besa vs trajano

Besa v. Trajano

FACTS:

Shoe shiners are members of KAMPI. Respondent Kaisahan ng Mangagawang Pilipino (KAMPI) filed a Petition for Certification Election. Petitioner opposed alleging that there is no ER-EE relationship between Besa (company) and respondents. These respondents are shoe shiners paid on a commission basis. The question of ER-EE relationship became a primordial consideration in resolving whether or not the subject shoe shiners have the juridical personality and standing to present a petition for certification as well as to vote therein.

ISSUE: W/N ER-EE relationship exists betweem shoe shiners and Besa

HELD: No. Existence of employer-employee relationship is determined by the following elements, namely, a] selection and engagement of the employee; b] payment of wages; c] powers of dismissal; and d] power to control the employee's conduct although the latter is the most important element

Shoe shiner is different from a piece worjer:

Piece Woker Shoe shiner1. paid for work accomplished 1. contributes anything to the capital of the

employer2. the employer pays his wages 2. paid directly by his customer3. paid for work accomplished without concern to the profit derived by employer

3. the proceeds derived from the trade are divided share with respondent BESA

4. the employer supervises and controls his work

4. respondent does not exercise control

Thus, shoe shiners are not employees of the company, but are partners, because there is no control by the owner and shoe shiners have their own customers whom they charge a fee and divide the proceeds equally with the owner.