National Union of Workers In Hotel Restaurant v. Philippine Plaza Holdings

Summary

The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision denying the union's claim for P5.5 million in allegedly uncollected service charges from a luxury hotel. The union argued that various hotel transactions including Westin Gold Card sales, barter agreements, and promotional activities should have been subject to the 10% service charge distribution under their collective bargaining agreement. However, the Court ruled that these transactions either fell under the CBA's explicit exemptions for 'negotiated contracts' and 'special rates' or did not constitute actual sales of covered items (food, beverage, rooms, transportation, laundry). The Court found the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion by failing to properly analyze whether the disputed transactions were covered by the service charge provisions. The decision reinforced that CBAs must be interpreted according to their plain language, and employers are only obligated to distribute service charges on transactions where they actually collect such charges under the agreement's terms.