Vinoya v. NLRC G.R. 126586. August 25, 2000. FACTS: This case involves a motion for reconsideration filed by private respondent Regent Food Corporation (RFC), of the decision ordering RFC to reinstate petitioner Alexander inoya to his former position position and pay him bac!"ages# bac!"ages# The Co$rt Co$rt fo$nd that RFC "as the rightf$l rightf$l employer of petitioner $nder the fo$r%fold test of employer%employee relations, contrary to RFC&s claim that inoya "as act$ally an employee of the 'C# RFC no" claims that reinstatement is no longer feasible d$e to the parties& strained relations# SS*+: hether or not petitioner inoya is entitled to reinstatement.+/0: 1o# As a general r$le, strained relations is an iss$e fact$al in nat$re and sho$ld be raised and proved before the /abor /abor Arbiter# Arbiter# n this case, the strained relations arose only after the filing of the case# The iss$e of strained relations "as never dealth "ith in the decision being reconsidered# reconsidered# The Co$rt finds that it "o$ld "o$ld be impractical to reinstate petitioner petitioner to his former position as s$ch position as sales representative involves the handling of acco$nts and other property of RFC# Therefore, Therefore, in lie$ of reinstatement, payment payment of separation separation pay e2$ivalent to one month&s salary for every year of service is granted# Vinoya vs. National Labor Relation Commission FACTS: % %
% % /abor /abor %
inoya inoya applied applied and "as "as accepted accepted onmay 3445, 3445, as a sales represe representati ntative ve by RFC on the same same date "as iss$ed iss$ed an i#d vinoya vinoya allege alleges s that he "as $nder $nder direct direct control and s$pervision plant manager and senior salesman of 'RC# 6n 7$ly 3443, 3443, vinoya vinoya "as transferr transferred ed by RFC to 'C, 'C, an agency agency "hich provides provides RFC "ith "ith additional additional contrac contract$al t$al "or!ers "or!ers p$rs$ant p$rs$ant to a contract contract for for s$pply of manpo"er services after his transfer# .e "as re assigned to RFC as sales representative# S$bse2$ently on nov# 3443, he "as informed by RFC that his services "ere terminated and he "as as!ed to s$rrender his i#d# card# 0ec, 3443, 3443, vinoya vinoya filed filed a case case of illeg illegal al dismissal dismissal and non#pa non#paymen ymentt of 38th moth pay pay before before the labor arbiter# arbiter# 'C "as initial initial imp imp leaded as as one of the respond respondents, ents, b$t b$t vinoya "ithdre "ithdre" " his charge charge against against 'C and bo$ght9 bo$ght9p$rs$ p$rs$ed ed his claim claim solely solely against against RFC# S$bse2$ently, RFC filed a 8rd party complaint against 'C# RFC is g$il g$ilty ty of of illeg illegal al dism dismiss issal al b$t b$t deni denied ed 38th 38th m# pay pay RFC is the employer 'C is an indepen independent dent contrac contractor, tor, g$ilty g$ilty of of illegal illegal dismissal dismissal## 6rdered 6rdered payment payment of of 38th month month pay# pay#
1/RC % SS*+S: # he het he he r pet itit io io ne ner " as as an an em pl pl oy oy me ment of of RF RF C or ' C C # A# Stat$s of 'C ("hether it is a independent independent contractor or labor%only contractor contractor +lements of labor%only 3# .ave s$bstantial capital to perform the 7ob "or! or service on its o"n acct# and responsibility % 3,555,555 stoc! ;<,555 in paid = not eno$gh ># % or or! er er s as si si gn gn ed ed by by ' ' C C to to RF RF C, C, th the ?? ?? ?? ???? ha has th th e c on ont ro rol 8# 0oesn&t pe perfor m and sp spec ifific 7o 7ob or or se serv ice % erely s$pplies RFC "ith ++S @# S al al es es re reps ar ar e dir ec ec tltl y r el el at at ed ed to to th th e b $s $s in in es es s of RF RF C <# rant ing ' 'C is is an an in independent co cont ra ractor % ' et et itit io io ne ne r i s no t in cl cl$d ed ed in in th the lilis t t o be as as si si gn gn ed ed to to RF RF C C# RFC carried o$t th the @ ????? test# 3#) 'o"er to hire % #0# #0# iss iss$e $ed d is is s$f s$ffi fici cien entt for for a pro proof of % '+T '+T is "ith "ith RFC RFC prio priorr con contr trac actt >#) 'ayment of "ages % f$nds came from RFC % alth altho$ o$gh gh co$r co$rse sed d thro thro$g $gh h 'C 'C 8#) 'o"er of control % RFC admitted % '+T is $nder the direct control of RFC personnel @#) 'o"er to 0ismiss % Cont Contra ract ct sta state tes s that that RFC RFC has has the the po" po"er er to to dism dismis iss s ## he het he he r pet itit io io ne ner " as as i lllle ga gal ly ly dis mi mi ss ss ed ed % 0$e to his his leng length th of of servi service, ce, ac2$ir ac2$ired ed ? tams tams of reg ++# Th$s may only be dismissed $pon compliance of legal re2s: for dismissal# T"o fold re2s: 3# S$bstantial ># 'roced$ral 3# 3#
+xpirat ion of contract s is not one of the The gro$nds allo"ed by la" 1o not notic ice e of of imp impen endi ding ng dism dismiss issal al
0S'6 %
0ecisi 0ecision on and reso reso of of 1/RC 1/RC are are ann$l ann$lled led and set aside aside
%
/abo /aborr arbi arbite terr deci decisio sion n is rei reins nsta tate ted d
