G.R. No. 91307 Case Digest

G.R. No. 91307, January 24, 1991

Singer Sewing Machine Company, petitioner

vs Hon. Franklin Drilon, Med-Arbiter Felix Chaguile, Jr., and Singer Machine Collectors Union-Baguio, respondents.

Ponente: Gutierrez, Jr.

Facts:

This is a petition for certiorari assailing the order of Chaguile and Drilon denying the motion for reconsideration in the case of the certification of SIMACUB as the sole and collective bargaining agent.

February 1989, SIMACUB filed a petition for direct certification as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent of all collectors of the singer company, Baguio City branch. The company opposed the petition on the ground that union members are actually not employees but independent contractors of the company.

But Chaguile, found that there exist an employee-employer relationship between the union members and company, thus he granted the petition for certification. On appeal, Drilon affirmed the same. Thus this petition, alleging that Drilon and Chaguile acted in excess of jurisdiction and/or committed grave abuse of discretion in that: (1) DOLE has no jurisdiction over cases where there is employee-employer relationship, (2) right to due process was denied when the evidence of the union members' being commission agents was disregarded by Drilon, (3) that Drilon and Chaguile erred in finding the existence of employee-employer relationship, (4) Drilon and Chaguile disregarded the well-settled rule that commission agents are not employees but are independent contractors.

Respondents insist that the provisions of Collective Agency Agreement contradict the company's position that the union members are independent contractors. Proving that union members are performing the most desirable and necessary activities for the continuous and effective operations of the company. Citing also that the union members will not qualify as independent contractors because they are not free from control of the alleged employer, who have substantial capital or investment in the equipment, tool and other necessities of the business.

Ruling:

The following elements are generally considered in the determination of the 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 employee's conduct — although the latter is the most important element" 

The petitioner relies on the following stipulation in the agreement: (a) a collector is designated as a collecting agent" who is to be considered at all times as an independent contractor and not employee of the Company; While the respondents rely on Paragraph 4 on the monthly collection quota required by the Company is deemed by respondents as a control measure over the means by which an agent is to perform his services.

Because of the agreement's confirmation of the status of the collecting agent as independent contractor, court ruled in favor of the petitioner. Saying also that the monthly collection qouta is a normal requirement in contractual agreements (among other reasons like, collectors are not bound to report on a daily basis, they are not prohibited to seek another employment, and they are paid in a commission basis, etc). Thus concluding also that there is no employer-employee relationship. Denying the contention that the alleged employees are performing activities that are necessary for the business is not determinative in this case, due to the agreement. 

The assumption of DOLE over the case is considered rightful because it was brought on appeal for the revearsal of the Med-arbiter hence the petitioner submits itself as well as the issue of existence of employment relationship to the jurisdiction of DOLE which was faced with dispute on an application for certification election.

The Court finds that since private respondents are not employees of the Company, they are not entitled to the constitutional right to join or form a labor organization for purposes of collective bargaining. Accordingly, there is no constitutional and legal basis for their "union" to be granted their petition for direct certification.