- Statute
- Labor Code
- Article
- Art. 100
- Topic
- Non-diminution of benefits
- Status
- In force
- Year
- 1974
- Cited by
- Multiple Supreme Court decisions
The provision
ARTICLE 100. Prohibition against elimination or diminution of benefits. Nothing in this Book shall be construed to eliminate or in any way diminish supplements, or other employee benefits being enjoyed at the time of promulgation of this Code.
Intellegal Wiki · In plain terms
Employers cannot use the Labor Code as a reason to take away or reduce supplements and other benefits that workers were already enjoying when the Code took effect. In practice this is the non-diminution rule: once a benefit has been granted and is being enjoyed, it generally cannot be unilaterally withdrawn or cut back.
An editorially maintained plain-language explanation of this provision — not legal advice.
Key points
Article 100 of the Labor Code is the non-diminution rule. Nothing in the Book on conditions of employment may be construed to eliminate or in any way diminish supplements or other employee benefits being enjoyed at the time the Code was promulgated.
Jurisprudence applies the principle to benefits that have ripened into company practice through consistent and deliberate grant over time, which the employer cannot then unilaterally withdraw or reduce. The provision is read alongside the security-of-tenure and termination rules of the Labor Code.
The protection applies most clearly to benefits that have become an established company practice — granted consistently and deliberately over a significant period and not by mere error — which the employer may not afterward unilaterally withdraw, reduce, or discontinue. It is balanced against management's recognized prerogatives, so a genuinely erroneous or conditional grant may stand on a different footing. The principle is frequently invoked in disputes over allowances, bonuses, and similar supplements claimed to have ripened into a demandable benefit.
Cases applying this article
- Brokenshire Memorial Hospital v. NLRC G.R. No. L-69741
- Davao Fruits Corporation v. Associated Labor Unions G.R. No. 85073
- Central Azucarera de Tarlac v. CAT Labor Union-NLU G.R. No. 188949
- Eastern Telecommunications Philippines v. Eastern Telecoms Employees Union G.R. No. 185665