General principles involved in wage distortion
At this point it is opportune to re-state the general principles enunciated in that case, summarized in Metro Transit Organization, Inc. vs. NLRC, et al., as follows: "(a) The concept of wage distortion assumes an existing grouping or classification of employees which establishes distinctions among such employees on some relevant or legitimate basis. This classification is reflected in a differing wage rate for each of the existing classes of employees; (b) Wage distortions have often been the result of government-decreed increases in minimum wages. There are, however, other causes of wage distortions, like the merger of two (2) companies (with differing classification of employees and different wage rates) where the surviving company absorbs all the employees of the dissolved corporation. (In the present Metro case, as already noted, the wage distortion arose because the effectivity dates of wage increases given to each of the two (2) classes of employees (rank-and-file and supervisory) had not been synchronized in their respective CBA's; (c) Should a wage distortion exist, there is no legal requirement that in the rectification of that distortion by re-adjustment of the wage rates of the differing classes of employees, the gap which had previously or historically existed be restored in precisely the same amount. In other words, correction of a wage distortion may be done by re-establishing a substantial or significant gap (as distinguished from the historical gap) between the wage rates of the differing classes of employees; (d) The re-establishment of a significant difference in wage rates may be the result of resort to grievance procedures or collective bargaining negotiations." [G.R. No. 108556. November 19, 1996]