GR 248299; (July, 2021) (Digest)
G.R. No. 248299, July 14, 2021.
RODRIGO A. UPOD, PETITIONER, VS. ONON TRUCKING AND MARKETING CORPORATION AND AIMARDO V. INTERIOR, RESPONDENTS.
FACTS
Petitioner Rodrigo A. Upod was hired by respondent Onon Trucking and Marketing Corporation in April 2004 as a hauler/driver, paid on a “per trip” basis. His service was interrupted from 2009 to 2014 due to an alleged suspension for abandonment, after which he was rehired and worked until February 2017 when he was no longer given delivery assignments. He filed a complaint for illegal dismissal with money claims, asserting he was a regular employee entitled to benefits. Respondent company denied an employer-employee relationship, claiming petitioner was an independent freelance driver engaged under a per trip contract that ended upon delivery or return to the warehouse. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of petitioner, declaring him a regular employee who was illegally dismissed. The NLRC reversed, finding no employer-employee relationship. The Court of Appeals modified the ruling, acknowledging an employer-employee relationship but held petitioner was a fixed-term employee validly dismissed upon the contract’s expiration.
ISSUE
Whether an employer-employee relationship existed between petitioner and respondent company, and if so, whether petitioner was a regular employee who was illegally dismissed.
RULING
The Supreme Court granted the petition. It held that an employer-employee relationship existed, as all elements of the four-fold test were present: respondent company hired petitioner; paid him 16% of gross revenues per trip; possessed the power to dismiss; and exercised control over his work, including defining delivery routes and owning the trucks used. Petitioner, having been engaged for tasks necessary and desirable to the company’s business for over a year, attained regular employment status. His dismissal, based merely on the lapse of a fixed-term contract without just or authorized cause and due process, was illegal. The Court reinstated the Labor Arbiter’s decision with modification, awarding full backwages, separation pay in lieu of reinstatement, and attorney’s fees, subject to legal interest.