Short answer. No, not as a general matter. Article 116 makes it unlawful for any person to withhold any amount from a worker's wages, or induce the worker to give up part of them, by force, stealth, intimidation, threat, or any other means whatsoever, without the worker's consent — whatever reason is being offered for the withholding.
What the law says
Withholding of wages and kickbacks prohibited. It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, to withhold any amount from the wages of a worker or induce him to give up any part of his wages by force, stealth, intimidation, threat or by any other means whatsoever without the worker’s consent.
Labor Code, Article 116 — Withholding And Kickbacks Prohibited. Read the full provision →
The prohibition does not turn on the employer's stated reason
Article 116 is not written as a list of acceptable and unacceptable reasons for withholding wages; it is written around the presence or absence of the worker's consent. Whether an employer explains the withholding as covering a shortage, a loss, a penalty, or something else, the article's test stays the same: was any amount withheld from the worker's wages, and did the worker actually consent to it. A reason offered after the fact does not substitute for consent given beforehand.
The methods the article treats as defeating real consent
The statute names force, stealth, intimidation, and threat as examples of how a worker can be induced to give up wages without truly consenting, and then adds any other means whatsoever, showing the list is illustrative rather than exhaustive. Stealth is worth noting specifically: it covers withholding done quietly, without the worker's knowledge, which is a different failure of consent than an explicit threat but is treated the same way under this article.
"Any person", including intermediaries
The obligation is not limited to the employer named on your contract. Article 116 applies to any person, directly or indirectly, so a manager, a paymaster, or another intermediary handling your wages is also bound by the prohibition, regardless of whether that person is the one who technically employs you. This wider reach matters in workplaces where payroll, deductions, or cash handling pass through more than one hand before reaching the worker, since the article does not let any of those hands off the hook simply because they are not the named employer.
What the article does not cover
Article 116 does not itself distinguish between different categories of withholding an employer might attempt, and it does not describe a complaint process or penalties. It establishes the underlying rule — no withholding without genuine consent — and leaves the mechanics of enforcement to be found elsewhere. If your wages have been withheld and you never agreed to it, this article is the reason that withholding is not simply a management decision the employer is free to make unilaterally.