AKBAYAN Party-list and several labor groups have asked the Supreme Court to conduct an administrative evaluation of the circumstances over the issuance by the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasig City of two orders that effectively suspended the implementation of an P85 minimum wage hike in Metro Manila.
The groups were referring to the status quo ante order (SQAO) issued by the Pasig RTC Executive Judge dated July 23, 2026 and the temporary restraining order (TRO) issued by Pasig RTC Branch 152 dated July 30, 2026.
In a letter addressed to the SC-Judiciary Integrity Office (JIO) Officer-in-Charge lawyer Eduardo Tolentino, the groups stressed that the SQAO and the TRO run counter to Article 126 of the Labor Code.
The said provisions specifically states: ‘No preliminary or permanent injunction or temporary restraining order may be issued by any court, tribunal or other entity against any proceedings before the Commission or the Regional Boards.’
‘The request does not ask the Judicial Integrity Office to determine the merits of the pending declaratory relief case, nor to substitute its judgment for that of the trial court on the validity of the Wage Order,’ the letterread.
‘Rather it seeks administrative evaluation of the circumstances surrounding the issuance of the interim orders, particularly in light of Article 126 of the Labor Code and the applicable rules governing injunctive relief,’ it added.
It may be recalled that the Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Board in Metro Manila last month issued a wage order mandating an P85 increase in the minimum wage to be implemented in two tranches.
The first amounting to P60 took effect on July 25 and the remaining P25 will take effect on January 20, 2027.
However, the Pasig court issued an SQAO in response to a petition filed by construction companies Readycon Trading and Construction Corp. and R-II Builders Inc seeking to stop the wage hike.
After the case was raffled, Pasig RTC Branch 152 Presiding Judge Marie Joyce P. Manongsong issued a TRO enjoining NCR wage board and the National Wages and Productivity Commission from implementing the wage order until August 13, subject to the petitioners posting a P1-million bond.
The groups also asked the SC-JIO to endorse to the SC en banc the issuance of an Administrative Circular providing guidance to first- and second-level courts on the application of Article 126 of the Labor Code and the procedural requirements governing interim injunctive relief.
‘The administrative question, therefore, is whether a trial court may employ an order denominated as a ‘Status Quo Ante Order’ to grant relief that, in substance and effect, suspends the implementation of a Wage Order notwithstanding the prohibition under Article 126 of the Labor Code,’ the groups said.