Myla Ruth N.

Sara

PRC vs. CA

FACTS:
PRC is engaged in the business of extracting and refining oil from copra.
Respondent Garcia started to work as a copra carrier and was later promoted as a foreman with 21 or 22
men working under him in pakiao arrangements. These pakiao workers unloaded copra from trucks, stored it in the
company and delivered it. Later, the pakiao arrangements were formalized in writing and Garcia was given
authority to choose and hire men. For their salary, the money is being given to Garcia and he will distribute it to
laborers.
The work of the 22 laborers is essential, permanent and indispensable in the company’s business. However,
PRC did not report them to SSS for coverage, believing that Garcia is an independent contractor and the laborers
were his own employees. Thus, the laborers filed a complaint against PRC.

ISSUE: W/N an intervening employer is an independent contractor obliged to register his workers in the SSS

HELD:
No. Under the control test, it ascertains whether the employer controls or has reserved the right to control
the employee not only as to the result of the work to be done but also as to the means and methods by which the
same is accomplished.

The company ordered the independent contractor where to store copra, when to bring it out, how much to
load and what class of copra to handle.

Mr. Garcia had no office of his own and no independent funds to pay the laborers. He was completely
dependent of the appellant. Thus, the control test has met in the case at bar.

Wherefore, petition is dismissed.