This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2008-07-04 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| employer; and (2) those who have rendered at least one year of service, whether continuous or broken, with respect to the activity in which they are employed.[27] Simply stated, regular employees are classified into: regular employees by nature of work; and regular employees by years of service. The former refers to those employees who perform a particular activity which is necessary or desirable in the usual business or trade of the employer, regardless of their length of service; while the latter refers to those employees who have been performing the job, regardless of the nature thereof, for at least a year.[28] If the employee has been performing the job for at least one year, even if the performance is not continuous or merely intermittent, the law deems the repeated and continuing need for its performance as sufficient evidence of the necessity, if not indispensability, of that activity to the business.[29] | |||||
|
2007-06-21 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| The principal test in determining whether an employee is a project employee is whether he/she is assigned to carry out a "specific project or undertaking," the duration and scope of which are specified at the time the employee is engaged in the project,[7] or where the work or service to be performed is seasonal in nature and the employment is for the duration of the season.[8] A true project employee should be assigned to a project which begins and ends at determined or determinable times, and be informed thereof at the time of hiring.[9] | |||||