G.R. No.

116960 April 2, 1996

BERNARDO JIMENEZ and JOSE JIMENEZ, as Operators of JJ's TRUCKING, petitioners,
vs.
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, PEDRO JUANATAS and FREDELITO JUANATAS,
respondents.
Facts: Pedro and Fredelito Juanatas, father and son, filed a claim for unpaid wages/commission, separation pay and
damages against JJs Trucking and/or Dr. Bernardo Jimenez. The private respondents alleged in their compliant that
in December, 1987, they were hired by the petitioner as driver/mechanic and helper respectively. They were assigned
to a ten-wheeler truck and paid on commission basis initially fixed at 17% but was later increased to 20% in 1988.
But in March 1990 their services were illegally terminated and they only received partial commission for the total
gross income of the years 1988 and 1989. It is the refusal of the petitioners to pay the said commission was a ploy to
unjustly terminate them. Petitioners contended that Fredelito Juanatas was not an employee of the firm but was
merely a helper of his father Pedro; the commissions due to Pedro were duly paid; and there was no illegal dismissal
since the truck that the private respondents were using was sold to one Winston Flores.
The Labor Arbiter rendered decision ordering respondents to pay jointly and severally Pedro Juantas for the
separation pay and dismissed the complaint of Fredelito Juanatas for lack of merit. But on appeal, the decision was
modified and Fredelito Juanatas was declared to be respondents employee who was entitled also of commission
and separation fee. Petitioners motion for reconsideration was also denied. Thus, the present petition.
Issue: Whether there is an employer-employee relationship when the person was hired as mere helper by another
employee and not by the company itself?
Held: None. There was no employee-employer relationship between Fredelito Juanatas and petitioners. The four
elements in determining the existence of employer-employee relationship are: (1) the selection and engagement of
the employee; (2) the Payment of wages; (3) the power of dismissal; and (4) the power to control the employee's
conduct, were lacking in the present case. and in the present case, Fredelito was hired by his father and the
compensatin he received was out of his fathers commission. It was also established that Fredelito was not subject to
the control and supervision of and dismissal of the petitioners but pf his father. Therefore, there was no employeremployee relationship established and Fredelito Juanatas was not entitled to separation pay and award of
commission.