Petitioner Restituto Palomado was hired as a truck driver and paid on a ‘per trip’ basis by respondent Marling Rice Mill until its cessation upon the death of its owner. Petitioner alleges that he was illegally dismissed by respondent Rolando Tan, whom he claims to be the manager of Marling Rice Mill, when the latter talked him into selling the old truck he drives to buy a new unit and subsequently hired a new driver for it. Both the Labor Arbiter and NLRC found no employer-employee relationship existed between petitioner and respondent Tan.
Whether or not employer-employee relationship existed between the parties.
As discussed earlier, and as found by the labor arbiter and affirmed by the public respondent NLRC, there never existed an employer-employee relationship between petitioner and private respondent Rolando Tan.
With regards to complainant’s claims against respondent Rolando O. Tan, the overwhelming documentary evidences presented by said respondent strongly negated complainant’s charges that he had been under the employ of Rolando O. Tan who appeared to be the registered proprietor/owner of R.S. Rice Mill.
Respondent Rolando Tan, whom complainant alluded to as the manager/operator of Marling Rice Mill was nothing more than a mere employee of Marling Rice Mill as shown by the payrolls submitted to the Social Security System by respondent Marling Rice Mill.
Complainant’s allegation that Rolando Tan managed, operated and transacted business for Marling Rice Mill is of no moment and wanting in evidence since it is even clear from the said payrolls that it was one Guillermo Tan who was the manager of Marling Rice Mill.