Sonza vs. ABS-CBN broadcasting Corporation FACTS: ABS-CBN and MJMDC entered into a contract on may 1994.

ABS-CBN was represented by itsofficers while MJMDC was represented by sonza, as president and general manager and meltiangco, as EVP and treasurer referred to in the agreement as agent, MJDC agreed toprovide sonzas services exclusively ABS-CBN as talent for radio and television. Theagreement listed the services sonza would plender. On april 1996, sonza wrote a letter to ABS-CBNs president in regard to hisresignationin view of the events concerning his programs and career. April 30,1996, sonza filed a complaint against the ABS-CBN before the DOLE.Sonza complained that the ABS-CBN did not pay his salaries, separation pay, serviceincentive, leave pay, signing bonus, travel allowances and amounts due under the employeestock option plan (ESOP). On july 10 1996, ABS-CBN filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that there isno employer-employee relationship. Sonza filed an opposition to the motion on July 19, 1996. Meanwhile, ABS-CBN opened a account to continually remit sonza fees under the agreement.Labor arbiter denied the motion to dismiss, however in his decision labor arbiter dismissed thecomplaint for lack of jurisdiction and that there is not employeremployee relationship. On appeal, the NLRC affirmed the decision of the labor arbiter. The same was also denied upon the motion for reconsideration. ISSUEI . Whether or not sonza is an employee or independent contractor the existence of an employer-employee relationship i s a q u e s t i o n o f f a c t . Appellate courts accord the factual findings of the labor arbiter and the NLRC not only respectbut also finality when supported by substantial evidence. Court does not substitute its own judgment for that of tha tribunal in determining where the weight of evidence lies or whatevidence is credible. II.Essential elements of employeremployee relationship A.Selection and engagement of employer. the specific s e l e c t i o n a n d hiring of sonza, because of his unique skills, talent and celebritystatus not possessed by ordinary employees. Is a circumstanceindicative but not conclusive of independent contractualrelationship .B , P a y m e n t o f w a g e s w h a t e v e r b e n e f i t s s o n z a e n j o y e d a r o s e f r o m contract and not because of an employer-employee relationship.The power to bargain the talent fees way above the salary scales of ordinary employees is a circumstance indicative, but not conclusiveof independent contractual relationship.

C.Power of dismissal. Sonza failed to show that ABSC B N c o u l d terminate his service on grounds other than breach of contract, such asretrenchment to prevent losses as provided under labor laws. D.power of control applying the control test the c o u r t h e l d t h a t sonza is not an employee but an independent contractor. The control test beingthe most important test our courts apply in distinguishing an employee from anindependent contactor. ABS-CBN did not exercise control over the means and methods of performance of sonzas work. Moreover a radio broadcast specialist who worksunder minimal supervision is an independent contractor lastly, in broadcastindustry exclusively is not necessarily the same as control. I V . n a t u r e o f s o n z a s c l a i m sonzas claims are all based on the may agreement and stock option planand not in the 1994 labor code. Clearly the present case does not call for an application of the labor code. In effect sonzas cause of action is for breach of contract which is intrinsically a civil dispute cognizable by the court.

DISPOSITION Petition denied Assailed decision is affirmed

Employee-employer Relationship in a Publication Bond Requirement When Employer Appeals in a Labor Case

Orozco was hired as a writer by the Philippine Daily Inquirer in 1990. She was the columnist of Feminist Reflections under the Lifestyle section of the publication. She writes on a weekly basis and on a per article basis (P250300/article). In 1991, Magsanoc as the editor-in-chief sought to improve the Lifestyle section of the paper. She said there were too many Lifestyle writers and that it was time to reduce the number of writers. Orozcos column was eventually dropped. Orozco filed for a case for Illegal Dismissal against PDI and Magsanoc. Orozco won in the Labor Arbiter. The LA ruled that there exists an employeremployee relationship between PDI and Orozco hence Orozco is entitled to receive backwages, reinstatement, and 13th month pay. PDI appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission. The NLRC denied the appeal because of the failure of PDI to post asurety bond as required by Article 223 of the Labor Code. The Court of Appeals reversed the NLRC. ISSUE: Whether or not there exists an employer-employee relationship between PDI and Orozco. Whether or not PDIs appeal will prosper. HELD: Under Article 223 of the Labor Code: ART. 223. Appeal. Decisions, awards or orders of the Labor Arbiter are final and executory unless appealed to the Commissionby any or both parties within ten (10) calendar days from receipt of such decisions, awards, or orders. In case of a judgment involving a monetary award, an appeal by the employer may be perfected only upon the posting of a cashor surety bond issued by a reputable bonding company duly accredited by the Commission in the amount equivalent to the monetary award in the judgment appealed from. The requirement that the employer post a cash or surety bond to perfect its/his appeal is apparently intended to assure the workers that if they prevail in the

case, they will receive the money judgment in their favor upon the dismissal of the employers appeal. It was intended to discourage employers from using an appeal to delay, or even evade, their obligation to satisfy their employees just and lawful claims. But in this case, this principle is relaxed by the Supreme Court considering the fact that the Labor Arbiter, in ruling that the Orozco is entitled to backwages, did not provide any computation. The case is then remanded to the Labor Arbiter for the computation. This necessarily pended the resolution of the other issue of whether or not there exists an employer-employee relationship between PDI and Orozco.