You are on page 1of 1


170087) receiving check vouchers indicating her

salaries/wages, benefits, 13th month pay, bonuses
and allowances, as well as deductions and Social
Facts: Security contributions. Petitioner’s membership in
Petitioner Angelina Francisco was hired by the SSS as manifested by a copy of the SSS
respondent Kasei Corporation during its specimen signature card which was signed by the
incorporation stage as Accountant and Corporate President of Kasei Corporation and the inclusion of
Secretary and later as Liaison Officer. her name in the on-line inquiry system of the SSS
Subsequently she was also designated Acting evinces the existence of an employer-employee
Manager until replaced, but was assured by the relationship between petitioner and respondent
company that she was still connected as Technical corporation. It is therefore apparent that petitioner
Consultant. Thereafter, Kasei Corporation reduced is economically dependent on respondent
petitioner’s salary until it was later withheld despite corporation for her continued employment in the
repeated follow-ups. Petitioner once again asked latter’s line of business.
for her salary but was informed that she is no
longer connected with the company. Petitioner thus
filed an action for constructive dismissal before the Magsalin v. National Organization of Working
Labor Arbiter. Respondent Kasei Corporation Men
averred that petitioner is not their employee as she
performed her work at her own discretion without Facts: 1. The private respondents worked as sales
their control and supervision. Both the Labor Arbiter route helpers for the petitioner (Coca Cola) for 5
and NLRC tribunal found for petitioner. CA months and thereafter they were hired on a daily
reversed the decision. basis. According to the petitioner, the respondents
Issue: were merely hired as substitutes for regular helpers
Whether or not there was employer-employee
relationship between the parties. when the latter were unavailable or due to shortage
Ruling: YES. of manpower/high volume of work. These workers
In certain cases the control test is not sufficient to would then wait every morning outside the gates
give a complete picture of the relationship between and if hired, they would be paid their wages at the
the parties, owing to the complexity of such a end of the day.
relationship where several positions have been
held by the worker. The better approach would 2. The respondents asked the petitioner to make
therefore be to adopt a two-tiered test involving: (1) them regular but the latter refused. Hence, 23 of
the putative employer’s power to control the these temporary workers filed a case for illegal
employee with respect to the means and methods
by which the work is to be accomplished; and (2) dismissal.
the underlying economic realities of the activity or
Issue: W/N the respondents' work is deemed
By applying the control test, there is no doubt that necessary and desirable in the usual business
petitioner is an employee of Kasei Corporation or trade of the petitioner
because she was under the direct control and
supervision of Seiji Kamura, the corporation’s RULING: Yes. The repeated hiring of the
Technical Consultant. She reported for work respondent workers and continuing need of their
regularly and served in various capacities as daily services clearly attest to the necessity or
Accountant, Liaison Officer, Technical Consultant, desirability of their services in the regular conduct
Acting Manager and Corporate Secretary, with of the business/trade of petitioner.
substantially the same job functions, that is,
rendering accounting and tax services to the In determining whether employment is regular or
company and performing functions necessary and not, the applicable test is the reasonable
desirable for the proper operation of the corporation
such as securing business permits and other connection between a particular activity performed
licenses over an indefinite period of engagement. in relation to the usual business or trade of the
Under the broader economic reality test, the employer. The nature of work must be viewed from
petitioner can likewise be said to be an employee of the perspective of the business in its entirety and
respondent corporation because she had served not confined scope.
the company for six years before her dismissal,