Dear PAO, 

At the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, our company shifted to a four-day compressed workweek arrangement, supposedly to help contain the spread of the virus. The company consulted us regarding the proposed changes and almost every employee consented to it because we deem it more convenient to render ten hours of work for four days, if it meant we could have three days off per week. Just recently, the management informed us that they are planning on reverting to a strict eight-hour duty, five days a week schedule. However, this time, the management did not bring up the matter for discussion despite knowing that the employees have already grown accustomed to the four-day workweek arrangement. Can they unilaterally impose the five-day workweek without the consent of the employees? 

Lei 

Dear Lei, 

Presidential Decree (PD) 442, otherwise known as the Labor Code of the Philippines, sets forth the legal standards for wages, working hours, benefits, and the general conditions of employment. At its core is the provision which limits the normal work hours to eight hours a day. (Article 83, Labor Code of the Philippines) 

The statutory provision is primarily designed to protect the rights and welfare of the employees, in line with the basic policy that “[t]he State shall afford protection to labor, promote full employment, ensure equal work opportunities regardless of sex, race or creed and regulate the relations between workers and employers. The State shall assure the rights of workers to self-organization, collective bargaining, security of tenure, and just and humane conditions of work.” (Article 3, Labor Code of the Philippines) 

However, given that the Labor Code only provides for the minimum standards of employment, employers are free to offer other terms and conditions for employment, provided that they are not less than those mandated by law. This right of the employers to regulate all aspects of employment, commonly known as “management prerogative,” covers the right to determine working hours.

On the other hand, the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) Advisory 2, series of 2004, which took effect on Dec. 2, 2004, first introduced the concept of a compressed workweek (CWW) scheme that allowed the adoption of “an alternative arrangement whereby the normal workweek is reduced to less than six days but the total number of normal work hours per week shall remain at 48 hours.” Under this arrangement, the daily work hours are increased to more than eight hours without the payment of the corresponding overtime premium, resulting into a workweek of less than the normal six days. It is an alternative arrangement, the adoption and implementation of which shall be voluntarily agreed upon by the employer and the majority of covered employees.

Just as the adoption of the CWW scheme proscribes the diminution of existing employee benefits, the reversion to the normal eight-hour workday, too, shall not constitute a diminution of benefits. However, unlike in the adoption of CWW scheme wherein the consent of the majority of covered employees is required to proceed forthwith, the reversion to the normal workweek merely requires that the employer provides prior notice of such reversion to the employees within a reasonable period of time.

From the foregoing, it is clear that your management decision to revert to the standard daily work hours from the current CWW scheme is a valid exercise of management prerogative, which may be implemented sans consent of the employees, provided that a prior notice within a reasonable period of time had been given.

We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice was based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.

We appreciate your trust and support.

Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to [email protected]