Caurdanetaan Piece Workers Union vs.

Laguesma & Corfarm Grains

G.R No. 113542, February 24, 1998
Facts:
Caurdanetaan Piece Workers Union members (petitioners) worked as cargadores for
Corfarms Grains, Inc. (private respondent). They loaded, unloaded and piled sacks of palay
from the warehouses to the cargo trucks and from the cargo trucks to the buyers. They were
paid by private respondent on a piece rate basis. When Corfarm denied some benefits to
these cargadores, they organized a union. Upon learning of its formation, Corfarm barred its
members from working with them and replaced them with non-members of the union.
Petitioner filed [a petition] for certification election before the Department of Labor and
Employment and also filed a complaint for illegal dismissal.
Corfarm denies that it had the power of control, rationalizing that petitioner's members
"were 'street-hired' workers engaged from time to time to do loading and unloading work
.There was no superintendent-in-charge to give orders and there were no gate passes
issued, nor tools, equipment and paraphernalia issued by Corfarm for loading/unloading.
Furthermore they contended that employer-employee relationship is negated by the fact
that they offer and actually perform loading and unloading work for various rice mills in
Pangasinan .
Labor Arbiter Rolando D. Gambito issued his decision finding the dismissal of petitioner's
members illegal. Public Respondent Laguesma premised the dismissal of the petition for
certification election on the absence of an employer-employee relationship between
petitioner's members and private respondent
ISSUE:
The present controversy hinges on whether or not an employer-employee relationship
between the CPWU members and Respondent Corfarm exist.
HELD.
Yes there is employer-employee relationship. To determine the existence of an employeremployee relation, this Court has consistently applied the "four-fold" test which has the
following elements: (1) the power to hire, (2) the payment of wages, (3) the power to
dismiss, and (4) the power to control - the last being the most important element.
Caurdanetaan Piece Workers Union members (petitioners) performed work which is directly
related, necessary and vital to the operations of Corfarm. Moreover, Corfarm did not even
allege, much less prove, that petitioner's members have "substantial capital or investment
in the form of tools, equipment, machineries, [and] work premises, among others. To be
considered as independent contractors. Furthermore, said respondent did not contradict
petitioner's allegation that it paid wages directly to these workers without the intervention of
any third-party independent contractor. It also wielded the power of dismissal over
petitioners; in fact, its exercise of this power was the progenitor of the illegal dismissal case.
Clearly, the workers are not independent contractors. Assuming arguendo that they did work
with other rice mills, this was required by the imperative of meeting their basic needs.