[Digest] Oregas vs. NLRC (2008)

Oregas v. NLRC (2008)

Quisumbing, J.

Facts:

·          Petitioners are employees of FVA manpower training center and Services who assigned them to work as valet parking attendants at the Dusit Hotel.

·          In 2000 petitioners were recalled from service in Dusit Hotel.

·          They filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and several claims for wages against Dusit Hotel.

·          The Labor Arbiter ruled that petitioners are NOT employees of Dusit they are instead employees of FVA. Using the 4 fold test, manner and selection, payment of wages, power of dismissal and power to control conduct were all found to ultimately reside with FVA.

·          Court noted furthermore that when they were recalled they continued to be under the employ of FVA but because they were not assigned within the 6 months after their recall they were deemed constructively dismissed.

·          Petitioners assail the findings of the labor arbiter.

Doctrine:

·          FVA is registered with DOLE and DTI as a legitimate job contractor.

·          The employment contract and pay of the petitioners are all with FVA NOT DUSIT.

·          There is an FVA supervisor that is assigned with them in DUSIT.

·          They were duly informed by FVA that they would only be assigned to Dusit for 5 months.

Dusit paid FVA for the services it provided while FVA was the one who paid the employees.                                                                 

·          To establish employer-employee relations the ff are needed:

1. 1.        Manner of selection and engagement of the putative employees
2. 2.        Mode of payment of wages
3. 3.        Presence or absence of a power of dismissal
4. 4.        The presence or absence of a power to control the putative employee’s conduct [THIS IS MOST DETERMINATIVE]