top of page

Nasa nagsasampa ng kaso ang dapat patunayang empleyado ng inirereklamong kumpanya

  • Writer: BULGAR
    BULGAR
  • Jun 21, 2023
  • 3 min read

ni Atty. Persida Rueda-Acosta @Magtanong Kay Attorney | June 21, 2023


Dear Chief Acosta,

Ako at ang aking asawa ay naglilingkod para sa isang kumpanya. Ang aking asawa ay isang driver, habang ako naman ay isang janitress. Isang gabi, matapos na ipagmaneho ng aking asawa ang kanyang boss, ay ipinatawag siya nito sa kanyang opisina. Matapos hingin ng aking asawa ang kanyang sahod ay bigla na lamang nagalit ang aming amo, tinutukan siya ng baril, at pinukpok sa ulo. Ako ay sumaklolo sa aking asawa at napagbuntunan naman ako ng aming amo ng kanyang galit. Kami ay ikinulong sa isang kwarto at pinalabas lamang nang sumunod na araw. Dahil sa takot, kaming mag-asawa ay hindi na pumasok sa trabaho at agarang nagpunta sa NLRC upang magsampa ng kasong Constructive Dismissal. Ikinakaila ng aming amo na kami ay empleyado dahil wala ang aming mga pangalan sa listahan na isinusumite sa BIR, SSS, PhilHealth, at Pag-IBIG. Wala kaming kahit anong patunay ng aming pagiging empleyado tulad ng kontrata, ID, at iba pang mga dokumento. Ang tanging meron ako ay mga sulat-kamay na pay slip. Tama ba ang tinuran na hindi kami empleyado? - Rima

Dear Rima,

Ang iyong katanungan ay sinagot ng Korte Suprema sa kasong Gerome B. Ginta-Ason v. J.T.A. Packaging Corporation and Jon Tan Arquilla, G.R. No. 244206, Mar. 16, 2022, Ponente: Honorable Associate Justice Ramon Paul L. Hernando, kung saan tinalakay ng Korte Suprema ang aplikasyon ng tinatawag na ‘four-fold test’ upang masuri kung may employer-employee relationship ang isang manggagawa at kumpanya. Ayon din sa nasabing desisyon, pasan ng taong nagsasampa ng kaso na patunayan na siya ay isang empleyado. Ayon sa Korte Suprema:

“Settled is the rule that allegations in the complaint must be duly proven by competent evidence and the burden of proof is on the party making the allegation. In an illegal dismissal case, the onus probandi rests on the employer to prove that its dismissal of an employee was for a valid cause. However, before a case for illegal dismissal can prosper, an employer-employee relationship must first be established. In this instance, since it is petitioner here who is claiming to be an employee of JTA, the burden of proving the existence of an employer-employee relationship lies upon him. Unfortunately, petitioner failed to discharge this burden.

Applying the "four-fold test" in determining the existence of an employer-employee relationship, to wit: (a) the selection and engagement of the employee; (b) the payment of wages; (c) the power of dismissal; and (d) the power to control the employee's conduct, the NLRC, as affirmed by the CA, found that petitioner failed to prove, by competent and relevant evidence that he is an employee of JTA.

To prove the element of payment of wages, petitioner submitted pay slips allegedly issued by JTA. Significantly, the pay slips presented by petitioner bore no indication whatsoever as to their source. Absent any clear indication that the amount petitioner was allegedly receiving came from JTA, We cannot concretely establish payment of wages.In Valencia v. Classique Vinyl Products Corporation, the Court rejected the pay slips submitted by the petitioner employee because they did not bear the name of the respondent company. Thus, We cannot sustain petitioner's argument that the failure to indicate who issued the pay slips should not be taken against him.

Additionally, there were no deductions from petitioner's supposed salary such as withholding tax, SSS, PhilHealth or Pag-Ibig Fund contributions which are the usual deductions from employees' salaries. Thus, the alleged pay slips may not be treated as competent evidence of petitioner's claim that he is JTA's employee.”

Gaya sa kaso ninyong mag-asawa, hindi n'yo sapat na napatunayan na kayo ay mga empleyado ng inyong pinapasukang kumpanya sapagkat walang kahit na anong dokumento ang nagpapatunay nito maliban sa inyong alegasyon na kayo ay empleyado.


Sa kasong nabanggit, kinatigan ng Korte Suprema ang mga talaan ng empleyado na isinusumite sa mga ahensya ng gobyerno gaya ng Social Security System o SSS, PhilHealth, at Pag-IBIG, upang patunayan ng kumpanya na hindi nila empleyado ang mga nagrereklamo. Parehas sa inyong kaso, nasa inyo ang pasanin na patunayan na kayo ay empleyado ng kumpanya bago magbunga ang inyong reklamo para sa constructive dismissal.

Sana ay nabigyan namin ng linaw ang iyong katanungan. Ang payong aming ibinigay ay base lamang sa mga impormasyon na iyong inilahad at maaaring magbago kung mababawasan o madaragdagan ang mga detalye ng iyong salaysay.

Maraming salamat sa inyong patuloy na pagtitiwala.


Comments


Disclaimer : The views and opinions expressed on this website or any comments found on any articles herein, are those of the authors or columnists alike, and do not necessarily reflect nor represent the views and opinions of the owner, the company, the management and the website.

RECOMMENDED
bottom of page