G.R. No. 223018 , August 27, 2020
Leonarda Jamago Salabe, Petitioner, vs. Social Security Commission and Marino Talictic, in his capacity as Officer-in-Charge and Branch Head, SSS-Tagbilaran City Branch, Respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Leonarda Jamago Salabe worked as a helper in the carinderia of Ana Macas at the Jagna Public Market, Bohol, from August 1978 to February 1979. By virtue of this employment, Ana registered her with the Social Security System (SSS). After this employment, Salabe continued her SSS membership as a voluntary paying member, amassing 137 contributions. In 1993, upon reaching age 60, her application for retirement benefits was approved, and she received a monthly pension starting that year. In 2001, the SSS unilaterally terminated her pension. By a letter dated March 24, 2008, respondent Marino B. Talictic, SSS-Tagbilaran Branch Head, informed her that her membership was cancelled because there was purportedly no employer-employee relationship between her and Ana Macas. As a result, the contributions remitted for her and her subsequent voluntary payments were invalidated, and her pension was cancelled. Salabe filed a petition with the Social Security Commission (SSC), seeking a declaration as a bona fide employee and member and the restoration of her pension. The SSS, in its Answer, relied on a Memorandum Report dated April 14, 1989, by then SSS Provincial Officer Lamberto C. Miel, Jr., which recommended the cancellation of the membership of Ana Macas and her reported employees due to lack of proof of employer-employee relationship. Salabe submitted affidavits from Ana Macas’s son, Ceferino Macas, and disinterested witnesses Sabas Ranin and Ricardo Vinalon to corroborate her employment. During the SSC hearing, Salabe and her witnesses testified to the details of her employment. The SSC dismissed her petition, ruling she failed to prove employer-employee relationship and that her identity was questionable due to a discrepancy in her name and civil status in SSS records. The SSC also ordered the refund of pensions received, minus her paid contributions. The Court of Appeals affirmed the SSC’s ruling.

ISSUE

Whether the Social Security Commission and the Court of Appeals erred in upholding the invalidation of petitioner’s SSS membership and the cancellation of her retirement pension benefits due to an alleged lack of employer-employee relationship with Ana Macas.

RULING

The Supreme Court granted the petition, reversed the assailed Court of Appeals Decision and Resolution, and reinstated petitioner’s SSS membership and retirement pension benefits. The Court held that the SSC and the CA erred in ruling that no employer-employee relationship existed. The four-fold test for such a relationship—selection and engagement of the employee, payment of wages, power of dismissal, and power of control—was satisfied based on the evidence. Salabe was personally recruited and hired by Ana Macas, paid a daily wage, worked under Ana’s supervision, and her employment was terminated after five months. The testimonies of Salabe and her witnesses, including Ana Macas’s son, were clear, consistent, and credible. The Court emphasized that the existence of an employer-employee relationship is a factual matter, and the SSC’s findings, being contradicted by the evidence on record, were not binding. The Memorandum Report from 1989, which formed the basis for the cancellation, was not disclosed to Salabe, violating her right to due process. Furthermore, the discrepancy in her name in SSS records was insufficient to discredit her claim, as she adequately explained it and presented consistent evidence of her identity. The Court also ruled that her subsequent voluntary contributions were valid, as she was previously a covered employee. Consequently, the SSS’s cancellation of her membership and pension was unjustified.