(LABOR) Bitoy Javier V Fly Ace Corp
(LABOR) Bitoy Javier V Fly Ace Corp
(LABOR) Bitoy Javier V Fly Ace Corp
G.R. No. 192558 / FEB 15, 2012 / MENDOZA, J. / LABOR - Burden of Proving
Employer Employee Relationship/ LTLimbaring
NATURE
Petition for certiorari under Rule 45
PETITIONERS
Bitoy Javier
RESPONDENTS
Fly Ace Corporation / Flordelyn Castillo
SUMMARY. Javier filed an illegal dismissal case against Fly Ace Corporation. The
latter on the other hand contends that Javier is not their employee was just
contracted as an extra helper on a pakyaw basis.
DOCTRINE. Before a case for illegal dismissal can prosper, an employer-employee
relationship must first be established and it is incumbent upon private respondent to
prove the employee-employer relationship by substantial evidence.
FACTS.
DECISION.
Petition denied. CA decision affirmed.
NOTES.
Tests to determine the existence of an employer-employee relationship:
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 employees conduct
Ace engaged his services as a regular employee; that Fly Ace paid his
wages as an employee, or that Fly Ace could dictate what his conduct
should be while at work. In other words, Javiers allegations did not establish
that his relationship with Fly Ace had the attributes of an employeremployee relationship on the basis of the above-mentioned four-fold test.
Payment on a piece-rate basis does not negate regular employment. The
term wage is broadly defined in Article 97 of the Labor Code as