Honda Phils., Inc.

, vs Samahan ng Malayang Manggagawa sa Honda (2005)

G.R. 14551
!ac"s#
The case stems from the collective bargaining agreement between Honda and the
respondent union that it granted the computation of 14
th
month pay as the same as 13
th
month pay. Honda continues the practice of granting fnancial assistance covered every
December each year of not less than 100 of the basic salary. !n the latter part of 1""#$
the parties started to re%negotiate for the fourth and ffth years of the &'(. The union
fled a notice of stri)e on the ground of unfair labor practice for deadloc).
D*+, assumed -urisdiction over the case and certifed it to the .+/& for compulsory
arbitration. The stri)ing employees were ordered to return to wor) and management to
accept them bac) under the same terms prior to the stri)e staged. Honda issued a
memorandum of the new computation of the 13
th
month and 14
th
month pay to be
granted to all its employees whereby the 31 long stri)es shall be considered unwor)ed
days for purpose of computing the said benefts. The amount e0uivalent to 1 of the
employees2 basic salary shall be deducted from these bonuses$ with a commitment that
in the event that the stri)e is declared legal$ Honda shall pay the amount.
The respondent union opposed the pro%rated computation of bonuses. This issue was
submitted to voluntary arbitration where it ruled that the company2s implementation of
the pro%rated computation is invalid.
Iss$%# 3*. the pro%rated computation of the 13
th
and 14
th
month pays and other
bonuses in 0uestion is valid and lawful.
H%ld# The pro%rated computation is invalid.
The pro%rated computation of Honda as a company policy has not ripened into a
company practice and it was the frst time they implemented such practice.
The payment of the 13
th
month pay in full month payment by Honda has become an
established practice. The length of time where it should be considered in practice is not
being laid down by -urisprudence. The voluntary act of the employer cannot be
unilaterally withdrawn without violating (rticle 100 of the +abor &ode.
The court also rules that the withdrawal of the beneft of paying a full month salary for
13
th
month pay shall constitute a violation of (rticle 100 of the +abor &ode.