Employee-Employer Relationship

ZAMUDIO VS. NLRC

GR NO. 76723
March 25, 1990
Facts:
Petitioners rendered services essential for the cultivation of respondents farm. While the services were not continuous in the
sense that they were not rendered everyday throughout the year, as is the nature of farm work, petitioners had never stopped
working for respondent from year to year from the time he hired them to the time he dismissed.
Issue:
Are the petitioners considered as employees?
Ruling:
The nature of their employment, i.e. Pakyao basis, does not make petitioner independent contractors. Pakyao workers are
considered employees as long as the employer exercises control over the means by which such workers are to perform their work
inside private respondents farm, the latter necessarily exercised control over the performed by petitioners.
The seasonal nature of petitioners work does not detract from the conclusion that employer employee relationship exits.
Seasonal workers whose work is not merely for the duration of the season, but who are rehired every working season are
considered regular employees. The circumstances that petitioners do not apears in respondents payroll does not destroy the
employer employee relationship between them. Omission of petitioners in the payroll was not within their control, they had no
hand in the preparation of the payroll. This circumstance, even if true, cannot be taken against petitioners.