Facts
Helen Villaruel worked at Hacienda San Isidro, performing sugarcane cultivation, counting patdan, and other sugar-farming tasks for petitioners every season for several years, paid on a pakyaw basis. The Labor Arbiter found her a regular employee who was illegally dismissed. On appeal, the NLRC reversed, ruling she was not petitioners' employee at all; on respondents' motion for reconsideration, the NLRC set that aside and reinstated the Labor Arbiter's ruling that she was illegally dismissed. On petitioners' certiorari, the Court of Appeals first ruled Helen was not an employee for lack of proof of the employer's control; on respondents' motion for reconsideration, the CA's Amended Decision reversed itself again and held her a regular employee, reasoning she was a casual employee under the Labor Code's second paragraph who attained regular status after one year of broken service. Petitioners came to this Court, arguing Helen's freedom to work for other farms and her pakyaw pay defeated regular status.
Issue
Whether Helen, a seasonal sugar-farm worker paid on a pakyaw basis, attained the status of a regular employee of petitioners.
Ruling
Yes. The Court affirmed that Helen is a regular employee and was illegally dismissed, but corrected the Court of Appeals' reasoning. Article 295 (formerly 280) of the Labor Code excepts from regular status only seasonal employees "for the duration of the season," i.e., one season; a seasonal worker employed for more than one season falls under the general rule of regular employment in the first paragraph, not the second paragraph's casual-employee proviso the CA applied. The requisites are that the employee performs seasonal work and is employed for more than one season. Helen met both requisites, having been repeatedly rehired for the same seasonal tasks year after year, unlike the workers in Mercado, Sr. v. NLRC, who performed only a single phase of agricultural work before being free to work elsewhere; her freedom to also run a sari-sari store was therefore irrelevant to her employment status with petitioners. Being paid on a pakyaw basis likewise does not negate regular status, since the control test "merely calls for the existence of the right to control, and not necessarily the exercise thereof." The Petition for Review on Certiorari was DENIED, and the Court of Appeals' Amended Decision and Resolution were AFFIRMED.