Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila

xxxxx

G.R. No. 170734             May 14, 2008

ARCO METAL PRODUCTS CO. INC. AND MRS. SALVADOR UY versus SAMAHAN NG MGA MANGGAGAWA SA ARCO METAL - NAFLU (SAMARM-NAFLU).

SEPARATE CONCURRING OPINION

BRION, J.:

I fully agree with the ponencia that the enhanced 13^th month pay and bonus computations made by the company have ripened into an established benefit that can no longer be unilaterally withdrawn. The company claim - supported solely by the affidavit of a company officer that the computations were "clear oversights" that should not be taken against it - must fail as against the undisputed evidence of the number of times and years the enhanced computations have been in place. At most, the company claim raises a doubt about the real character of these computations but any such doubt we have to resolve in favor of labor (Article 4, Labor Code).

I concur separately to clarify that the basis for the prohibition against diminution of established benefits is not really Article 100 of the Labor Code as the respondents claimed and as the cases cited in the ponencia mentioned. Article 100 refers solely to the non-diminution of benefits enjoyed at the time of the promulgation of the Labor Code. Employer-employee relationship is contractual and is based on the express terms of the employment contract as well as on its implied terms, among them, those not expressly agreed upon but which the employer has freely, voluntarily and consistently extended to its employees. Under the principle of mutuality of contracts embodied in Article 1308 of the Civil Code, the terms of a contract - both express and implied - cannot be withdrawn except by mutual consent or agreement of the contracting parties. In the present case, the lack of consent or agreement was precisely the basis for the employees' complaint.

ARTURO D. BRION
Associate Justice