12) Televisions and Production Exponents, Inc. (TAPE, Inc.) vs.

Roberto Servaa
G.R. No. 167648 January 28, 2008
TINGA, J.:
Doctrine: 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.
FACTS: TAPE is a domestic corporation engaged in the production of television programs while
Antonio Tuviera serves as its president. Roberto Servaa served as security guard for TAPE
from 1987 until his services were termitated on 3 March 2000. Servaa filed a complaint for
illegal dismissal agianst TAPE.He alleged that he was first connected with Agro-Commercial
Security Agency but was later on absorbed by TAPE as a regular company guard. His services
were terminated on account of TAPEs decision to contract the services of a professional
security agency. Tape, on the other hand, alleged that Servaa was an independent contractor
falling under the talent group category and was working under a special arrangement. It alleged
that it was agreed that Servaa would render his services unitil such time that the company
shall have engaged the services of a professional security agency.
ISSUE: Whether or not there is an Employer-Employee relationship between TAPE and
Servaa?
LA RULING: Yes. The Labor Arbiter ruled that Servaa was a regular employee of Tape on
account of the nature of the work of Servaa, which is securing and maintaining order in the
studio, as necessary and desirable in the usual business of TAPE. However, the Labor Aribter
ruled the termination valid on the ground of redundancy.
NLRC RULING: No. The NLRC reversed the ruling of the Labor Arbiter on the ground security
services may not be deemed necessary and desirable in the usual business of TAPE.
CA RULING: Yes. The CA ruled that that Servaa was a regular employee considering the
nature and length of his service.
SC RULING:
Yes. 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.
Servaa was hired by TAPE when the latter absorbed him upon the expiration of his security
agency contract with RPN-9. The monthly salary received by Servaa is considered wages
despite being designated as talent fees by TAPE. The Memorandum informing Servaa of
discontinuance of his services also proves that TAPE had the power to dismiss him. Control is
also manifested in the bundy cards submitted by Servaa. He was required to report daily and
observe definite work hours. He is also considered a regular employee by reason of his 5 year
continuous service regardless of whether or not respondent had been performing work that is
necessary or desirable to the usual business of TAPE. Thus being a regular employee, his
services may not be terminated except for a just or authorized cause. TAPE is liable for illegal
dismissal for it failure to comply the 1month requirement for termination of services as required
by law. However, with respect to the liability of petitioner Tuviera, president of TAPE, absent any
showing that he acted with malice or bad faith in terminating respondent, he cannot be held
solidarily liable with TAPE.

Submitted by: Loren Manda