Dumpit-Murillo v. CA
Dumpit-Murillo v. CA
CA (Kara) FACTS:
June 8, 2007 | Quisimbing, J. | ER-EE Relationship 1. October 2, 1995 - under Talent Contract NT95-1805, private
respondent ABC hired petitioner Thelma Dumpit-Murillo as a
PETITIONER: THELMA DUMPIT-MURILLO newscaster and co-anchor for Balitang-Balita, an early evening
RESPONDENT: COURT OF APPEALS, ASSOCIATED news program. The contract was for a period of three months. In
BROADCASTING COMPANY (ABC), JOSE JAVIER AND EDWARD addition, petitioner’s services were engaged for the program "Live
TAN on Five."
2. After four years of repeated renewals, petitioner’s talent contract
SUMMARY: Private respondent ABC hired petitioner Thelma Dumpit- expired.
Murillo as a newscaster and co-anchor for Balitang-Balita. The contract 3. Two weeks after the expiration of the last contract, petitioner sent a
was for three months. After four years of repeated renewals, petitioner’s letter to Mr. Jose Javier, Vice President for News and Public
talent contract expired. Two weeks after the expiration of the last contract, Affairs of ABC, informing the latter that she was still interested in
petitioner sent a letter to Javier informing the latter that she was still renewing her contract subject to a salary increase.
interested in renewing her contract subject to a salary increase. A month 4. Thereafter, petitioner stopped reporting for work.
later, petitioner demanded reinstatement, payment of unpaid wages, 13th 5. A month later, petitioner sent a demand letter to ABC, demanding:
month pay, and other monetary benefits due to a regular employee. ABC a. reinstatement to her former position;
will only pay for the wages. Petitioner filed a complaint in the NLRC. The b. payment of unpaid wages for services rendered from
Labor Arbiter dismissed, NLRC reversed the LA but the CA reversed the September 1 to October 20, 1999 and full backwages;
NLRC. The issue is simply whether the petitioner was a fixed-term c. payment of 13th month pay, vacation/sick/service
employee or a regular employee. SC said she is a regular employee. incentive leaves and other monetary benefits due to a
Regular status arises from either the nature of work of the employee or the regular employee starting March 31, 1996.
duration of his employment. Petitioner’s work was necessary in the usual 6. ABC replied that a check covering petitioner’s talent fees for
business or trade of the employer and her work was continuous for a September 16 to October 20, 1999 had been processed and
period of four years. There was no valid fixed-period employment, the prepared, but that the other claims of petitioner had no basis in fact
petitioner occupied a position of weakness when they negotiated the or in law.
contract. Lastly, the practice of repeatedly extending petitioner’s 3-month Complaint filed in the NLRC
contract for 4 years is a circumvention of the acquisition of regular status. 7. December 20, 1999, petitioner filed a complaint against ABC, Mr.
Javier and Mr. Edward Tan, for illegal constructive dismissal,
DOCTRINE: The elements to determine the existence of an employment nonpayment of salaries, overtime pay, premium pay, separation
relationship are (Manila Water Company, Inc. v. Pena): pay, holiday pay, service incentive leave pay, vacation/sick leaves
a. the selection and engagement of the employee, and 13th month pay in NLRC
b. the payment of wages, 8. She likewise demanded payment for moral, exemplary and actual
c. the power of dismissal, and damages, as well as for attorney’s fees.
d. the employer’s power to control. 9. The parties agreed to submit the case for resolution after settlement
The most important element is the employer’s control of the employee’s failed during the mandatory conference/conciliation.
conduct, not only as to the result of the work to be done, but also as to the 10. March 29, 2000, the Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint.
means and methods to accomplish it. Appeal - NLRC reversed the Labor Arbiter (CORRECT)
11. The NLRC held
a. an employer-employee relationship existed between
petitioner and ABC;
b. the subject talent contract was void; b. The practice of having fixed-term contracts in the industry
c. the petitioner was a regular employee illegally dismissed; does not automatically make all talent contracts valid and
and compliant with labor law.
d. she was entitled to reinstatement and backwages or c. The assertion that a talent contract exists does not
separation pay, aside from 13th month pay and service necessarily prevent a regular employment status.
incentive leave pay, moral and exemplary damages and d. Sonza case is not applicable.
attorney’s fees. i. Sonza had a free hand on what to say or discuss
Court of Appeals in his shows provided he did not attack the
12. reversed NLRC and said that petitioner was a fixed-term employee television station or its interests. Clearly, ABS-
and not a regular employee within the ambit of Article 280 of the CBN did not exercise control over the means and
Labor Code because her job, as anticipated and agreed upon, was methods of the performance of Sonza’s work.
only for a specified time. e. Present case, ABC had control over the performance of
ISSUE: petitioner’s work as stated in the contract of employment
1. W/N this Court can review the findings of the Court of Appeals - of petitioner with ABC.
YES f. Noteworthy too, is the comparatively low P28,000
2. W/N the Court of Appeals committed a reversible error in its monthly pay of petitioner vis the P300,000 a month salary
Decision. – YES, NLRC is correct. of Sonza, that all the more bolsters the conclusion that
RATIO: petitioner was not in the same situation as Sonza.
Issue 1 5. The elements to determine the existence of an employment
2. Decisions, final orders or resolutions of the Court of Appeals in relationship are (Manila Water Company, Inc. v. Pena):
any case may be appealed to this Court through a petition for a. the selection and engagement of the employee,
review. This remedy is a continuation of the appellate process over b. the payment of wages,
the original case, and considering there is no congruence in the c. the power of dismissal, and
findings of the NLRC and the Court of Appeals regarding the d. the employer’s power to control.
status of employment of petitioner, we can review such findings. The most important element is the employer’s control of the
Issue 2 employee’s conduct, not only as to the result of the work to be
3. Respondents: CA did not err when it upheld the validity of the done, but also as to the means and methods to accomplish it.
talent contracts voluntarily entered into by petitioner. It further The duties of petitioner as enumerated in her employment
stated that prevailing jurisprudence has recognized and sustained contract indicate that ABC had control over the work of
the absence of employer-employee relationship between a talent petitioner.
and the media entity which engaged the talent’s services on a per Aside from control, ABC also dictated the work assignments
talent contract basis, as held in Sonza v. ABS-CBN Broadcasting and payment of petitioner’s wages. ABC also had power to
Corporation. dismiss her. All these being present, clearly, there existed an
4. Petitioner: Petitioner avers however that an employer-employee employment relationship between petitioner and ABC.
relationship was created when the private respondents started to 6. Concerning regular employment, the law provides for two kinds of
merely renew the contracts repeatedly 15 times or for 4 employees:
consecutive years. PETITIONER IS CORRECT. a. those who are engaged to perform activities which are
a. Petitioner was a regular employee under contemplation of usually necessary or desirable in the usual business or
law. trade of the employer; and
b. those who have rendered at least one year of service, otherwise, private respondents would have simply refused
whether continuous or broken, with respect to the activity to renew her contract.
in which they are employed. b. Patently, the petitioner occupied a position of weakness
In other words, regular status arises from either the nature of vis-à-vis the employer.
work of the employee or the duration of his employment. c. Moreover, private respondents’ practice of repeatedly
The primary standard for determining regular employment is extending petitioner’s 3-month contract for four years is a
the reasonable connection between the particular activity circumvention of the acquisition of regular status.
performed by the employee vis-à-vis the usual trade or d. While this Court has recognized the validity of fixed-term
business of the employer. (Benares v. Pancho) employment contracts in a number of cases, it has
7. Going back to the case… consistently emphasized that when the circumstances of a
a. Gleaned from the description of the scope of services case show that the periods were imposed to block the
aforementioned, petitioner’s work was necessary or acquisition of security of tenure, they should be struck
desirable in the usual business or trade of the employer down for being contrary to law, morals, good customs,
which includes, as a pre-condition for its public order or public policy.
enfranchisement, its participation in the government’s e. As a regular employee, petitioner is entitled to security of
news and public information dissemination. tenure and can be dismissed only for just cause and after
b. In addition, her work was continuous for a period of four due compliance with procedural due process. There was
years. This repeated engagement under contract of hire is an illegal dismissal in this case.
indicative of the necessity and desirability of the
petitioner’s work in private respondent ABC’s business.
8. The contract was not characterized by a valid fixed-period
employment.
a. There should have been no force, duress or improper
pressure brought to bear upon the employee; neither
should there be any other circumstance that vitiates the
employee’s consent.
b. It should satisfactorily appear that the employer and the
employee dealt with each other on more or less equal
terms with no moral dominance being exercised by the
employer over the employee.
c. Moreover, fixed-term employment will not be considered
valid where, from the circumstances, it is apparent that
periods have been imposed to preclude acquisition of
tenurial security by the employee.
9. Present case…
a. Being one of the numerous newscasters/broadcasters of
ABC and desiring to keep her job as a broadcasting
practitioner, petitioner was left with no choice but to affix
her signature of conformity on each renewal of her
contract as already prepared by private respondents;