MAKATI HABERDASHERY, INC., JORGE LEDESMA and CECILIO G.

INOCENCIO, petitioners, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, CEFERINA J.

DIOSANA (Labor Arbiter, Department of Labor and Employment, National Capital Region),
SANDIGAN NG MANGGAGAWANG PILIPINO (SANDIGAN)-TUCP and its
members, respondents. G.R. Nos. 83380-81 November 15, 1989. FERNAN, C.J.:

 Private respondents have been working for petitioner Makati Haberdashery, Inc. as tailors,
seamstress, sewers, basters (manlililip) and "plantsadoras".
 They are paid on a piece-rate basis except Maria Angeles and Leonila Serafina who are paid
on a monthly basis. In addition to their piece-rate, they are given a daily allowance of three (P
3.00) pesos provided they report for work before 9:30 a.m. everyday.

 Private respondents are required to work from or before 9:30 a.m. up to 6:00 or 7:00 p.m.
from Monday to Saturday and during peak periods even on Sundays and holidays.

 SMP, the labor organization of the workers filed a complaint before NLRC for: underpayment
of basic wage and money claims including non-payment of service incentive leave among
others

 LA - dismissed the claim for underpayment, however, ruled that Haberdashery violated the
decrees on service incentive leave pay (and others). He ordered for the computation of
monetary awards retroactive as of 3 years prior to the filing of the case

 NLRC - affirmed the decision. Hence this petition.

ISSUE + RULING: Whether there is an employer-employee relationship between

Haberdashery and the workers

YES. Respondents are regular employees. Using the four-fold test (wherein the most important
requisite is control), supervision is actively manifested in the manner and quality of cutting,
sewing and ironing. The presence of control over both the result and means and methods is also
evident in a Memorandum issued by the Asst. Manager addressed to the workers which ordered
them to: follow instructions from the undersigned; before accepting job orders, tailors must check
the materials, job orders, due dates and other things, etc. Further, they have to report for work
regularly for 930AM to 6PM. Unlike independent contractors who generally rely on their own
resources, the equipment, tools, accessories, and paraphernalia used by private respondents are
supplied and owned by petitioners.

As a consequence of their status as regular employees, they are entitled to the Minimum wage,
COLA and 13th Month Pay.

ISSUE + RULING: Whether respondents are entitled to service incentive leave

NO. They are not entitled to service incentive leave pay because as piece-rate workers being
paid at a fixed amount for performing work irrespective of time consumed in the performance
thereof, they fall under one of the exceptions stated in Section 1(d), Rule V, Implementing
Regulations, Book III, Labor Code. (For the same reason private respondents cannot also claim
holiday pay (Section 1(e), Rule IV, Implementing Regulations, Book III, Labor Code)