LAKAS SA INDUSTRIYA NG KAPATIRANG HALIGI NG ALYANSA - PINAGBUKLOD NG MANGGAGAWANG PROMO NG BURLINGAME vs. BURLINGAME CORPORATION
Posted by bestre on Monday, January 19, 2009(G. R. No. 162833, June 15, 2007)
FACTS:
Petitioner in this case sought to represent all rank-and-file promo employees of respondent. It alleged that said group of employees is not represented by a Union. So, they filed a petition for certification election before the Department of Labor and Employment. Respondent, however, opposed said petition on the ground that there exists no employer-employee relation between the parties. Respondent here further claimed that the employees sought to be represented by petitioner are not their employees but the employees of F. Garil Manpower Services, a duly licensed local employment agency.
ISSUE:
Whether or not there is employer-employee relationship between respondent and the employees sought to be represented by petitioner
RULING:
In deciding the instant petition, the Supreme Court stressed the "four-fold test" in determining the existence of employer-employee relationship. The elements to determine the existence of an employment relationship are:
1. the selection and engagement of the employee
2. the payment of wages
3. the power of dismissal and
4. the employer's power to control the employee's conduct
The most important element is the last element. That is, the employer controls the conduct of an employee not only as to the result of the work to be done, but also as to the means and methods to accomplish it. It bears stressing that the facts of the case clearly indicate the existence of employer-employee relationship. The involvement of F. Garil, the employment agency, is limited only to the recruitment aspect. Furthermore, despite of the presence of an stipulation agreed into by the employment agency and herein respondent to the extent that the rank-and-file employees are considered as the employees of the former, the Supreme Court held that said contractual stipulation cannot override factual circumstances firmly establishing the legal existence of an employer-employee relationship.
FACTS:
Petitioner in this case sought to represent all rank-and-file promo employees of respondent. It alleged that said group of employees is not represented by a Union. So, they filed a petition for certification election before the Department of Labor and Employment. Respondent, however, opposed said petition on the ground that there exists no employer-employee relation between the parties. Respondent here further claimed that the employees sought to be represented by petitioner are not their employees but the employees of F. Garil Manpower Services, a duly licensed local employment agency.
ISSUE:
Whether or not there is employer-employee relationship between respondent and the employees sought to be represented by petitioner
RULING:
In deciding the instant petition, the Supreme Court stressed the "four-fold test" in determining the existence of employer-employee relationship. The elements to determine the existence of an employment relationship are:
1. the selection and engagement of the employee
2. the payment of wages
3. the power of dismissal and
4. the employer's power to control the employee's conduct
The most important element is the last element. That is, the employer controls the conduct of an employee not only as to the result of the work to be done, but also as to the means and methods to accomplish it. It bears stressing that the facts of the case clearly indicate the existence of employer-employee relationship. The involvement of F. Garil, the employment agency, is limited only to the recruitment aspect. Furthermore, despite of the presence of an stipulation agreed into by the employment agency and herein respondent to the extent that the rank-and-file employees are considered as the employees of the former, the Supreme Court held that said contractual stipulation cannot override factual circumstances firmly establishing the legal existence of an employer-employee relationship.
Post a Comment