Is this scenario falls under Art. 100. Prohibition against elimination or diminution of benefits of our Philippine Labor Code?

Scenario:
- Stated in Contract (Offer of Employment) that you will be entitled with 12-day Vacation Leave and 12-day Sick Leave benefit (no further description on VLs and SLs)
- After regularization, stated in Regularization Document that a 6-days of earned vacation leave is entitled, and for every month there after, leaves will be earned at 1 day per month for a max of 12 days per year. Sick leave is entitled to 12 days per year (no further description unlike VLs)

But the company imposes that same "accumulation idea" of VLs to Sick Leaves. So this means that Sick Leaves are now earned at 1 day per month for a max of 12 days which is not written in both contract and regularization document instead of an instant 12 day leave every year.

Is this scenario falls under Art. 100. Prohibition against elimination or diminution of benefits of our Philippine Labor Code?

Thanks,

If you were previously allowed to use the VL/SL at the start of the year in full, then I would agree there is a diminution of benefit.

So with this scenario, my complaint will just be turned down the fact that the company did not disclose properly the full detail of my SL and VL benefits in the contract as well as the regularization document ? That's sad to hear but Thank you very much for the reply