EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONSHIP

The elements to determine the existence of an employment relationship are: (a) the selection and engagement of the employee; (b) the payment of wages; (c) the power of dismissal; and (d) the employer’s power to control the employee’s conduct. The most important element is the employer’s control of the employee’s conduct, not only as to the result of the work to be done, but also as to the means and methods to accomplish it. (AD SONICMIX v. WILMER D. GENOVIA, G.R. No. 169757, November 23, 2011)

Guidelines indicative of labor law "control" do not merely relate to the mutually desirable result intended by the contractual relationship; they must have the nature of dictating the means and methods to be employed in attaining the result. (GREGORIO V. TONGKO v. THE MANUFACTURERS LIFE INSURANCE CO. (PHILS.), INC. and RENATO A. VERGEL DE DIOS, G.R. No. 167622, 25 January 2011)

The Court is of the considerable view that on Javier lies the burden to pass the well-settled tests to determine the existence of an employer-employee relationship, viz: (1) the selection and engagement of the employee; (2) the payment of wages; (3) the power of dismissal; and (4) the power to control the employee’s conduct. Of these elements, the most important criterion is whether the employer controls or has reserved the right to control the employee not only as to the result of the work but also as to the means and methods by which the result is to be accomplished. (BITOY JAVIER (DANILO P. JAVIER) v. FLY ACE CORPORATION/FLORDELYN CASTILLO, G.R. No. 192558, February 15, 2012)

In determining the presence or absence of an employer-employee relationship, the Court has consistently looked for the following incidents, to wit: (a) the selection and engagement of the employee; (b) the payment of wages; (c) the power of dismissal; and (d) the employer’s power to control the employee on the means and methods by which the work is accomplished. The last element, the so-called control test, is the most important element. (CHARLIE JAO v. BCC PRODUCTS SALES INC., and TERRANCE TY, G.R. No. 163700, 18 April 2012)

Neil Christian

I want to share to you my knowledge about law, our travels with my family, success principles as well as healthy insights. I hope you will enjoy and learn from my blog.