Independent Contractors and Labor Only Contractors Case Why Did The Laborers Sue? Contractor/ Nature of Work Legit Contractor or Labor Only-Only?

Independent Contractors and Labor Only Contractors
Case Contractor/ nature Why did the laborers sue? Legit contractor or labor
of work only-only?
PAL v Synergy- private underpayment, non- Labor-only- either of any of
Ligan unloading and payment of premium pay the ff elements: 1. No
loading, delivery of for holidays, restday, substantial caplital or work is
baggage and cargo incentive pay, regularization directly related to main
from aircraft of PAL business of the principal 2.
(principal) contractor does not exerice
control
San Mig Sunflower coop- demanded to be regularized Labor only, 1. it did not have
v Aballa messengerial, employyes of SMC control over the means of
janitorial, shrimp work 2. no capital + work is
harvesting, washing, also directly related to the
cold storage main business
MERALC Janitorial services- illegal deduction, Meralco may be considered

Ov labor equipment, underpayment, non- an indirect employer only for
NLRC materials, tools and payment of OT, holiday pay the purposes of unpad wages.
equipment and premium pay, illegal
dismissal
Manila People's Security Inc, unpaid monetary benefits, Legit contractor, the phrase
Electric Securtiy guard MERALCO asked them to be MERALCO has the right of
v replaced because of their inspection at all times is not
Bersami unsatisfactory work. indicative of control as it was
ra not a unliteral rt. But the fact
that no ee-er relp exists does
not exonerate MERALCO from
liability as it became an
indirect employer under art.
107 LC.
DOLE v Campco regularizaton, that Campco Labor only, Campco did not
Esteva was a labor-only contractor carry out an independent
and a mere conduit of business from the petitioner.
DOLE, security of tenure, It was established to render
constructive dismissal, services to Dole to augment
illegal dismissal its workfore during peak
seasons. Dole was only its
client
Alviado Promm-gem or SAPS, regularization, service Promm-gen: legitimate labor-

v P&G product handling incentive leave pay, only contrator, has ACS of 1M
dismissal and APIC of 500k, SAPS:labor
only, APIC only 250
Temic v forwarders- clerk, demanded that the Legit, the company can
Temic material handler, forwarders' employees be determine in the best
Union system encoder, regularized judgement whether it should
general clerk contract out a part of its work
for as long as the employer is
motivated by good faith and
not to circumvent the law
Coca- Interserce, rsalesmen regularization Labor only, no capital, no

cola v control
Agito
Smart v NTT Japan - formed Astorga was terminated on the realignment was
Astorga part of Smart NTT the ground of redundancy, legitimate. Employers are
multimedia, aas a this is not true because free to make economic and
consequence, smart there was no compelling effective policies even if not
abolished employee, economic reason experiencing economic
Astorga's dvision reverses. The law does not
require financial losses for
redundancy.
Manila Manila water- termination because of a labor-only- no capital to

v managed the shift to collectorless scheme undertake services of Manila
Dalumpi distribution system in where customers could water involving a fleet of 100
nes the east zone of MM remit payment through collectors
bayad centers
Babas v Best Manpower regularization Labor-only, worked at LSC's
LSC services - premises and no other, no
maintenacne and control, no proof of capital.
repair service, Contractor also had no other
inspection client aside from LSC.
Teng v Pahagac was hired to Illegal termination

Pahagac count fishes done
with the use of tools
of the company
Doctrine
Control test is a primary

determinant of the ee-er
relp, in this case, PAL fixed
work schedule of the
laborers
Test to determine existence

of independent
contratorship is whether
one claiming to be an
independent contractor has
contracted to do the work
accdg to his methods
without being to the
control of the employer
Solidary liability of the

indirect and direct
employers gives workers
ample protection
consonant with the
provisions of labor and
social provisons of the
1987 Const. But this is still
with out prejudcie to the
right of reimbursement
Campco's office and
equipment were used for
admin purposes only. The
equipment used by
Campco members when
rendering services
belonged to DOLE, strong
indication of labor-only
contracting
absence of evidence
showing the outsourcing
has resulted in reduction of
workhours or spiitting the
bargaining unit is indicative
that the contracting is not
illegal
ee-er exists between

employees and Coke.
Employers are free to

create a more competent
and specialized organiation
to preform the work
required for corporate
accounts. This is a case of
management prerogative.
there was already an ee-er
relationship in this case.
Worked for 13 years with
the company.
Case Facts
Dumpit- broadcaster for ABSCBN,
Murillo term contracts renewed
for over 15 times over the
past 4 years.
the petitioner is a regular

employee despite term
contracts.
Begino v camera men, hired via

ABSCBN talent contracts
Royale
Homes v
Alcantara
Ee-er relationship?
Yes. Control was present, also the power to dismiss.
two kinds of regular employees. (1) those engaged to perform activities which are
usually necessary or desirable to the usual business or trade of the employer, (2) those
who have rendered at least one year of service, whether not continuous and merely
intermittent.
This repetitive renewal was indicative of Petitioner’s work’s desirability and necessity.
Hence it is concluded that she is a regular employee.
Control test; is generally regarded as the most crucial and determinative indicator
of the presence or absence of an employer-employee relationship. Under this test, an
employer-employee relationship is said to exist where the person for whom the services
are performed reserves the right to control not only the end result but also the manner
and means utilized to achieve the same.
Notwithstanding the nomenclature of their Talent Contracts and/or Project
Assignment Forms and the terms and condition embodied therein, petitioners
are regular employees of ABS-CBN. Time and again, it has been ruled that the
test to determine whether employment is regular or not is the reasonable
connection between the activity performed by the employee in relation to the
business or trade of the employer. As cameramen/editors and reporters,
petitioners were undoubtedly performing functions necessary and essential to
ABS-CBN’s business of broadcasting television and radio content. From their
initial engagement in the aforesaid capacities, petitioners were
continuously re-hired by ABS over the years.
If the employee has been performing the job for at least one year, even if the
performance is not continuous
or merely intermittent, the law deems the repeated or continuing performance
as sufficient evidence of the
necessity, if not indispensability of that activity in the business.
person who performs work for another and is subjected to its rules, regulations,
and code of ethics does not necessarily become an employee. As long as the
level of control does not interfere with the means
and methods of accomplishing the assigned tasks, the rules imposed by the
hiring party on the hired party do not amount to the labor law concept of control
that is indicative of employer-employee relationship.

Independent Contractors and Labor Only Contractors Case Why Did The Laborers Sue? Contractor/ Nature of Work Legit Contractor or Labor Only-Only?

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Independent Contractors and Labor Only Contractors Case Why Did The Laborers Sue? Contractor/ Nature of Work Legit Contractor or Labor Only-Only?

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Independent Contractors and Labor Only Contractors Case Why Did The Laborers Sue? Contractor/ Nature of Work Legit Contractor or Labor Only-Only?

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Independent Contractors and Labor Only Contractors

MERALC Janitorial services- illegal deduction, Meralco may be considered

Alviado Promm-gem or SAPS, regularization, service Promm-gen: legitimate labor-

Coca- Interserce, rsalesmen regularization Labor only, no capital, no

Manila Manila water- termination because of a labor-only- no capital to

Teng v Pahagac was hired to Illegal termination

Control test is a primary

Test to determine existence

Solidary liability of the

ee-er exists between

Employers are free to

the petitioner is a regular

Begino v camera men, hired via

You might also like