5j Taxi Vs NLRC
5j Taxi Vs NLRC
in such trades, occupations or business where the practice of making deposits is a recogni1ed one, or is necessary or desirable as determined by the Secretary of 6abor in appropriate rules and regulations" )t can be deduced that the said article provides the rule on deposits for loss or damage to tools, materials or e'uipments supplied by the employer" +learly, the same does not apply to or permit deposits to defray any deficiency which the taxi driver may incur in the remittance of his boundary" 3n the matter of the car wash payments, the labor arbiter had this to say in his decision8 :#nent the issue of illegal deductions, there is no dispute that as a matter of practice in the taxi industry, after a tour of duty, it is incumbent upon the driver to restore the unit he has given to the same clean condition when he took it out, and as claimed by the respondents ;petitioners in the present case<, complainant;s< ;private respondents herein< were made to shoulder the expenses for washing, the amount doled out was paid directly to the person who washed the unit, thus we find nothing illegal in this practice, much more ;sic< to consider the amount paid by the driver as illegal deduction in the context of the law": +onse'uently, private respondents are not entitled to the refund of the P %"%% car wash payments they made" )t will be noted that there was nothing to prevent private respondents from cleaning the taxi units themselves, if they wanted to save their P %"%%" #lso, as the Solicitor General correctly noted, car washing after a tour of duty is a practice in the taxi industry, and is, in fact, dictated by fair play"