#3 36:46-57:46 Issue: if services is rendered and no agreement was made beforehand as

to whether or not it is compensated or much less how much the

To be an employee is to be in an employer-employee contract and you compensation should be, is there obligation to pay for that service?
have fund out from LVN vs.Philippine Musicians Guild that there are 4 Ruling: The supreme court ordered Pomar to pay Perez. How much?
requisites. QUANTUM MERUIT - as much as the value of the service fetches.

LVN vs.Philippine Musicians Guild Rule: If there is no agreement as to compensation or how much it should
Requisites to establish employer-employee relationship be and service that is normally compensable is rendered, then
1. Selection and hiring compensation is owing according to the normal rate that is paid for that
2. There must be payment of wages kind of service. Quantum Meruit.
3. There must be power to dismiss
Q: So, when you render service to another, is there an assumption that
4. There is power of control not only as to the goal or end to be achieved
there is compensation?
but also as to the means and methods and manner of achieving the end.

A: That is the rule if the service that is rendered is normally compensable.

Q: are those 4 requisites verified in the case of a GRO?
Was there selection and hiring?
Was there payment of wages?
Is there power to dismiss?
IS there power of control?
If not, then there is no presumption of compensation that will arise.
No
(next part starts on the posporo story)
No. They get commission
No. She can dismiss herself if she
wants to. She is free as the holy
spirit to move in and out.
No. None even as to the working
hours.

Ans: there is employer-employee relationship because it is imposed by

law. The law itself says so.

When you come to labor legislation in implementation of social justice,

some of thsoe rigid categories that would otherwise be just a staple in a
society where everyone is presumed to be equal, it stands.
Once you have a society that is assumed to be fundamentally defective,
then you can have this employer employee relationship imposed by law.

Q: In an employer employee relationship, is the consent part presumed or

not? Is it given the benefit of the doubt or not?

Bag o mo gikasal. Dugay mo nagplano sa inyong balay. Karon magsugod

namog buhat sa inyong balay. Samtang gitukod inyong balay naa namoy
neighbors. Nagtawag kag experienced workers ug nagsugod nag
trabaho.

Giduol ka sa imong silingan nag ingon syag “magtabang ko ninyo,

kumpleto man ko sa tools” Unya nalipay ka kay mutabang sya.
Pagkabuntag mubatging nag kapatas, muabot sya. Sa tanan buhaton,
muapil sya sa tanan. Magtabang daw sya kay silingan daw mo. He did
not object. After 1 week, nilinya ang mga panday, mason ug ultimo (mga
walay skill) unya niapil sad syag linya. Nangayo syag sobre. Is he entitled
to compensation? And for how much?

Ans: The law says, if you are suffered or permitted to work, then there
is an employer-employee relationship.

Case: Perez vs. Pomar, G.R. L-1299, Nov 17, 1903

Facts: This happened in the 1800s. Pomar was the manager of

Tabakalera Y Cia. Its business was making cigarettes - the first cigarette
factory in the Philippines. To continue with his operations when the
americans came, he needed to get tobacco supplies. And he had a coach,
horse drawn and he would be going around luzon buying tobacco leaves.
In order to do that, he has to pass through checkpoints. These
checkpoints were manned by the americans. Now, Pomar only knew how
to speak Filipino, tagalog and spanish. Unya, “hi joe” man tong nagbantay.
SO he asked Perez who knew english and spanish, to come along and
help him.

He told perez, “we will be going around. If you need to buy something,
just load it in the carraige and yuou make a business out of it. But your
task is to transalte what I say when we reach the checkpoint. You
translate what I say so they can understand.”
3 months sila nagsuroy suroy. Then perez goes to pomar and says “you
have to pay me. I spent 3 months going around with you and translating.”

Pomar says “we did not agree on that. You bought things and put them in
my carriage too which you made a business of. We did not agree on
compensation. Why should I pay you?”