SOUTH EAST INTERNATIONAL RATTAN, INC.

and/or ESTANISLAO AGBAY,

Petitioners, vs.
JESUS J. COMING, Respondent.
Facts:
South East International Rattan, Inc. (SEIRI) hired Jesus Coming (Coming) as Sizing
Machine Operator. His compensation was on pakiao basis but later on he was paid
weekly.
Coming was dismissed from work after many years of service without lawful cause.
He was told that the company is not doing well and he will be called back to work
only if they need his services again. He did not receive any call from the company
almost a year after his termination.
He filed a complaint before the regional arbitration branch.
SEIRI denied existence of employer-employee relationship with Coming and stressed
that he was not included in the list of employees submitted to Social Security
System (SSS) and his name does not appear in the payrolls and pay envelope
records.
Issue: Does employer-employee relationship exist?
Control Test
Jurisprudence in the case of Tan vs. Lagrama - The fact that a worker was not
reported as an employee to the SSS is not conclusive proof of the absence of
employer-employee relationship. Otherwise, an employer would be rewarded for his
failure or even neglect to perform his obligation.
Case History
April 30, 2004 - Labor Arbiter ruled that Coming is a regular employee of SEIRI and
that the termination of his employment was illegal.
July 28, 2005 NLRC set aside and vacated Labor Arbiter ruling and dismissed the
complaint.
February 21, 2008 Court of Appeals reversed the NLRC and ruled that there
existed an employer-employee relationship between petitioners and respondent
who was dismissed without just and valid cause.
Ruling of the Supreme Court:
Employer-employee relationship exists.
The Court affirmed the control test applied by the Court of Appeals. The SEIRIs
control over the work of Coming was manifested on the following facts:
they required him to work within the company premises;
they obliged petitioner to report every day of the week and tasked him to usually
perform the same job;
they enforced the observance of definite hours of work from 8 oclock in the
morning to 5 oclock in the afternoon;
the mode of payment of petitioners salary was under their discretion, at first paying
him on pakiao basis and thereafter, on daily basis;
they implemented company rules and regulations;
Agbay directly paid petitioners salaries and controlled all aspects of his

employment and
Petitioner rendered work necessary and desirable in the business of the respondent
company.
Non-reporting of a worker as an employee to the SSS or the fact that Comings
name does not appear in the payrolls and pay envelopes records negate existence
of employer-employee relationship.