1) Why the question matters

In Philippine labor law, maternity leave does not suspend the employment relationship. A worker on maternity leave remains an employee, retains employment status, and continues to enjoy statutory protections against discrimination and diminution of benefits. The practical issue is not whether the employee is “still employed” (she is), but what kind of salary increase is involved and what rules or policies govern it.

Salary increases generally fall into three categories, and the legal treatment differs for each:

Statutory wage increases (e.g., minimum wage or wage order adjustments; mandated pay changes).
Contractual/collectively bargained increases (CBA or employment contract step increases).
Employer-discretionary increases (merit increases, performance-based raises, market adjustments, promotion-related increases subject to criteria).

Understanding the category is the key to determining entitlement while on maternity leave.

2) Governing legal framework (private sector focus)

Several Philippine laws and doctrines shape the answer:

A. Expanded Maternity Leave Law (Republic Act No. 11210)

RA 11210 expanded maternity leave benefits and strengthened job protection. The law’s policy direction is protective: it aims to ensure women do not suffer work-related disadvantage due to pregnancy and childbirth. While RA 11210 is primarily about leave duration and pay mechanisms (including SSS maternity benefit and employer salary differential where applicable), it reinforces the principle that maternity leave is a protected absence and should not be used to penalize the employee.

B. Anti-discrimination rules involving sex, pregnancy, and maternity

Philippine labor standards and related statutes recognize pregnancy-based and sex-based discrimination as unlawful. In practice, this means an employer should not withhold increases or impose disadvantage because an employee took maternity leave, if similarly situated employees are not treated that way.

C. Non-diminution of benefits (Labor Code doctrine)

A benefit that has become part of practice/policy—especially if:

it is consistent and deliberate, and
extended over time, and
not a one-time discretionary act may be treated as a company benefit that cannot be withdrawn or reduced unilaterally. If a “raise system” is effectively an established benefit (e.g., yearly across-the-board increases granted regularly to a class of employees based on clear rules), excluding maternity leave takers can raise non-diminution and discrimination concerns.

D. Principle: maternity leave does not break service

For many employment-related computations and entitlements, maternity leave is treated as part of continuous service (subject to the specific benefit’s rules). This matters for seniority-based increases and step increments.

3) The core rule: it depends on the type of salary increase

3.1 Statutory wage increases and mandated adjustments

If a wage increase is mandated by law or regulation, it applies even while the employee is on maternity leave.

Examples:

A regional wage board wage order increasing minimum wage.
A legally mandated adjustment affecting pay classifications.

Practical handling: If payroll systems do not implement it mid-leave, the employee should receive the corrected rate and any underpayment retroactive to the effectivity date, because the obligation arises from law, not attendance.

Key point: maternity leave is not a lawful reason to delay or deny a statutory wage adjustment.

3.2 CBA or employment contract increases (including step increments)

If an increase is promised by:

a Collective Bargaining Agreement, or
an employment contract, or
an established company policy that functions like a binding commitment (e.g., salary step program tied to length of service),

then the question becomes: did the employee meet the condition?

Common arrangements:

Across-the-board CBA increases effective on a fixed date (e.g., “₱X increase effective January 1”).
Step increments based on tenure, job grade, or time-in-position.

General treatment: Because maternity leave does not sever employment and usually does not break service, seniority/tenure-based increases should typically apply on schedule, unless the agreement clearly and lawfully states otherwise.

Caution: A clause that excludes maternity leave recipients as a class (or treats maternity leave as a break in service when other protected leaves are not treated the same) may be attacked as discriminatory or contrary to protective labor policy.

3.3 Merit increases / performance-based raises (discretionary increases)

This is the most contested category.

A. If the merit increase is truly discretionary

If management has genuine discretion (not bound by policy or practice) and increases depend on performance metrics requiring active work during the review period, the employer may argue there is no automatic entitlement to a raise during maternity leave.

However, discretion is not absolute: it cannot be exercised in a way that discriminates on pregnancy or maternity leave.

B. The discrimination lens: maternity leave cannot be the reason for denial

A legally safer approach is for employers to apply neutral, consistently applied rules, such as:

evaluating performance based on the period actually worked (without penalizing protected absence),
pro-rating where a policy clearly allows pro-rating for any long leave (and applying it equally to comparable leaves),
deferring evaluation to the next cycle only if that is how the system treats any employee who lacks sufficient rating data (not just maternity leave takers).

Red flags (often problematic):

“No raise because you were on maternity leave.” (direct maternity-based penalty)
Granting raises to employees who were absent for non-protected reasons but denying those on maternity leave.
Treating maternity leave as a negative performance factor.

C. If the employer has a consistent practice of granting annual increases

If the company consistently gives an annual increase to employees who remain employed as of a cut-off date (even if branded “merit”), that practice may be used to argue it is no longer purely discretionary—especially if employees have come to rely on it as a standard incident of employment.

In that situation, excluding maternity leave takers may implicate:

non-diminution of benefits, and/or
unlawful discrimination.

4) Timing: must the increase be implemented during leave, or can it be given upon return?

Legally, the more important question is effectivity—when the employee becomes entitled—rather than the date it is physically processed in payroll.

A. If the increase is effective on a fixed date

If the increase is:

statutory, or
CBA-scheduled, or
tenure-based with a set effectivity date, then the employee should receive it effective that date, even if she is on leave. If payroll processing occurs later, she should generally be made whole through retroactive pay adjustment.

B. If the increase depends on a performance evaluation that cannot be completed during leave

An employer may:

process it after return, or
use the last available rating period, or
apply a neutral pro-rating rule, so long as the approach is consistently applied and not punitive toward maternity leave.

5) Interaction with maternity “pay” mechanics (SSS benefit and salary differential)

In the private sector, maternity leave pay is often a combination of:

SSS maternity benefit, plus
employer salary differential (where required by RA 11210 and applicable rules/exemptions).

Why this matters to salary increases

If a salary increase takes effect during maternity leave:

The employee’s “full pay” baseline (for differential computations) may need to reflect the new rate, depending on how the benefit and differential are computed under the governing rules and the employer’s payroll practice.

Because SSS benefit is computed using SSS rules and contribution-based salary credit concepts, while “salary differential” aims to reach “full pay,” disputes can arise if employers do not adjust computations mid-stream. When the increase is mandated/contractual, the safer view is that “full pay” should track the lawful wage rate as it changes.

6) Promotions and reclassification increases during maternity leave

A promotion-related increase depends on whether promotion is:

automatic under a system (e.g., step ladder with time), or
competitive/discretionary requiring active selection.

A. Automatic progression systems

If promotion/step-up is time-bound and not performance-contingent beyond basic eligibility, maternity leave should not block it, because the employee remains employed and service typically continues.

B. Competitive promotions

If promotion requires interviews, assessments, or work product demonstration during the leave window, employers should ensure the employee is not unfairly excluded. Practical compliant approaches include:

allowing participation through reasonable arrangements (without pressuring the employee during leave),
moving the assessment to a reasonable time upon return if feasible and consistent with business needs,
documenting objective criteria for selection.

A blanket “not eligible because on maternity leave” invites discrimination claims.

7) Common lawful policy designs (and common unlawful ones)

Lawful (usually defensible if consistently applied)

Across-the-board increases applied to all employees in a class as of a cut-off date, including those on maternity leave.
Tenure-based step increments that continue during maternity leave.
Merit increase rules that:
- do not treat maternity leave as a negative factor,
- use objective performance data from time worked,
- apply pro-rating neutrally to any extended absence where pro-rating is part of policy, and
- provide a clear process for employees without sufficient rating data.

Unlawful or high-risk

Explicitly denying raises because the employee went on maternity leave.
Using maternity leave as a basis for a lower rating or “does not qualify.”
Applying pro-rating only to maternity leave, but not to other long absences.
Treating maternity leave as a “break in service” for purposes of scheduled increases without a strong lawful basis and consistent treatment of comparable protected leaves.

8) Evidence that typically decides disputes

In real-world workplace disputes, outcomes often turn on documentation:

Company policy/manual on salary increases and merit cycles.
CBA provisions on scheduled increases and eligibility.
Employment contract terms on pay progression.
Past practice (how the company treated employees on leave in prior cycles).
Comparators (how other employees on different leaves were treated).
Internal communications (emails/messages showing the reason for denial).

Pregnancy/maternity discrimination cases are often proven through patterns and comparators rather than admissions.

9) Remedies and enforcement pathways (Philippine setting)

When an employee believes a raise was unlawfully withheld while on maternity leave, typical avenues include:

A. Internal mechanisms

HR inquiry or payroll correction request (especially for statutory/CBA increases).
Grievance machinery under a CBA, if unionized.

B. Labor standards enforcement / monetary claims

If the issue is a wage underpayment (e.g., failure to implement a wage order or a contractually mandated increase), it may be pursued as a monetary claim under labor dispute mechanisms.

C. Discrimination-based claims

If the denial is tied to pregnancy/maternity status, it may be pursued as an unlawful discrimination or illegal labor practice-type grievance depending on the setting, facts, and union status, with potential claims for:
- wage differentials/back pay,
- damages where allowed,
- attorney’s fees in appropriate cases,
- corrective policy action.

The appropriate forum and cause of action depend heavily on whether the claim is framed as a simple underpayment of a fixed obligation (statutory/CBA/contract) versus a discretionary decision infected by discrimination.

10) Practical conclusions (what “entitlement” usually means)

Yes, if the increase is mandated by law or clearly promised by contract/CBA/policy with objective eligibility the employee satisfies—maternity leave should not prevent implementation, and retroactive adjustment is generally expected if delayed.
It depends, if the increase is merit/performance-based—but maternity leave cannot be used as a penalty, and any method of deferral, pro-rating, or evaluation must be neutral and consistently applied.
No employer should treat maternity leave as a break in employment for pay progression unless a valid, uniformly applied rule exists and does not violate anti-discrimination protections.
The most legally vulnerable posture is the explicit or implicit rule: “no raise because you were on maternity leave.”