Sonza vs Abs-cbn and Dumpit-murillo vs. CA

7/25/2019 Sonza vs Abs-cbn and Dumpit-murillo vs. CA

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sonza-vs-abs-cbn-and-dumpit-murillo-vs-ca 1/26

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 138051. June 10, 2004]

JOSE Y. SONZA, petitioner , vs. ABS-CBN BROADCASTNGCOR!ORATON, respondent .

D E C S O N

CAR!O, J ."

T#e C$%e

Before this Court is a petition for review on certiorari [1] assailing the ! "ar#h

1$$$ De#ision[]

of the Court of %ppeals in C%&'(R( S) No( *$1$+ ,is-issing the petitionfile, ./ 0ose ( Son2a 3SON4%5( The Court of %ppeals affir-e, the fin,ings of the

National 6a.or Relations Co--ission 3N6RC57 whi#h affir-e, the 6a.or %r.iters

,is-issal of the #ase for la#8 of 9uris,i#tion(

T#e &$'(%

In "a/ 1$$*7 respon,ent %BS&CBN Broa,#asting Corporation 3%BS&CBN5 signe,

an %gree-ent 3%gree-ent5 with the "el an, 0a/ "anage-ent an, Develop-ent

Corporation 3"0"DC5( %BS&CBN was represente, ./ its #orporate offi#ers while

"0"DC was represente, ./ SON4%7 as )resi,ent an, 'eneral "anager7 an, Car-ela

Tiang#o 3TI%N'CO57 as :V) an, Treasurer( Referre, to in the %gree-ent as %':NT7

"0"DC agree, to provi,e SON4%s servi#es e;#lusivel/ to %BS&CBN as talent for ra,io

an, television( The %gree-ent liste, the servi#es SON4% woul, ren,er to %BS&CBN7 as

follows<

a. Co-host for Mel & Jay radio program, 8:00 to 10:00 a.m., Mondays to

Fridays;

b. Co-host for Mel & Jay teleision program, !:"0 to #:00 p.m., $%ndays.[=]

%BS&CBN agree, to pa/ for SON4%s servi#es a -onthl/ talent fee of )=1+7+++ for

the first /ear an, )=1>7+++ for the se#on, an, thir, /ear of the %gree-ent( %BS&CBN

woul, pa/ the talent fees on the 1+th an, ?th ,a/s of the -onth(

On 1 %pril 1$$!7 SON4% wrote a letter to %BS&CBNs )resi,ent7 :ugenio 6ope2 III7

whi#h rea,s<

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jun2004/138051.htm#_ftn1









ear Mr. 'ope(,

)e *o%ld li+e to all yo%r attention to the greement dated May 1/ entered into by

yo%r goodself on behalf of $-C *ith o%r ompany relatie to o%r talent J2$3 4.

$25.

s yo% are *ell a*are, Mr. $on(a irreoably resigned in ie* of reent eents

onerning his programs and areer. )e onsider these ats of the station iolatie of

the greement and the station as in breah thereof. 6n this onnetion, *e hereby

sere notie of resission of said greement at o%r instane effetie as of date.

Mr. $on(a informed %s that he is *aiing and reno%ning reoery of the remaining

amo%nt stip%lated in paragraph # of the greement b%t reseres the right to see+

reoery of the other benefits %nder said greement.

7han+ yo% for yo%r attention.

ery tr%ly yo%rs,

9$gd.

J2$3 4. $25

resident and <en. Manager [*]

On =+ %pril 1$$!7 SON4% file, a #o-plaint against %BS&CBN .efore the

Depart-ent of 6a.or an, :-plo/-ent7 National Capital Region in @ue2on Cit/( SON4%

#o-plaine, that %BS&CBN ,i, not pa/ his salaries7 separation pa/7 servi#e in#entive

leave pa/7 1=th -onth pa/7 signing .onus7 travel allowan#e an, a-ounts ,ue un,er the

:-plo/ees Sto#8 Option )lan 3:SO)5(

On 1+ 0ul/ 1$$!7 %BS&CBN file, a "otion to Dis-iss on the groun, that no

e-plo/er&e-plo/ee relationship e;iste, .etween the parties( SON4% file, an

Opposition to the -otion on 1$ 0ul/ 1$$!(

"eanwhile7 %BS&CBN #ontinue, to re-it SON4%s -onthl/ talent fees through his

a##ount at )CIBan87 @ue2on %venue Bran#h7 @ue2on Cit/( In 0ul/ 1$$!7 %BS&CBN

opene, a new a##ount with the sa-e .an8 where %BS&CBN ,eposite, SON4%s talent

fees an, other pa/-ents ,ue hi- un,er the %gree-ent(





In his Or,er ,ate, De#e-.er 1$$!7 the 6a.or %r.iter [?] ,enie, the -otion to

,is-iss an, ,ire#te, the parties to file their respe#tive position papers( The 6a.or

%r.iter rule,<

6n this instant ase, omplainant for haing ino+ed a laim that he *as an employee

of respondent ompany %ntil pril 1!, 1= and that he *as not paid ertain laims, itis s%ffiient eno%gh as to onfer >%risdition oer the instant ase in this 2ffie. nd

as to *hether or not s%h laim *o%ld entitle omplainant to reoer %pon the a%ses

of ation asserted is a matter to be resoled only after and as a res%lt of a

hearing. 7h%s, the respondents plea of la+ of employer-employee relationship may be

pleaded only as a matter of defense. 6t behooes %pon it the d%ty to proe that there

really is no employer-employee relationship bet*een it and the omplainant.

The 6a.or %r.iter then #onsi,ere, the #ase su.-itte, for resolution( The parties

su.-itte, their position papers on * Fe.ruar/ 1$$>(

On 11 "ar#h 1$$>7 SON4% file, a Repl/ to Respon,ents )osition )aper with

"otion to :;punge Respon,ents %nne; * an, %nne; ? fro- the Re#or,s( %nne;es *

an, ? are affi,avits of %BS&CBNs witnesses So##oro Vi,anes an, Rolan,o V( Cru2(

These witnesses state, in their affi,avits that the prevailing pra#ti#e in the television

an, .roa,#ast in,ustr/ is to treat talents li8e SON4% as in,epen,ent #ontra#tors(

The 6a.or %r.iter ren,ere, his De#ision ,ate, A 0ul/ 1$$> ,is-issing the #o-plaint

for la#8 of 9uris,i#tion([!] The pertinent parts of the ,e#ision rea, as follows<

? ? ?

)hile hilippine >%rispr%dene has not yet, *ith ertainty, to%hed on the tr%e nat%re

of the ontrat of a talent, it stands to reason that a talent as aboe-desribed annot be

onsidered as an employee by reason of the pe%liar ir%mstanes s%rro%nding the

engagement of his series.

6t m%st be noted that complainant was engaged by respondent by reason of his

peculiar skills and talent as a TV host and a radio broadcaster. Unlike an

ordinary employee, he was free to perform the services he undertook to render inaccordance with his own style. 7he benefits onferred to omplainant %nder the May

1/ greement are ertainly ery m%h higher than those generally gien to

employees. For one, omplainant $on(as monthly talent fees amo%nt to a

staggering "1#,000. Moreoer, his engagement as a talent *as oered by a speifi

ontrat. 'i+e*ise, he *as not bo%nd to render eight 98 ho%rs of *or+ per day as he

*or+ed only for s%h n%mber of ho%rs as may be neessary.







7he fat that per the May 1/ greement omplainant *as aorded some benefits

normally gien to an employee is inonse@%ential. Whatever benefits complainant

enjoyed arose from specific agreement by the parties and not by reason of

employer-employee relationship. s orretly p%t by the respondent, ll these

benefits are merely talent fees and other ontrat%al benefits and sho%ld not bedeemed as salaries, *ages andAor other rem%neration aorded to an employee,

not*ithstanding the nomenlat%re appended to these benefits. propos to this is the

r%le that the term or nomenlat%re gien to a stip%lated benefit is not ontrolling, b%t

the intent of the parties to the greement onferring s%h benefit.

The fact that complainant was made subject to respondents ules and

egulations, likewise, does not detract from the absence of employer-employee

relationship. s held by the $%preme Co%rt, 7he line sho%ld be dra*n bet*een r%les

that merely sere as g%idelines to*ards the ahieement of the m%t%ally desired res%lt

*itho%t ditating the means or methods to be employed in attaining it, and those that

ontrol or fi? the methodology and bind or restrit the party hired to the %se of s%h

means. 7he first, *hih aim only to promote the res%lt, reate no employer-employee

relationship %nli+e the seond, *hih address both the res%lt and the means to ahiee

it. 96ns%lar 'ife ss%rane Co., 'td. s. 'BC, et al., <.B. o. 8//8/, oember 1!,

18.

? ? ? 93mphasis s%pplied[>]

SON4% appeale, to the N6RC( On * Fe.ruar/ 1$$A7 the N6RC ren,ere, aDe#ision affir-ing the 6a.or %r.iters ,e#ision( SON4% file, a -otion for

re#onsi,eration7 whi#h the N6RC ,enie, in its Resolution ,ate, = 0ul/ 1$$A(

On ! O#to.er 1$$A7 SON4% file, a spe#ial #ivil a#tion for #ertiorari .efore the Court

of %ppeals assailing the ,e#ision an, resolution of the N6RC( On ! "ar#h 1$$$7 the

Court of %ppeals ren,ere, a De#ision ,is-issing the #ase( [A]

en#e7 this petition(

T#e Ru)*n+% o (#e NRC $n Cou/( o Ae$)%

The Court of %ppeals affir-e, the N6RCs fin,ing that no e-plo/er&e-plo/ee

relationship e;iste, .etween SON4% an, %BS&CBN( %,opting the N6RCs ,e#ision7 the

appellate #ourt uote, the following fin,ings of the N6RC<

? ? ? the May 1/ greement *ill readily reeal that MJMC entered into the

ontrat merely as an agent of omplainant $on(a, the prinipal. y all indiation and







as the la* p%ts it, the at of the agent is the at of the prinipal itself. 7his fat is made

parti%larly tr%e in this ase, as admittedly MJMC is a management ompany

deoted e?l%siely to managing the areers of Mr. $on(a and his broadast partner,

Mrs. Carmela C. 7iango. 92pposition to Motion to ismiss

Clearly, the relations of prinipal and agent only ar%es bet*een omplainant $on(a

and MJMC, and not bet*een $-C and MJMC. 7his is lear from the

proisions of the May 1/ greement *hih speifially referred to MJMC as the

<37. s a matter of fat, *hen omplainant herein %nilaterally resinded said

May 1/ greement, it *as MJMC *hih iss%ed the notie of resission in behalf

of Mr. $on(a, *ho himself signed the same in his apaity as resident.

Moreoer, preio%s ontrats bet*een Mr. $on(a and $-C reeal the fat that

historially, the parties to the said agreements are $-C and Mr. $on(a. nd it is

only in the May 1/ greement, *hih is the latest greement e?e%ted bet*een$-C and Mr. $on(a, that MJMC fig%red in the said greement as the agent of

Mr. $on(a.

)e find it erroneo%s to assert that MJMC is a mere labor-only ontrator of $-

C s%h that there e?istsD employer-employee relationship bet*een the latter and

Mr. $on(a. 2n the ontrary, )e find it ind%bitable, that MJMC is an agent, not of

$-C, b%t of the talentAontrator Mr. $on(a, as e?pressly admitted by the latter

and MJMC in the May 1/ greement.

6t may not be amiss to state that >%risdition oer the instant ontroersy indeed

belongs to the reg%lar o%rts, the same being in the nat%re of an ation for alleged

breah of ontrat%al obligation on the part of respondent-appellee. s s@%arely

apparent from omplainant-appellants osition aper, his laims for ompensation for

series, 1"th month pay, signing bon%s and trael allo*ane against respondent-

appellee are not based on the 'abor Code b%t rather on the proisions of the May

1/ greement, *hile his laims for proeeds %nder $to+ %rhase greement are

based on the latter. portion of the osition aper of omplainant-appellant bears

per%sal:

Ender the May 1/ greementD *ith respondent $-C, the latter ontrat%ally

bo%nd itself to pay omplainant a signing bon%s onsisting of shares of sto+s*ith

F63 EB3 72E$ 3$2$ 9!00,000.00.



$imilarly, omplainant is also entitled to be paid 1" th month pay based on an amo%nt

not lo*er than the amo%nt he *as reeiing prior to effetiity of 9the greement.

Ender paragraph of 9the May 1/ greement, omplainant is entitled to a

omm%table trael benefit amo%nting to at least 2ne %ndred Fifty 7ho%sand esos

91!0,000.00 per year.

7h%s, it is preisely bea%se of omplainant-appellants o*n reognition of the fat

that his ontrat%al relations *ith $-C are fo%nded on the e* Ciil Code,

rather than the 'abor Code, that instead of merely resigning from $-C,

omplainant-appellant sered %pon the latter a notie of resission of greement *ith

the station, per his letter dated pril 1, 1=, *hih asserted that instead of referring

to %npaid employee benefits, he is *aiing and reno%ning reoery of the remaining

amo%nt stip%lated in paragraph # of the greement b%t reseres the right to s%h

reoery of the other benefits %nder said greement. 9nne? " of the respondent$-Cs Motion to ismiss dated J%ly 10, 1=.

3idently, it is preisely by reason of the alleged iolation of the May 1/

greement andAor the $to+ %rhase greement by respondent-appellee that

omplainant-appellant filed his omplaint.Complainant-appellants laims being

anhored on the alleged breah of ontrat on the part of respondent-appellee, the

same an be resoled by referene to iil la* and not to labor la*. Conse@%ently,

they are *ithin the realm of iil la* and, th%s, lie *ith the reg%lar o%rts. s held in

the ase of ai-Chi 3letronis Man%fat%ring s. illarama, G"8 $CB G=#, G1 oember 1/, an action for breach of contractual obligation is intrinsically a

civil dispute.[$] 93mphasis s%pplied

The Court of %ppeals rule, that the e;isten#e of an e-plo/er&e-plo/ee relationship

.etween SON4% an, %BS&CBN is a fa#tual uestion that is within the 9uris,i#tion of the

N6RC to resolve([1+] % spe#ial #ivil a#tion for #ertiorari e;ten,s onl/ to issues of want or

e;#ess of 9uris,i#tion of the N6RC([11] Su#h a#tion #annot #over an inuir/ into the

#orre#tness of the evaluation of the evi,en#e whi#h serve, as .asis of the N6RCs

#on#lusion( [1] The Court of %ppeals a,,e, that it #oul, not re&e;a-ine the parties

evi,en#e an, su.stitute the fa#tual fin,ings of the N6RC with its own([1=]

T#e %%ue

In assailing the ,e#ision of the Court of %ppeals7 SON4% #onten,s that<















power to #ontrol the e-plo/ee on the -eans an, -etho,s ./ whi#h the wor8 is

a##o-plishe,( [1A] The last ele-ent7 the so&#alle, 'on(/o) (e%(7 is the -ost i-portant

ele-ent( [1$]

A. Selection and Engagement of Employee

%BS&CBN engage, SON4%s servi#es to #o&host its television an, ra,io progra-s

.e#ause of SON4%s pe#uliar s8ills7 talent an, #ele.rit/ status( SON4% #onten,s that

the ,is#retion use, ./ respon,ent in spe#ifi#all/ sele#ting an, hiring #o-plainant over

other .roa,#asters of possi.l/ si-ilar e;perien#e an, ualifi#ation as #o-plainant

.elies respon,ents #lai- of in,epen,ent #ontra#torship(

In,epen,ent #ontra#tors often present the-selves to possess uniue s8ills7

e;pertise or talent to ,istinguish the- fro- or,inar/ e-plo/ees( The spe#ifi# sele#tion

an, hiring of SON4%7because of his unique skills talent and celebrity status not

possessed by ordinary employees7 is a #ir#u-stan#e in,i#ative7 .ut not #on#lusive7of an in,epen,ent #ontra#tual relationship( If SON4% ,i, not possess su#h uniue s8ills7

talent an, #ele.rit/ status7 %BS&CBN woul, not have entere, into the %gree-ent with

SON4% .ut woul, have hire, hi- through its personnel ,epart-ent 9ust li8e an/ other

e-plo/ee(

In an/ event7 the -etho, of sele#ting an, engaging SON4% ,oes not #on#lusivel/

,eter-ine his status( e -ust #onsi,er all the #ir#u-stan#es of the relationship7 with

the #ontrol test .eing the -ost i-portant ele-ent(

!. "ayment of #ages

%BS&CBN ,ire#tl/ pai, SON4% his -onthl/ talent fees with no part of his fees going

to "0"DC( SON4% asserts that this -o,e of fee pa/-ent shows that he was an

e-plo/ee of %BS&CBN( SON4% also points out that %BS&CBN grante, hi- .enefits an,

privileges whi#h he woul, not have en9o/e, if he were trul/ the su.9e#t of a vali, 9o.

#ontra#t(

%ll the talent fees an, .enefits pai, to SON4% were the result of negotiations that

le, to the %gree-ent( If SON4% were %BS&CBNs e-plo/ee7 there woul, .e no nee, for

the parties to stipulate on .enefits su#h as SSS7 "e,i#are7 ; ; ; an, 1= th -onth

pa/[+]

whi#h the law auto-ati#all/ in#orporates into ever/ e-plo/er&e-plo/ee #ontra#t([1] hatever .enefits SON4% en9o/e, arose fro- #ontra#t an, not .e#ause of an

e-plo/er&e-plo/ee relationship([]

SON4%s talent fees7 a-ounting to )=1>7+++ -onthl/ in the se#on, an, thir, /ear7

are so huge an, out of the or,inar/ that the/ in,i#ate -ore an in,epen,ent #ontra#tual

relationship rather than an e-plo/er&e-plo/ee relationship( %BS&CBN agree, to pa/

SON4% su#h huge talent fees pre#isel/ .e#ause of SON4%s uniue s8ills7 talent an,













#ele.rit/ status not possesse, ./ or,inar/ e-plo/ees( O.viousl/7 SON4% a#ting alone

possesse, enough .argaining power to ,e-an, an, re#eive su#h huge talent fees for

his servi#es( The power to .argain talent fees wa/ a.ove the salar/ s#ales of or,inar/

e-plo/ees is a #ir#u-stan#e in,i#ative7 .ut not #on#lusive7 of an in,epen,ent

#ontra#tual relationship(

The pa/-ent of talent fees ,ire#tl/ to SON4% an, not to "0"DC ,oes not negate

the status of SON4% as an in,epen,ent #ontra#tor( The parties e;pressl/ agree, on

su#h -o,e of pa/-ent( n,er the %gree-ent7 "0"DC is the %':NT of SON4%7 to

who- "0"DC woul, have to turn over an/ talent fee a##ruing un,er the %gree-ent(

C. "o$er of %ismissal

For violation of an/ provision of the %gree-ent7 either part/ -a/ ter-inate their

relationship( SON4% faile, to show that %BS&CBN #oul, ter-inate his servi#es on

groun,s other than .rea#h of #ontra#t7 su#h as retren#h-ent to prevent losses asprovi,e, un,er la.or laws([=]

During the life of the %gree-ent7 %BS&CBN agree, to pa/ SON4%s talent fees as

long as %':NT an, 0a/ Son2a shall faithfull/ an, #o-pletel/ perfor- ea#h #on,ition of

this %gree-ent([*] :ven if it suffere, severe .usiness losses7 %BS&CBN #oul, not

retren#h SON4% .e#ause %BS&CBN re-aine, o.ligate, to pa/ SON4%s talent fees

,uring the life of the %gree-ent( This #ir#u-stan#e in,i#ates an in,epen,ent

#ontra#tual relationship .etween SON4% an, %BS&CBN(

SON4% a,-its that even after %BS&CBN #ease, .roa,#asting his progra-s7 %BS&

CBN still pai, hi- his talent fees( )lainl/7 %BS&CBN a,here, to its un,erta8ing in the %gree-ent to #ontinue pa/ing SON4%s talent fees ,uring the re-aining life of the

%gree-ent even if %BS&CBN #an#elle, SON4%s progra-s through no fault of SON4%([?]

SON4% assails the 6a.or %r.iters interpretation of his res#ission of the %gree-ent

as an a,-ission that he is not an e-plo/ee of %BS&CBN( The 6a.or %r.iter state, that

if it were true that #o-plainant was reall/ an e-plo/ee7 he woul, -erel/ resign7 instea,(

SON4% ,i, a#tuall/ resign fro- %BS&CBN .ut he also7 as presi,ent of "0"DC7

res#in,e, the %gree-ent(SON4%s letter #learl/ .ears this out( [!] owever7 the -anner

./ whi#h SON4% ter-inate, his relationship with %BS&CBN is i--aterial( hether

SON4% res#in,e, the %gree-ent or resigne, fro- wor8 ,oes not ,eter-ine his statusas e-plo/ee or in,epen,ent #ontra#tor(

%. "o$er of Control

Sin#e there is no lo#al pre#e,ent on whether a ra,io an, television progra- host is

an e-plo/ee or an in,epen,ent #ontra#tor7 we refer to foreign #ase law in anal/2ing the

present #ase( The nite, States Court of %ppeals7 First Cir#uit7 re#entl/ hel, in Alberty&











'le( v. Corporacin %e "uerto )ico "ara *a %ifusin "blica +#I"), [>] that a television

progra- host is an in,epen,ent #ontra#tor( e uote the following fin,ings of

the (S( #ourt<

$eeral fators faor lassifying lberty as an independent ontrator. !irst, a

television actress is a skilled position re"uiring talent and training not availableon-the-job. ? ? ? 6n this regard, lberty possesses a masters degree in p%bli

omm%niations and >o%rnalism; is trained in dane, singing, and modeling; ta%ght

*ith the drama department at the Eniersity of %erto Bio; and ated in seeral

theater and teleision prod%tions prior to her affiliation *ith esde Mi

%eblo. #econd, $lberty provided the tools and instrumentalities necessary for

her to perform. $peifially, she proided, or obtained sponsors to proide, the

ost%mes, >e*elry, and other image-related s%pplies and series neessary for her

appearane. lberty disp%tes that this fator faors independent ontrator stat%s

bea%se )6B proided the e@%ipment neessary to tape the sho*. lbertys arg%mentis misplaed. 7he e@%ipment neessary for lberty to ond%t her job as host of

esde Mi %eblo related to her appearane on the sho*.2thers proided e@%ipment

for filming and prod%ing the sho*, b%t these *ere not the primary tools that lberty

%sed to perform her parti%lar f%ntion. 6f *e aepted this arg%ment, independent

ontrators o%ld neer *or+ on ollaboratie pro>ets bea%se other indiid%als often

proide the e@%ipment re@%ired for different aspets of the ollaboration. ? ? ?

Third, W%& could not assign $lberty work in addition to filming 'esde (i

&ueblo. lbertys ontrats *ith )6B speifially proided that )6B hired her professional series as ostess for the rogram esde Mi %eblo. 7here is no

eidene that )6B assigned lberty tas+s in addition to *or+ related to these

tapings. ? ? ?[A] 93mphasis s%pplied

%ppl/ing the 'on(/o) (e%( to the present #ase7 we fin, that SON4% is not an

e-plo/ee .ut an in,epen,ent #ontra#tor( The #ontrol test is the o%( *o/($n( test

our #ourts appl/ in ,istinguishing an e-plo/ee fro- an in,epen,ent #ontra#tor( [$] This

test is .ase, on the e;tent of #ontrol the hirer e;er#ises over a wor8er( The greater the

supervision an, #ontrol the hirer e;er#ises7 the -ore li8el/ the wor8er is ,ee-e, an

e-plo/ee( The #onverse hol,s true as well the less #ontrol the hirer e;er#ises7 the -oreli8el/ the wor8er is #onsi,ere, an in,epen,ent #ontra#tor( [=+]

First 7 SON4% #onten,s that %BS&CBN e;er#ise, #ontrol over the -eans an,

-etho,s of his wor8(

SON4%s argu-ent is -ispla#e,( %BS&CBN engage, SON4%s servi#es spe#ifi#all/

to #o&host the "el G 0a/ progra-s( %BS&CBN ,i, not assign an/ other wor8 to











SON4%( To perfor- his wor87 SON4% onl/ nee,e, his s8ills an, talent( ow SON4%

,elivere, his lines7 appeare, on television7 an, soun,e, on ra,io were outsi,e %BS&

CBNs #ontrol( SON4% ,i, not have to ren,er eight hours of wor8 per ,a/( The

%gree-ent reuire, SON4% to atten, onl/ rehearsals an, tapings of the shows7 as well

as pre& an, post&pro,u#tion staff -eetings( [=1] %BS&CBN #oul, not ,i#tate the #ontents of

SON4%s s#ript( owever7 the %gree-ent prohi.ite, SON4% fro- #riti#i2ing in his shows %BS&CBN or its interests([=] The #lear i-pli#ation is that SON4% ha, a free han, on what

to sa/ or ,is#uss in his shows provi,e, he ,i, not atta#8 %BS&CBN or its interests(

e fin, that %BS&CBN was not involve, in the a#tual perfor-an#e that pro,u#e,

the finishe, pro,u#t of SON4%s wor8([==] %BS&CBN ,i, not instru#t SON4% how to

perfor- his 9o.(%BS&CBN -erel/ reserve, the right to -o,if/ the progra- for-at an,

airti-e s#he,ule for -ore effe#tive progra--ing( [=*] %BS&CBNs sole #on#ern was the

ualit/ of the shows an, their stan,ing in the ratings( Clearl/7 %BS&CBN ,i, not e;er#ise

#ontrol over the -eans an, -etho,s of perfor-an#e of SON4%s wor8(

SON4% #lai-s that %BS&CBNs power not to .roa,#ast his shows proves %BS&CBNs

power over the -eans an, -etho,s of the perfor-an#e of his wor8( %lthough %BS&CBN

,i, have the option not to .roa,#ast SON4%s show7 %BS&CBN was still o.ligate, to pa/

SON4%s talent fees( Thus7 even if %BS&CBN was #o-pletel/ ,issatisfie, with the

-eans an, -etho,s of SON4%s perfor-an#e of his wor87 or even with the ualit/ or

pro,u#t of his wor87 %BS&CBN #oul, not ,is-iss or even ,is#ipline SON4%( %ll that

%BS&CBN #oul, ,o is not to .roa,#ast SON4%s show .ut %BS&CBN -ust still pa/ his

talent fees in full([=?]

Clearl/7 %BS&CBNs right not to .roa,#ast SON4%s show7 .ur,ene, as it was ./ the

o.ligation to #ontinue pa/ing in full SON4%s talent fees7 ,i, not a-ount to #ontrol over

the -eans an, -etho,s of the perfor-an#e of SON4%s wor8( %BS&CBN #oul, not

ter-inate or ,is#ipline SON4% even if the -eans an, -etho,s of perfor-an#e of his

wor8 & how he ,elivere, his lines an, appeare, on television & ,i, not -eet %BS&CBNs

approval( This proves that %BS&CBNs #ontrol was li-ite, onl/ to the result of SON4%s

wor87 whether to .roa,#ast the final pro,u#t or not( In either #ase7 %BS&CBN -ust still

pa/ SON4%s talent fees in full until the e;pir/ of the %gree-ent(

In 'aughan et al. v. #arner et al.7[=!] the nite, States Cir#uit Court of %ppeals

rule, that vau,eville perfor-ers were in,epen,ent #ontra#tors although the

-anage-ent reserve, the right to ,elete o.9e#tiona.le features in their shows( Sin#ethe -anage-ent ,i, not have #ontrol over the -anner of perfor-an#e of the s8ills of

the artists7 it #oul, onl/ #ontrol the result of the wor8 ./ ,eleting o.9e#tiona.le features([=>]

SON4% further #onten,s that %BS&CBN e;er#ise, #ontrol over his wor8 ./

suppl/ing all euip-ent an, #rew( No ,ou.t7 %BS&CBN supplie, the euip-ent7 #rew

an, airti-e nee,e, to .roa,#ast the "el G 0a/ progra-s( owever7 the euip-ent7

















#rew an, airti-e are not the tools an, instru-entalities SON4% nee,e, to perfor- his

9o.( hat SON4% prin#ipall/ nee,e, were his talent or s8ills an, the #ostu-es

ne#essar/ for his appearan#e( [=A] :ven though %BS&CBN provi,e, SON4% with the pla#e

of wor8 an, the ne#essar/ euip-ent7 SON4% was still an in,epen,ent #ontra#tor sin#e

%BS&CBN ,i, not supervise an, #ontrol his wor8( %BS&CBNs sole #on#ern was for

SON4% to ,ispla/ his talent ,uring the airing of the progra-s( [=$]

% ra,io .roa,#ast spe#ialist who wor8s un,er -ini-al supervision is an

in,epen,ent #ontra#tor([*+] SON4%s wor8 as television an, ra,io progra- host reuire,

spe#ial s8ills an, talent7 whi#h SON4% a,-itte,l/ possesses( The re#or,s ,o not show

that %BS&CBN e;er#ise, an/ supervision an, #ontrol over how SON4% utili2e, his s8ills

an, talent in his shows(

Second 7 SON4% urges us to rule that he was %BS&CBNs e-plo/ee .e#ause %BS&

CBN su.9e#te, hi- to its rules an, stan,ar,s of perfor-an#e( SON4% #lai-s that this

in,i#ates %BS&CBNs #ontrol not onl/ [over] his -anner of wor8 .ut also the ualit/ of hiswor8(

The %gree-ent stipulates that SON4% shall a.i,e with the rules an, stan,ar,s of

perfor-an#e 'oe/*n+ ($)en(%[*1] of %BS&CBN( The %gree-ent ,oes not reuire SON4%

to #o-pl/ with the rules an, stan,ar,s of perfor-an#e pres#ri.e, for e-plo/ees of

%BS&CBN( The #o,e of #on,u#t i-pose, on SON4% un,er the %gree-ent refers to the

Television an, Ra,io Co,e of the Hapisanan ng -ga Broa,#aster sa )ilipinas 3HB)57

whi#h has .een a,opte, ./ the CO")%N 3%BS&CBN5 as its Co,e of :thi#s( [*] The

HB) #o,e applies to .roa,#asters7 not to e-plo/ees of ra,io an, television

stations( Broa,#asters are not ne#essaril/ e-plo/ees of ra,io an, television

stations( Clearl/7 the rules an, stan,ar,s of perfor-an#e referre, to in the %gree-ent

are those appli#a.le to talents an, not to e-plo/ees of %BS&CBN(

In an/ event7 not all rules i-pose, ./ the hiring part/ on the hire, part/ in,i#ate that

the latter is an e-plo/ee of the for-er( [*=] In this #ase7 SON4% faile, to show that these

rules #ontrolle, his perfor-an#e( e fin, that these general rules are

-erel/ +u*e)*ne% towar,s the a#hieve-ent of the -utuall/ ,esire, result7 whi#h are

top&rating television an, ra,io progra-s that #o-pl/ with stan,ar,s of the in,ustr/( e

have rule, that<

F%rther, not eery form of ontrol that a party reseres to himself oer the ond%t ofthe other party in relation to the series being rendered may be aorded the effet of

establishing an employer-employee relationship. 7he fats of this ase fall s@%arely

*ith the ase of 6ns%lar 'ife ss%rane Co., 'td. s. 'BC. 6n said ase, *e held that:

'ogially, the line sho%ld be dra*n bet*een r%les that merely sere as g%idelines

to*ards the ahieement of the m%t%ally desired res%lt *itho%t ditating the means or















methods to be employed in attaining it, and those that ontrol or fi? the methodology

and bind or restrit the party hired to the %se of s%h means. 7he first, *hih aim only

to promote the res%lt, reate no employer-employee relationship %nli+e the seond,

*hih address both the res%lt and the means %sed to ahiee it. [**]

The 'aughan #ase also hel, that one #oul, still .e an in,epen,ent #ontra#tor

although the hirer reserve, #ertain supervision to insure the attain-ent of the ,esire,

result( The hirer7 however7 -ust not ,eprive the one hire, fro- perfor-ing his servi#es

a##or,ing to his own initiative( [*?]

Lastly 7 SON4% insists that the e;#lusivit/ #lause in the %gree-ent is the -ost

e;tre-e for- of #ontrol whi#h %BS&CBN e;er#ise, over hi-(

This argu-ent is futile( Being an e;#lusive talent ,oes not ./ itself -ean that

SON4% is an e-plo/ee of %BS&CBN( :ven an in,epen,ent #ontra#tor #an vali,l/

provi,e his servi#es e;#lusivel/ to the hiring part/( In the .roa,#ast in,ustr/7 e;#lusivit/is not ne#essaril/ the sa-e as #ontrol(

The hiring of e;#lusive talents is a wi,esprea, an, a##epte, pra#ti#e in the

entertain-ent in,ustr/([*!] This pra#ti#e is not ,esigne, to #ontrol the -eans an,

-etho,s of wor8 of the talent7 .ut si-pl/ to prote#t the invest-ent of the .roa,#ast

station( The .roa,#ast station nor-all/ spen,s su.stantial a-ounts of -one/7 ti-e an,

effort in .uil,ing up its talents as well as the progra-s the/ appear in an, thus e;pe#ts

that sai, talents re-ain e;#lusive with the station for a #o--ensurate perio, of ti-e([*>] Nor-all/7 a -u#h higher fee is pai, to talents who agree to wor8 e;#lusivel/ for a

parti#ular ra,io or television station( In short7 the huge talent fees partiall/ #o-pensatesfor e;#lusivit/7 as in the present #ase(

-J-%C as Agent of S/0A

SON4% protests the 6a.or %r.iters fin,ing that he is a talent of "0"DC7 whi#h

#ontra#te, out his servi#es to %BS&CBN( The 6a.or %r.iter rule, that as a talent of

"0"DC7 SON4% is not an e-plo/ee of %BS&CBN( SON4% insists that "0"DC is a

la.or&onl/ #ontra#tor an, %BS&CBN is his e-plo/er(

In a la.or&onl/ #ontra#t7 there are three parties involve,< 315 the la.or&onl/

#ontra#torE 35 the e-plo/ee who is ostensi.l/ un,er the e-plo/ of the la.or&onl/

#ontra#torE an, 3=5 the prin#ipal who is ,ee-e, the real e-plo/er( n,er this

s#he-e7 (#e )$o/-on) 'on(/$'(o/ *% (#e $+en( o (#e /*n'*$). The law -a8es the

prin#ipal responsi.le to the e-plo/ees of the la.or&onl/ #ontra#tor as if the prin#ipal

itself ,ire#tl/ hire, or e-plo/e, the e-plo/ees( [*A] These #ir#u-stan#es are not present

in this #ase(













There are essentiall/ onl/ two parties involve, un,er the %gree-ent7 na-el/7

SON4% an, %BS&CBN( "0"DC -erel/ a#te, as SON4%s agent( The %gree-ent

e;pressl/ states that "0"DC a#te, as the %':NT of SON4%( The re#or,s ,o not show

that "0"DC a#te, as %BS&CBNs agent( "0"DC7 whi#h stan,s for "el an, 0a/

"anage-ent an, Develop-ent Corporation7 is a #orporation organi2e, an, owne, ./

SON4% an, TI%N'CO( The )resi,ent an, 'eneral "anager of "0"DC is SON4%hi-self( It is a.sur, to hol, that "0"DC7 whi#h is owne,7 #ontrolle,7 hea,e, an,

-anage, ./ SON4%7 a#te, as agent of %BS&CBN in entering into the %gree-ent with

SON4%7 who hi-self is represente, ./ "0"DC( That woul, -a8e "0"DC the agent of

.oth %BS&CBN an, SON4%(

%s SON4% a,-its7 "0"DC is a -anage-ent #o-pan/ ,evote, e')u%*e) to

-anaging the #areers of SON4% an, his .roa,#ast partner7 TI%N'CO( "0"DC is not

engage, in an/ other .usiness7 not even 9o. #ontra#ting( "0"DC ,oes not have an/

other fun#tion apart fro- a#ting as agent of SON4% or TI%N'CO to pro-ote their

#areers in the .roa,#ast an, television in,ustr/([*$]

"olicy Instruction /o. 12

SON4% argues that )oli#/ Instru#tion No( *+ issue, ./ then "inister of 6a.or Blas

Ople on A 0anuar/ 1$>$ finall/ settle, the status of wor8ers in the .roa,#ast

in,ustr/( n,er this poli#/7 the t/pes of e-plo/ees in the .roa,#ast in,ustr/ are the

station an, progra- e-plo/ees(

)oli#/ Instru#tion No( *+ is a -ere e;e#utive issuan#e whi#h ,oes not have the

for#e an, effe#t of law( There is no legal presu-ption that )oli#/ Instru#tion No( *+

,eter-ines SON4%s status( % -ere e;e#utive issuan#e #annot e;#lu,e in,epen,ent

#ontra#tors fro- the #lass of servi#e provi,ers to the .roa,#ast in,ustr/( The

#lassifi#ation of wor8ers in the .roa,#ast in,ustr/ into onl/ two groups un,er )oli#/

Instru#tion No( *+ is not .in,ing on this Court7 espe#iall/ when the #lassifi#ation has no

.asis either in law or in fa#t(

Affidavits of A!S&C!/s #itnesses

SON4% also faults the 6a.or %r.iter for a,-itting the affi,avits of So#orro Vi,anes

an, Rolan,o Cru2 without giving his #ounsel the opportunit/ to #ross&e;a-ine these

witnesses(SON4% .ran,s these witnesses as in#o-petent to attest on the prevailingpra#ti#e in the ra,io an, television in,ustr/( SON4% views the affi,avits of these

witnesses as -islea,ing an, irrelevant(

hile SON4% faile, to #ross&e;a-ine %BS&CBNs witnesses7 he was never

prevente, fro- ,en/ing or refuting the allegations in the affi,avits( The 6a.or %r.iter







In,ivi,uals with spe#ial s8ills7 e;pertise or talent en9o/ the free,o- to offer their

servi#es as in,epen,ent #ontra#tors( The right to life an, livelihoo, guarantees this

free,o- to #ontra#t as in,epen,ent #ontra#tors( The right of la.or to se#urit/ of tenure

#annot operate to ,eprive an in,ivi,ual7 possesse, with spe#ial s8ills7 e;pertise an,

talent7 of his right to #ontra#t as an in,epen,ent #ontra#tor( %n in,ivi,ual li8e an artist or

talent has a right to ren,er his servi#es without an/ one #ontrolling the -eans an,-etho,s ./ whi#h he perfor-s his art or #raft( This Court will not interpret the right of

la.or to se#urit/ of tenure to #o-pel artists an, talents to ren,er their servi#es onl/ as

e-plo/ees( If ra,io an, television progra- hosts #an ren,er their servi#es onl/ as

e-plo/ees7 the station owners an, -anagers #an ,i#tate to the ra,io an, television

hosts what the/ sa/ in their shows( This is not #on,u#ive to free,o- of the press(

%ifferent 3a4 3reatment of 3alents and !roadcasters

The National Internal Revenue Co,e 3NIRC5[?*] in relation to Repu.li# %#t No( >>1!7[??]

as a-en,e, ./ Repu.li# %#t No( A*17[?!]

treats talents7 television an, ra,io.roa,#asters ,ifferentl/( n,er the NIRC7 these professionals are su.9e#t to the 1+

value&a,,e, ta; 3V%T5 on servi#es the/ ren,er( :;e-pte, fro- the V%T are those un,er

an e-plo/er&e-plo/ee relationship( [?>] This ,ifferent ta; treat-ent a##or,e, to talents

an, .roa,#asters .olters our #on#lusion that the/ are in,epen,ent #ontra#tors7 provi,e,

all the .asi# ele-ents of a #ontra#tual relationship are present as in this #ase(

/ature of S/0As Claims

SON4% see8s the re#over/ of allege,l/ unpai, talent fees7 1=th -onth pa/7

separation pa/7 servi#e in#entive leave7 signing .onus7 travel allowan#e7 an, a-ounts

,ue un,er the :-plo/ee Sto#8 Option )lan( e agree with the fin,ings of the 6a.or

%r.iter an, the Court of %ppeals that SON4%s #lai-s are $)) $%e on (#e 6$ 1774

A+/eeen( $n %(o' o(*on )$n, $n no( on (#e $o/ Coe. Clearl/7 the present

#ase ,oes not #all for an appli#ation of the 6a.or Co,e provisions .ut an interpretation

an, i-ple-entation of the "a/ 1$$* %gree-ent( In effe#t7 SON4%s #ause of a#tion is

for .rea#h of #ontra#t whi#h is intrinsi#all/ a #ivil ,ispute #ogni2a.le ./ the regular

#ourts([?A]

9:ERE&ORE7 we D:N the petition( The assaile, De#ision of the Court of

%ppeals ,ate, ! "ar#h 1$$$ in C%&'(R( S) No( *$1$+ is %FFIR":D( Costs against

petitioner(

SO ORDERED.

Davide, Jr., C.J., (Chairman), Panganiban, Ynares-Santiago, an, !c"na,

JJ., #on#ur .













#)*+' '%V%#%+T)($ 'U(&%T-(U%+,

etitioner,

- ers%s -

/.. o. 012134

resent:

IE6$EM6<, J., Chairperson,

CB62,

CB62 M2B'3$,

76<, and

3'$C2, JB., JJ .

*+UT +! $&&)$#,

$##+*%$T)' 5+$'*$#T%/

*+(&$6, 7+#) 7$V%) $'

)'W$' T$,

Bespondents.

rom%lgated:

J%ne 8, G00#

8- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -8

')*%#%+

9U%#U(5%/, J.:

7his petition see+s to reerse and set aside both the eision:0; dated Jan%ary

"0, G00/ of the Co%rt of ppeals in C-<.B. $ o. ="1G! and its

Besol%tion:4; dated J%ne G", G00/ denying the motion for reonsideration. 7he

Co%rt of ppeals had oert%rned the Besol%tion:<; dated %g%st "0, G000 of the

ational 'abor Belations Commission 9'BC r%ling that petitioner *as illegally

dismissed.

7he fats of the ase are as follo*s:

2n 2tober G, 1!, %nder 7alent Contrat o. 7!-180!,:2; priate

respondent ssoiated roadasting Company 9C hired petitioner 7helma

%mpit-M%rillo as a ne*saster and o-anhor for Balitang-Balita, an early

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2007/june2007/164652.htm#_ftn1












eening ne*s program. 7he ontrat *as for a period of three months. 6t *as

rene*ed %nder 7alent Contrats os. 7!-11!, 7=-"00G, 78-/8/ and

7-!=/.:3; 6n addition, petitioners series *ere engaged for the program Live

on Five. 2n $eptember "0, 1, after fo%r years of repeated rene*als, petitioners

talent ontrat e?pired. 7*o *ee+s after the e?piration of the last ontrat, petitioner sent a letter to Mr. Jose Jaier, ie resident for e*s and %bli

ffairs of C, informing the latter that she *as still interested in rene*ing her

ontrat s%b>et to a salary inrease. 7hereafter, petitioner stopped reporting for

*or+. 2noember !, 1, she *rote Mr. Jaier another letter,:1; *hih *e @%ote

erbatim:

? ? ? ?

ear Mr. Jaier:

2n 2tober G0, 1, 6 *rote yo% a letter in ans*er to yo%r @%ery by

*ay of a marginal note *hat terms and onditions in response to my first

letter dated 2tober 1", 1. 7o date, or for more than fifteen 91! days

sine then, 6 hae not reeied any formal *ritten reply. ???

6n ie* hereof, sho%ld 6 not reeie any formal response from yo%

%ntil Monday, oember 8, 1, 6 *ill deem it as a onstr%tie

dismissal of my series.

? ? ? ?

month later, petitioner sent a demand letter :=; to C, demanding: 9a

reinstatement to her former position; 9b payment of %npaid *ages for series

rendered from $eptember 1 to 2tober G0, 1 and f%ll ba+*ages; 9 payment

of 1"th month pay, aationAsi+Aserie inentie leaes and other monetary

benefits d%e to a reg%lar employee starting Marh "1, 1=. C replied that a

he+ oering petitioners talent fees for $eptember 1= to 2tober G0, 1 had

been proessed and prepared, b%t that the other laims of petitioner had no basis in

fat or in la*.

2n eember G0, 1, petitioner filed a omplaint:>; against C, Mr. Jaier

and Mr. 3d*ard 7an, for illegal onstr%tie dismissal, nonpayment of salaries,

oertime pay, premi%m pay, separation pay, holiday pay, serie inentie leae pay,

aationAsi+ leaes and 1"th month pay in 'BC-CB Case o. "0-1G-008!-











. $he li+e*ise demanded payment for moral, e?emplary and at%al damages, as

*ell as for attorneys fees.

7he parties agreed to s%bmit the ase for resol%tion after settlement failed

d%ring the mandatory onfereneAoniliation. 2n Marh G, G000, the 'abor rbiter dismissed the omplaint.:?;

2n appeal, the 'BC reersed the 'abor rbiter in a Besol%tion dated %g%st

"0, G000. 7he 'BC held that an employer-employee relationship e?isted bet*een

petitioner and C; that the s%b>et talent ontrat *as oid; that the petitioner *as a

reg%lar employee illegally dismissed; and that she *as entitled to reinstatement and

ba+*ages or separation pay, aside from 1"th month pay and serie inentie leae

pay, moral and e?emplary damages and attorneys fees. 6t held as follo*s:

W))!+), the eision of the rbiter dated G Marh

G000 is hereby )V)#)'@#)T $#%') and a )W

+) prom%lgated:

1 delaring respondents to hae illegally dismissed omplainant

from her reg%lar *or+ therein and th%s, ordering them to reinstate her in

her former position *itho%t loss of seniority rightsD and other priileges

and to pay her f%ll ba+*ages, inl%sie of allo*anes and other

benefits, inl%ding 1"th month pay based on her said latest rate

of G8,000.00Amo. from the date of her illegal dismissal on G1 2tober

1 %p to finality hereof, or at omplainants option, to pay her

separation pay of one 91 month pay per year of serie based on said

latest monthly rate, re+oned from date of hire on "0 $eptember 1!

%ntil finality hereof;

G to pay omplainants ar%ed $6' $erie 6nentie 'eae

ayD of ! days pay per year and 1" th month pay for the years 1, 18

and 1# of 1,G"=.00 and 8/,000.00, respetiely and her ar%ed

salary from 1= $eptember 1 to G0 2tober 1 of "G,#=0.00 pl%s

legal interest at 1G from date of >%diial demand on G0 eember 1

%ntil finality hereof;

" to pay omplainant moral damages of !00,000.00,

e?emplary damages of "!0,000.00 and 10 of the total of the ad>%dged

monetary a*ards as attorneys fees.

2ther monetary laims of omplainant are dismissed for la+ of merit.

$2 2B3B3.:0A;







fter its motion for reonsideration *as denied, C eleated the ase to

the Co%rt of ppeals in a petition for ertiorari %nder B%le =!. 7he petition *as

first dismissed for fail%re to attah parti%lar do%ments, :00; b%t *as reinstated on

gro%nds of the higher interest of >%stie.:04;

7hereafter, the appellate o%rt r%led that the 'BC ommitted grae ab%se

of disretion, and reersed the deision of the 'BC.:0<; 7he appellate o%rt

reasoned that petitioner sho%ld not be allo*ed to renege from the stip%lations she

had ol%ntarily and +no*ingly e?e%ted by ino+ing the se%rity of ten%re %nder

the 'abor Code. ording to the appellate o%rt, petitioner *as a fi?ed-term

employee and not a reg%lar employee *ithin the ambit of rtile G80 :02; of the

'abor Code bea%se her >ob, as antiipated and agreed %pon, *as only for a

speified time.:03;

ggrieed, petitioner no* omes to this Co%rt on a petition for reie*,

raising iss%es as follo*s:6.

76$ 22B'3 C2EB7 C B363) 73 F66<$ 2F

73 22B'3 C2EB7 2F 3'$, 73 3C6$62 2F

)6C 6$ 27 6 CC2B )67 ') 2B )67 73

'6C'3 3C6$62$ 2F 73 $EB3M3 C2EB7;D

66.

73 B2-F2BM 7'37 C27BC7$, $ C2BB3C7'4

F2E 4 73 'BC F6B$7 66$62, B3 ANTI-

REGULARIZATION DEI!E" )6C ME$7 3 $7BECK 2)

F2B B3$2$ 2F E'6C 2'6C4;D

666.

4 B3$2 2F 73 C276E2E$ $ECC3$$63

B33)'$ 2F 73 7B33-M27 7'37 C27BC7$, 3M'243B-3M'2433 B3'762$6 )$ CB373 $

B263 F2B E3B B76C'3 G80 2F 73 '2B C23;D

6.

4 73 C2$7BEC763 6$M6$$' 2F 3B36 3767623B,

$ B3<E'B 3M'2433, 73B3 )$ 36' 2F













3767623B$ B6<7 72 E3 B2C3$$ 7E$ 3767'6< 3B

72 73 M234 C'6M$ $ $773 6 73 C2M'67.D:01;

7he iss%es for o%r disposition are: 91 *hether or not this Co%rt an reie*

the findings of the Co%rt of ppeals; and 9G *hether or not %nder B%le /! of the

B%les of Co%rt the Co%rt of ppeals ommitted a reersible error in its eision.

2n the first iss%e, priate respondents ontend that the iss%es raised in the

instant petition are mainly fat%al and that there is no sho*ing that the said iss%es

hae been resoled arbitrarily and *itho%t basis. 7hey add that the findings of the

Co%rt of ppeals are s%pported by oer*helming *ealth of eidene on reord as

*ell as preailing >%rispr%dene on the matter.:0=;

etitioner ho*eer ontends that this Co%rt an reie* the findings of the

Co%rt of ppeals, sine the appellate o%rt erred in deiding a @%estion of

s%bstane in a *ay *hih is not in aord *ith la* or *ith appliable deisions of

this Co%rt.:0>;

)e agree *ith petitioner. eisions, final orders or resol%tions of the Co%rt

of ppeals in any ase regardless of the nat%re of the ation or proeeding inoled

may be appealed to this Co%rt thro%gh a petition for reie*. 7his remedy is a

ontin%ation of the appellate proess oer the original ase,

:0?;

and onsideringthere is no ongr%ene in the findings of the 'BC and the Co%rt of ppeals

regarding the stat%s of employment of petitioner, an e?eption to the general r%le

that this Co%rt is bo%nd by the findings of fats of the appellate o%rt, :4A; *e an

reie* s%h findings.

2n the seond iss%e, priate respondents ontend that the Co%rt of ppeals

did not err *hen it %pheld the alidity of the talent ontrats ol%ntarily entered

into by petitioner. 6t f%rther stated that preailing >%rispr%dene has reogni(ed and

s%stained the absene of employer-employee relationship bet*een a talent and themedia entity *hih engaged the talents series on a per talent ontrat basis,

iting the ase of "on#a v. AB"-!BN Broa$%a&ting !or'oration.:40;















etitioner aers ho*eer that an employer-employee relationship *as

reated *hen the priate respondents started to merely rene* the ontrats

repeatedly fifteen times or for fo%r onse%tie years.:44;

gain, *e agree *ith petitioner. 7he Co%rt of ppeals ommitted reersibleerror *hen it held that petitioner *as a fi?ed-term employee. etitioner *as a

reg%lar employee %nder ontemplation of la*. 7he pratie of haing fi?ed-term

ontrats in the ind%stry does not a%tomatially ma+e all talent ontrats alid and

ompliant *ith labor la*. 7he assertion that a talent ontrat e?ists does not

neessarily preent a reg%lar employment stat%s.:4<;

F%rther, the "on#a ase is not appliable. 6n "on#a, the teleision station did

not instr%t $on(a ho* to perform his >ob. o* $on(a deliered his lines, appeared

on teleision, and so%nded on radio *ere o%tside the teleision stations ontrol.

$on(a had a free hand on *hat to say or dis%ss in his sho*s proided he did not

atta+ the teleision station or its interests. Clearly, the teleision station did not

e?erise ontrol oer the means and methods of the performane of $on(as *or+.:42; 6n the ase at bar, C had ontrol oer the performane of petitioners *or+.

ote*orthy too, is the omparatiely lo* G8,000 monthly pay of

petitioner :43; vi& the "00,000 a month salary of $on(a, :41;that all the more bolsters

the onl%sion that petitioner *as not in the same sit%ation as $on(a.

7he ontrat of employment of petitioner *ith C had the follo*ing

stip%lations:

? ? ? ?

1. $C23 2F $3B6C3$ 7'37 agrees to deote hisAher talent,

time, attention and best efforts in the performane of hisAher d%ties and

responsibilities as nhorArogram ostAe*saster of the rogram, in

aordane *ith the diretion of C andAor its a%thori(ed

representaties.

1.1. E763$ B3$2$66'6763$ 7'37 shall:

a. Bender hisAher series as a ne*saster on the rogram;

b. e inoled in ne*s-gathering operations by ond%ting

interie*s on- and off-the-air;

. artiipate in lie remote oerages *hen alled %pon;













d. e aailable for any other ne*s assignment, s%h as *riting,

researh or amera *or+;

e. ttend prod%tion meetings;

f. 2n assigned days, be at the st%dios at least one 91 ho%r before

the lie teleasts;

g. e present promptly at the st%dios andAor other plae of assignment at the time designated by C;

h. Keep abreast of the ne*s;

i. <ie hisAher f%ll ooperation to C and its d%ly a%thori(ed

representaties in the prod%tion and promotion of the

rogram; and

>. erform s%h other f%ntions as may be assigned to himAher

from time to time.

? ? ? ?

1." C2M'6C3 )67 $7B$, 6$7BEC762$

273B BE'3$ B3<E'762$ 7'37 agrees

that heAshe *ill promptly and faithf%lly omply *ith the re@%ests

and instr%tions, as *ell as the program standards, poliies, r%les

and reg%lations of C, the K and the goernment or any of its

agenies and instr%mentalities.:4=;

? ? ? ?

6n (anila )ater !o*'an+, In%. v. ena,:4>; *e said that the elements to determine the

e?istene of an employment relationship are: 9a the seletion and engagement of the

employee, 9b the payment of *ages, 9 the po*er of dismissal, and 9d the

employers po*er to ontrol. 7he most important element is the employers ontrol of

the employees ond%t, not only as to the res%lt of the *or+ to be done, b%t also as to

the means and methods to aomplish it.:4?;

7he d%ties of petitioner as en%merated in her employment ontrat indiate

that C had ontrol oer the *or+ of petitioner. side from ontrol, C also

ditated the *or+ assignments and payment of petitioners *ages. C also had po*er to dismiss her. ll these being present, learly, there e?isted an employment

relationship bet*een petitioner and C.

Conerning reg%lar employment, the la* proides for t*o +inds of

employees, namely: 91 those *ho are engaged to perform atiities *hih are

%s%ally neessary or desirable in the %s%al b%siness or trade of the employer; and









9G those *ho hae rendered at least one year of serie, *hether ontin%o%s or

bro+en, *ith respet to the atiity in *hih they are employed.:<A; 6n other *ords,

reg%lar stat%s arises from either the nat%re of *or+ of the employee or the d%ration

of his employment.:<0; 6n Benare& v. an%ho,:<4; *e ery s%intly said:

7Dhe primary standard for determining reg%lar employment is the

reasonable onnetion bet*een the parti%lar atiity performed by the

employee vi&--vi& the %s%al trade or b%siness of the employer. 7his

onnetion an be determined by onsidering the nat%re of the *or+

performed and its relation to the sheme of the parti%lar b%siness or

trade in its entirety. 6f the employee has been performing the >ob for at

least a year, een if the performane is not ontin%o%s and merely

intermittent, the la* deems repeated and ontin%ing need for its

performane as s%ffiient eidene of the neessity if not

indispensability of that atiity to the b%siness. ene, the employment

is onsidered reg%lar, b%t only *ith respet to s%h atiity and *hile

s%h atiity e?ists.:<<;

6n o%r ie*, the re@%isites for reg%larity of employment hae been met in the

instant ase. <leaned from the desription of the sope of series aforementioned,

petitioners *or+ *as neessary or desirable in the %s%al b%siness or trade of the

employer *hih inl%des, as a pre-ondition for its enfranhisement, its

partiipation in the goernments ne*s and p%bli information dissemination. 6n

addition, her *or+ *as ontin%o%s for a period of fo%r years. 7his repeatedengagement %nder ontrat of hire is indiatie of the neessity and desirability of

the petitioners *or+ in priate respondent Cs b%siness.:<2;

7he ontention of the appellate o%rt that the ontrat *as harateri(ed by a

alid fi?ed-period employment is %ntenable. For s%h ontrat to be alid, it sho%ld be

sho*n that the fi?ed period *as +no*ingly and ol%ntarily agreed %pon by the

parties. 7here sho%ld hae been no fore, d%ress or improper press%re bro%ght to bear

%pon the employee; neither sho%ld there be any other ir%mstane that itiates the

employees onsent.:<3; 6t sho%ld satisfatorily appear that the employer and theemployee dealt *ith eah other on more or less e@%al terms *ith no moral dominane

being e?erised by the employer oer the employee.:<1; Moreoer, fi?ed-term

employment *ill not be onsidered alid *here, from the ir%mstanes, it is apparent

that periods hae been imposed to prel%de a@%isition of ten%rial se%rity by the

employee.:<=;



















6n the ase at bar, it does not appear that the employer and employee dealt *ith

eah other on e@%al terms. Enderstandably, the petitioner o%ld not ob>et to the terms

of her employment ontrat bea%se she did not *ant to lose the >ob that she loed and

the *or+plae that she had gro*n a%stomed to,:<>; *hih is e?atly *hat happened

*hen she finally manifested her intention to negotiate. eing one of the n%mero%sne*sastersAbroadasters of C and desiring to +eep her >ob as a broadasting

pratitioner, petitioner *as left *ith no hoie b%t to affi? her signat%re of onformity

on eah rene*al of her ontrat as already prepared by priate respondents; other*ise,

priate respondents *o%ld hae simply ref%sed to rene* her ontrat. atently, the

petitioner o%pied a position of *ea+ness vi&--vi& the employer. Moreoer, priate

respondents pratie of repeatedly e?tending petitioners "-month ontrat for fo%r years

is a ir%mention of the a@%isition of reg%lar stat%s. ene, there *as no alid fi?ed-

term employment bet*een petitioner and priate respondents.

)hile this Co%rt has reogni(ed the alidity of fi?ed-term employment

ontrats in a n%mber of ases, it has onsistently emphasi(ed that *hen the

ir%mstanes of a ase sho* that the periods *ere imposed to blo+ the

a@%isition of se%rity of ten%re, they sho%ld be str%+ do*n for being ontrary to

la*, morals, good %stoms, p%bli order or p%bli poliy.:<?;

s a reg%lar employee, petitioner is entitled to se%rity of ten%re and an be

dismissed only for >%st a%se and after d%e ompliane *ith proed%ral d%e

proess. $ine priate respondents did not obsere d%e proess in onstr%tiely

dismissing the petitioner, *e hold that there *as an illegal dismissal.

W))!+), the hallenged eision dated Jan%ary "0, G00/ and

Besol%tion dated J%ne G", G00/ of the Co%rt of ppeals in C-<.B. $ o. ="1G!,

*hih held that the petitioner *as a fi?ed-term employee,

are )V)#)' and #)T $#%'). 7he 'BC deision is $!!%()'.

Costs against priate respondents.

#+ +'))'.

)+$'+ $. 9U%#U(5%/

ting Chief J%stie








)3 C2CEB:

$T+%+ T. *$&%+

ssoiate J%stie

*+*%T$ *$&%+ (+$)#

ssoiate J%stie

'$T) +. T%/$

ssoiate J%stie

&)#5%T)+ 7. V)$#*+, 7.

ssoiate J%stie

* ) T % ! % * $ T % +

%rs%ant to $etion 1", rtile 666 of the Constit%tion, 6 ertify that the

onl%sions in the aboe eision had been reahed in ons%ltation before the ase

*as assigned to the *riter of the opinion of the Co%rts iision.L

)+$'+ $. 9U%#U(5%/

ting Chief J%stie

Documents

Sonza vs Abs-cbn and Dumpit-murillo vs. CA