(Labor Standards – Existence of employer-employee relationship)
Facts: Private respondent working as a barber on piece-rate basis was designated by petitioners as caretaker of their barbershop. Private respondent’s duties as caretaker, in addition to his being a barber, were: 1) to report to the owners of the barbershop whenever the aircondition units malfunction and/or whenever water or electric power supply was interrupted; 2) to call the laundry woman to wash dirty linen; 3) to recommend applicants for interview and hiring; 4) to attend to other needs of the shop. For this additional job, he was given an honorarium equivalent to1/3 of the net income of the shop.
Private respondent left his job voluntarily because of his misunderstanding with his co-worker and demanded separation pay and other monetary benefits. Petitioner’s contends that respondent was not their employee but their “partner in trade” whose compensation was based on a sharing arrangement per haircut or shaving job done.
Issue: Whether or not there exist an employer-employee relationship.
Held: Yes. In determining the existence of an employer-employee relationship, the following elements are considered: 1) selection and engagement of worker; 2) power of dismissal; 3) the payment of wages; and 4) the power to control the worker’s conduct, with the latter assuming primacy in the overall consideration. The power of control refers to the existence of the power and not necessarily to the actual exercise thereof. It is not essential for the employer to actually supervise the performance of duties of the employee; it is enough that the employer has the right to wield that power.
CASE EATER 