The Supreme Court of Justice of Mexico issued a decision with important implications regarding salary integration and modification of economic benefits granted to employees.
In ruling on Amparo Directo en Revisión 3918/2025, the Supreme Court analyzed the case of a female worker who for several years received a payment called “nómina complementaria”, the payment of which was suspended under the argument that it was not provided for in the collective bargaining agreement or in the applicable salary tabulator.
In the analysis of the case, the Supreme Court did not determine that such perception necessarily integrated the salary nor did it definitively recognize the existence of an acquired right; it concluded that the jurisdictional authorities performed an insufficient analysis by limiting themselves to the contractual instruments, without examining the manner in which the benefit was granted during the employment relationship.
Salary integration
Although the resolution corresponds to a judgment issued in a specific case and not to an isolated thesis or binding jurisprudence, the matter acquires special interest due to the emphasis made by the Supreme Court regarding the principle of the primacy of reality in labor matters and the scope of Article 84 of the Federal Labor Law, according to which the salary may include not only the daily fee, but also bonuses, compensations and other benefits paid for work, provided they are ordinary, permanent and their payment is not conditioned.
Nature of bonuses, compensation and recurring payments
In practical terms, the issue becomes important with respect to bonuses, incentives, compensation, commissions or other recurring payments that, in practice, may operate as an ordinary consideration for services rendered, even if their documentary regulation is limited or ambiguous.
The Court specified that the lack of recognition of a benefit in a collective bargaining agreement or wage tabulation does not exclude, by itself, its possible wage nature when its payment has been constant. It also pointed out that in order to determine whether it constitutes an acquired right, it must be analyzed whether it was granted in an ordinary, habitual and permanent manner.
Recommendations
For employers, this criterion constitutes a warning regarding recurring payments that, although originally conceived as extraordinary or discretionary, could be analyzed as part of the salary. Rather than introducing a new criterion, the resolution confirms the relevance of properly documenting that, for a benefit to be extralegal, it must be extraordinary, temporary or discretionary; as well as maintaining consistency between the payment practice and the applicable labor documentation.
At Vega, Guerrero & Asociados we can assist you in the review of your compensation and benefits schemes to strengthen your labor documentation and reduce risks associated with the eventual salary integration of bonuses, compensation or other benefits granted to employees.
