Business groups warn P200 wage hike may hurt MSMEs, push layoffs
Business leaders and industry groups are urging lawmakers to reassess the proposed P200 daily wage increase approved by the House of Representatives, warning of dire consequences for micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs), as well as the broader economy.
In a statement released Sunday, the Management Association of the Philippines (MAP) said it supports measures to improve the welfare of minimum-wage earners, but cautioned that a legislated P200 increase could do more harm than good.
'We call on the bicameral conference committee to conduct further consultations with all affected sectors, like employers, employees, consumers, and government agencies before reaching a decision,' MAP said.
The group emphasized the importance of considering inflation and business sustainability in policymaking, especially as many MSMEs are still struggling to recover from recent economic disruptions.
'Our basic problem is not low wages, but high costs. We urge the government to focus on reducing food, power, transportation, and housing costs to make our country more competitive,' it added.
The MAP also called on employers to share the burden, urging businesses to help workers by covering mandatory contributions and sharing at least 20% of their net income before tax.
The Philippine Retailers Association (PRA) echoed the concerns, warning that a mandated P200 daily wage hike could trigger layoffs, particularly in the MSME segment that comprises around 70% of retail employment.
'This will cause layoffs in the retail sector,' said PRA president Roberto Claudio, noting that salary distortions across company hierarchies could force businesses to increase pay beyond minimum-wage levels.
The group reiterated its support for the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry's (PCCI) position to leave wage adjustments to the Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Boards, which are mandated to assess economic conditions across regions.
The Federation of Filipino Chinese Chambers of Commerce and Industry Inc. (FFCCCII) also raised concerns over a one-size-fits-all approach to wage increases.
'We respectfully urge policymakers to consider a more balanced, consultative, and region-sensitive approach in determining wage adjustments,' said FFCCCII president Victor Lim.
Last week, the House of Representatives approved House Bill No. 11376 on third and final reading, with 171 affirmative votes and only one dissenting. The bill mandates a P200 daily increase for all minimum wage workers in the private sector, regardless of employment status or industry.
The bill also retains the authority of the Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Boards to implement additional increases as needed, under the existing Wage Rationalization Act.
The Senate is expected to deliberate on the measure soon, with growing calls from the business community for a more deliberative and regionally responsive process.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Filipino Times
a day ago
- Filipino Times
Business groups warn P200 wage hike may hurt MSMEs, push layoffs
Business leaders and industry groups are urging lawmakers to reassess the proposed P200 daily wage increase approved by the House of Representatives, warning of dire consequences for micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs), as well as the broader economy. In a statement released Sunday, the Management Association of the Philippines (MAP) said it supports measures to improve the welfare of minimum-wage earners, but cautioned that a legislated P200 increase could do more harm than good. 'We call on the bicameral conference committee to conduct further consultations with all affected sectors, like employers, employees, consumers, and government agencies before reaching a decision,' MAP said. The group emphasized the importance of considering inflation and business sustainability in policymaking, especially as many MSMEs are still struggling to recover from recent economic disruptions. 'Our basic problem is not low wages, but high costs. We urge the government to focus on reducing food, power, transportation, and housing costs to make our country more competitive,' it added. The MAP also called on employers to share the burden, urging businesses to help workers by covering mandatory contributions and sharing at least 20% of their net income before tax. The Philippine Retailers Association (PRA) echoed the concerns, warning that a mandated P200 daily wage hike could trigger layoffs, particularly in the MSME segment that comprises around 70% of retail employment. 'This will cause layoffs in the retail sector,' said PRA president Roberto Claudio, noting that salary distortions across company hierarchies could force businesses to increase pay beyond minimum-wage levels. The group reiterated its support for the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry's (PCCI) position to leave wage adjustments to the Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Boards, which are mandated to assess economic conditions across regions. The Federation of Filipino Chinese Chambers of Commerce and Industry Inc. (FFCCCII) also raised concerns over a one-size-fits-all approach to wage increases. 'We respectfully urge policymakers to consider a more balanced, consultative, and region-sensitive approach in determining wage adjustments,' said FFCCCII president Victor Lim. Last week, the House of Representatives approved House Bill No. 11376 on third and final reading, with 171 affirmative votes and only one dissenting. The bill mandates a P200 daily increase for all minimum wage workers in the private sector, regardless of employment status or industry. The bill also retains the authority of the Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Boards to implement additional increases as needed, under the existing Wage Rationalization Act. The Senate is expected to deliberate on the measure soon, with growing calls from the business community for a more deliberative and regionally responsive process.
Filipino Times
a day ago
- Filipino Times
Escudero rejects pressure to fast-track VP Duterte impeachment trial: 'We will follow the Constitution'
Senate President Francis 'Chiz' Escudero dismissed mounting calls to expedite the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte, asserting that the Senate will adhere strictly to its constitutional procedures and timeline. Escudero reaffirmed that the Senate is set to hear the articles of impeachment from the House of Representatives and formally convene as an impeachment court on June 11, as scheduled. 'I've said this from the beginning: Whether someone is for or against the impeachment, whether they support VP Sara or oppose her — I will not listen to them,' he said in Filipino during a press briefing. 'I will do what is right, proper, and in accordance with the Constitution and the law, based on what I believe is right.' The Senate leader made the statement when asked whether he felt pressure from various groups urging immediate Senate action. Among those demanding swift proceedings are the Akbayan Party, the Mamamayang Liberal (ML) Party, and Tindig Pilipinas, who held a rally outside the Senate on Monday to push lawmakers to fulfill their constitutional duty. 'They want us to rush our constitutional duty,' Escudero said.'But the Senate will not be swayed by public pressure or political noise.' Senator Jinggoy Estrada earlier also assured the public that the Senate will proceed with the trial, denying rumors that it would be abandoned. Escudero emphasized that the upper chamber's responsibility is to uphold the Constitution, not respond to political pressure, and that due process will be observed throughout the proceedings.
Gulf Today
2 days ago
- Gulf Today
The Republican Party's fiscal hawk era is officially over
There is no constituency for debt reduction, which is a fancy way of saying voters don't care that the federal balance sheet is roughly $37 trillion in the red — and growing. This simple fact of American politics goes a long way toward explaining why President Donald Trump, with the help of congressional Republicans, is pushing a sweeping reconciliation package of tax cuts and fresh domestic spending priorities that is projected to add approximately $3.8 trillion to the swelling federal debt. Politics is a service business and Trump and his Capitol Hill allies are aiming to please the customer. So they've loaded up the reconciliation package, dubbed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, with a series of crowd-pleasers — expansions of existing tax breaks plus some brand-new ones. Yes, there are spending cuts. The version of the legislation that passed in the House of Representatives and is now up for consideration in the Senate includes reductions to Medicaid and other budget line items. But there's nothing in the bill that results in a net decrease in the debt. Even the proposed changes to Medicaid face an uncertain future, thanks to GOP opposition in the Senate. That's because the sort of substantial spending cuts and programme reforms required to break Washington's addiction to borrowing would be wildly unpopular. For instance, any meaningful attempt to balance the books probably requires both raising taxes and overhauling Medicare and Social Security. That's not a recipe for winning elections. As concerning as the US debt load is becoming for bond markets and some finance titans (and the few fiscal hawks left in Washington), most Americans have more urgent concerns, said David Winston, a Republican pollster who has been surveying voters for more than 25 years. 'There's another issue hitting voters that's a bigger deal, and that's inflation,' he told me. 'When you're looking at an economic situation where there's something that's pressing people at a personal level, it's not that the deficit isn't important, it is. But being able to pay bills and deal with things on a weekly basis and keep up with all your costs takes precedence.' Winston is right — and that's not to mention the fact that so many voters are convinced the looming debt bomb can be diffused by eliminating waste, fraud and abuse in government spending. But this isn't a new phenomenon. Voters generally, particularly on the left, have always found some reason or another for opposing legislation that asks them to participate in the solution to Washington's fiscal challenges. It's why tax hikes on the so-called rich are so popular and such an easy political message to wield. What has changed is the Republican Party and the voters it represents. Without question, Republican presidents prior to Trump were complicit in running up the debt. But in the pre-Trump era defined by President Ronald Reagan, fiscal responsibility and small government had currency with grassroots conservatives who formed the heart of the GOP base. But today's Republican base voters are different than their forebearers, courtesy of a Trump populist makeover. The 45th and 47th president over the past decade attracted legions of working-class voters to the Republican Party. For the most part, these newer Republicans are former Democrats who joined the GOP for cultural reasons; for instance, they passionately oppose abortion rights and support gun rights. Notably, they brought with them their preference for government safety-net programs and general lack of concern about the debt (qualities that have long defined grassroots Democrats). Simultaneously, suburban voters inclined to value fiscal responsibility generally, and debt reduction specifically, have drifted away from the GOP. The result is a Republican governing coalition much more enamored of government spending than it used to be and far less concerned about the federal debt, even though it has grown to more than 120% of the entire US economy — problematic to say the least. Brad Todd, a veteran Republican strategist in Washington and coauthor of The Great Revolt; Inside the Populist Coalition Reshaping American Politics, has closely monitored this electoral transformation. 'The voters who are additive to the coalition as a result of Donald Trump are voters who are not only comfortable with entitlements. They're wary of anybody that might cut them. One of the reasons these voters were not Republican for a long time is because they believed the Democrats' scare tactics on entitlements,' Todd told me. 'The realignment works both ways. Some of the voters Republicans have lost are upscale suburbanites who are fiscal conservatives.' 'Republicans tried to do privatised Social Security accounts; A to Z budgeting; baseline budgeting; line-item veto; balanced budget amendment,' he added. 'We've tried all those innovations, none of them resulted in winning elections. Culture does result in winning elections and so Donald Trump just came along and made the party about culture and not conservative economics.' David M. Drucker, Tribune News Service
