Short answer. No — and your agreeing to it changes nothing. Article 102 forbids paying wages by promissory notes, vouchers, coupons, tokens, tickets, chits or any object other than legal tender, and says so even when expressly requested by the employee. Wages are to be paid in money.
What the law says
No employer shall pay the wages of an employee by means of promissory notes, vouchers, coupons, tokens, tickets, chits, or any object other than legal tender, even when expressly requested by the employee.
Labor Code, Article 102 — Forms Of Payment. Read the full provision →
A list, and then a catch-all
The prohibition names the familiar substitutes — promissory notes, vouchers, coupons, tokens, tickets, chits — and then closes the gap with or any object other than legal tender. That last phrase is what makes the provision hard to work around. It is not a list to be searched for the particular device your employer has used; anything that is not legal tender is caught, whatever it is called. Grocery credit at an affiliated store, load, points, meal stubs and an IOU against next month's collections are all objects other than legal tender.
Consent is not a defence
This is the part most workers do not expect. The article adds even when expressly requested by the employee, which removes agreement from the picture entirely. An employer cannot cure the arrangement by pointing to a signed conformity, a memo you initialled, or the fact that you asked for store credit because it suited you at the time. The provision is written on the assumption that consent in this setting is not freely given, so it does not make consent relevant. Having agreed does not weaken a later claim for the wage.
The one alternative the article does permit
Payment by check or money order is dealt with separately in the same article, and allowed only in defined situations: where that manner of payment was customary when the Code took effect, where special circumstances specified in regulations make it necessary, or where a collective bargaining agreement stipulates it. The structure is worth noting. Every departure from legal tender needed express permission, and the article gave it to exactly one alternative on stated conditions. Nothing in it opens a general discretion to pay in some other form.
If this is how you are being paid
Treat the wage as unpaid rather than as paid in an unusual way, because that is the practical effect. Keep whatever you were given — the chits, vouchers or statements — together with the payslips, any memo describing the scheme, and a record of what you actually received each period. Where the substitute was redeemable only at a particular store, note that too. The material question a lawyer will ask is simple: for each pay period, how much of the wage was received in money, and how much was not.