ORLANDO FARM GROWERS ASSOCIATION/GLICERIO AOVER vs.NLRC (5th Division) (by Cris Figueroa) GR No.

129076 November 25, 1998

Facts: 1. Petitioner Orlando Farm Growers Association (Anover is the president) is an association of landowners engaged in the production of export quality bananas located in Kinamayan, Sto. Tomas, Davao del Norte, established for the sole purpose of dealing collectively with Stanfilco on matters concerning technical services, canal maintenance, irrigation and pest control, among others. Respondents (about 20 complainants) were hired as farm workers by several member-landowners but, nonetheless, were made to perform functions as packers and harvesters in the plantation of petitioner association. January 8, 1993 July 30, 1994 respondents were dismissed on various dates. Thus, they filed against petitioner for illegal dismissal and monetary benefits. Petitioners liabilities to complainants are joint and solidary, with its responsible officers. To determine the existence of employer employee relationship (Filipinas Broadcasting Network v. NLRC): 1. 2. 3. 4. The manner of selection and engagement Payment of wages Presence or absence of the power of dismissal Presence or absence of the power of control (most important element YES. Petition is DISMISSED. NLRC judgment affirmed but remanded back to Labor Arbiter Sancho to specify the amount each respondent is entitled to.

Ratio: The law does not require an employer to be registered before he may considered as one within the definition of the Labor Code. o Art 212 (e) of the Labor Code defines an employer as any person acting in the interest of an employer, directly or indirectly

2.

3.

4.

September 6, 1995 LABOR ARBITER SANCHO: ordered reinstatement of respondents and payment of backwages and other benefits o Note: 2 complainants eventually dropped their case (Loran Paquit and LovillaDorlones) because they were able to amicably settle their claims.

5.

December 26, 1996 - NLRC affirmed decision of LA and denied the motion for reconsideration. Petitioner contends that being an unregistered association and having been formed solely to serve as an effective medium for dealing collectively with Stanfilco and not existing in law, it cannot be considered an employer.

Evidence to support existence of employer employee relationship: o During the subsistence of the association, several circulars and memoranda were issued concerning, among other things, absences without formal request, loitering in the work area and disciplinary measures with which every worker is enjoined to comply. The employees were issued IDs. In Domasig v. NLRC, the issuance of ID was held to be not only as a security measure but mainly to identify the holder as a bonafide employee of the firm

6.

Issue: Whether or not an unregistered association may be an employer independent of the respective members it represents o

Held:

The power of the petitioner to enter into compromise agreements involving money claims filed by three employees, namely: Lorna Paquit, LovellaDorlones and Jasmine Espanola.

o The association exceeded the purpose it was initially established for when it did the above mentioned acts. Thus, it is considered an employer.