GR L 12582; (January, 1961) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-12582 and L-12598; January 28, 1961
LVN PICTURES, INC. and SAMPAGUITA PICTURES, INC., petitioners-appellants, vs. PHILIPPINE MUSICIANS GUILD (FFW) and COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, respondents-appellees.
FACTS
The Philippine Musicians Guild (Guild) filed a petition with the Court of Industrial Relations (CIR) to be certified as the sole and exclusive bargaining agency for all musicians working for LVN Pictures, Inc., Sampaguita Pictures, Inc., and Premiere Productions, Inc. The Guild alleged that 95% of the musicians providing musical recordings for these film companies were its members. The film companies opposed the petition, denying any employer-employee relationship with the musicians. They contended that musical scores were furnished through independent contractors, specifically musical directors who were hired per picture, composed the music, engaged their own musicians, and paid them.
The CIR rejected the film companies’ defense. It found that during the actual recording sessions for the films, the movie director exercised direct and detailed control over the musicians’ performance. The movie director could instruct the musicians to play more or less of certain instruments, cut music, or add specific elements. This level of control indicated that the musicians were not merely under the supervision of an independent contractor but were effectively under the control of the film production itself.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether an employer-employee relationship exists between the film companies and the musicians, thereby making the certification proceeding proper. Subsidiary issues involve the procedural propriety of the certification petition.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the CIR’s order, certifying the Guild as the exclusive bargaining agent. The Court held that the certification proceeding was proper despite the initial contest over the employer-employee relationship. Such proceedings are non-adversarial and investigatory in nature, intended to ascertain the employees’ representation desires. The CIR has wide discretion in its procedure, and it is empowered to resolve the foundational question of employment status as part of its fact-finding duty.
On the substantive issue, the Court applied the control test to determine the existence of an employer-employee relationship. The test is satisfied when the employer reserves the right to control not only the result but also the means and methods by which the work is accomplished. The evidence demonstrated that the film companies, through their movie directors, exercised precise control over the musicians during recordings—dictating how, when, and what to play. This control over the “means to be used” was decisive. The intervention of a musical director as a putative contractor did not negate this relationship, as ultimate control rested with the film company. Consequently, the musicians were deemed employees, and the Guild, representing the majority, was properly certified as their bargaining representative.