This case has been cited 6 times or more.
|
2014-12-03 |
LEONEN, J. |
||||
| Sonza was engaged by ABS-CBN in view of his "unique skills, talent and celebrity status not possessed by ordinary employees."[188] His work was for radio and television programs.[189] On the other hand, Dumpit-Murillo was hired by ABC as a newscaster and co-anchor.[190] | |||||
|
2014-12-03 |
LEONEN, J. |
||||
| Sonza's talent fee amounted to P317,000.00 per month, which this court found to be a substantial amount that indicated he was an independent contractor rather than a regular employee.[191] Meanwhile, Dumpit-Murillo's monthly salary was P28,000.00, a very low amount compared to what Sonza received.[192] | |||||
|
2014-12-03 |
LEONEN, J. |
||||
| Sonza was unable to prove that ABS-CBN could terminate his services apart from breach of contract. There was no indication that he could be terminated based on just or authorized causes under the Labor Code. In addition, ABS-CBN continued to pay his talent fee under their agreement, even though his programs were no longer broadcasted.[193] Dumpit-Murillo was found to have been illegally dismissed by her employer when they did not renew her contract on her fourth year with ABC.[194] | |||||
|
2014-12-03 |
LEONEN, J. |
||||
| In Sonza, this court ruled that ABS-CBN did not control how Sonza delivered his lines, how he appeared on television, or how he sounded on radio.[195] All that Sonza needed was his talent.[196] Further, "ABS-CBN could not terminate or discipline SONZA even if the means and methods of performance of his work . . . did not meet ABS-CBN's approval."[197] In Dumpit-Murillo, the duties and responsibilities enumerated in her contract was a clear indication that ABC had control over her work.[198] | |||||
|
2014-12-03 |
LEONEN, J. |
||||
| The Court of Appeals likewise cited Dumpit-Murillo, which involved fixed-term contracts that were successively renewed for four (4) years.[224] This court held that "[t]his repeated engagement under contract of hire is indicative of the necessity and desirability of the petitioner's work in private respondent ABC's business."[225] | |||||
|
2008-01-28 |
TINGA, J, |
||||
| Jurisprudence is abound with cases that recite the factors to be considered in determining the existence of employer-employee relationship, namely: (a) the selection and engagement of the employee; (b) the payment of wages; (c) the power of dismissal; and (d) the employer's power to control the employee with respect to the means and method by which the work is to be accomplished.[16] The most important factor involves the control test. Under the control test, there is an employer-employee relationship when the person for whom the services are performed reserves the right to control not only the end achieved but also the manner and means used to achieve that end.[17] | |||||