Eagle Security v.

NLRC - 173 SCRA 479FACTS: Respondents filed for unpaid wage and allowance
increases under Wage Order Nos. 2, 3, 5 and 6,where they were assigned by EAGLE as security
guards to PTSI pursuant to the Contract for Security Servicesentered by the 2 agencies, which was
granted in their favor hence this petition. In this case, both PTSI andEAGLE point to the other
as the one who should be solely be liable for paying the increases. PTSI also alleges that it is exempt
from payment under the Wage Orders because it is a public sector while the Wage Orders coveronly
employers and employees in the private sector.ISSUE: HELD: The Labor Code provides used in
Book Three, Title II on Wages, the term employer includes "theGovernment and all its
branches, subdivisions and instrumentalities, all government-owned or
controlledcorporations and institutions . . . The contractor is made Liable by being the direct
employer. The principal, on the other hand, is made theindirect employer of the contractor's
employees for purposes of paying the employees their wages should thecontractor be unable to
pay them. The application of the provisions of the Labor Code on joint and severalliabilities of
the principal and contractor is appropriate just as stated under the Wage Orders that payment of
theincreases are "to be borne" by the principal or client. So it is only right to jointly and severally pay the
wage andallowance increases as mandated to assure compliance of the provisions including the
statutory minimum wage[Article 99, Labor Code]. This joint and several liability facilitates payment
of the workers' performanceof any work, task, job or project, thus giving the workers ample protection as
mandated by Article II Sec.18 and Article XIII Sec. 3.
Jdfljgiu;