SSS (petitioner) vs. C.A.

and Ayalde (respondents)

Nature: Petition
Facts:
o
o
o
o

o
o

Ignacio Tana Sr. had a wife named Margarita Tana

Ignacio worked for Conchita Ayalde (respondent) as a farmhand in 2 sugarcane plantations from
1961- 1979.
Ignacio received the minimum wage at that time while social security contributions were
deducted from his wage..
When he died, his wife found out that Tana was never reported for coverage nor his contributions
remitted to the SSS (petitioner).
o Margarita Tana was deprived of the burial grant and pension.
She wanted:
o Respondents Ayalde to pay the premium contributions of her husband
o SSS to grant Mrs. Tanada her burial grant and pension due to her.
SSS stated that Conchita Ayalda were never registered to the SSS thus Mr. Tana was never
registered as well.
Ayalde (respondent) denied allegations that Mr. Tana was her employee
o He was only hired intermittently as an independent contractor and used his own
equipments and carabao as well as having his own work schedule.
o Ayalde never exercised control over the manner Tana used performed his work.
o Wanted the case dismissed because Tana was never her employee
Social Security Commission issued a resolution that stated that:
o Tana was an employee of Conchita Ayalde due to the testimony of the Tanas co-workers.
o Ayalde was liable for payment of damages and SSS give Mrs. Tana her accrued pension.
C.A. stated otherwise and declaring the decision in favour of Ayalde.

Issue: whether or not an agricultural laborer who was hired on pakyaw basis can be considered an
employee entitled to compulsory coverage and corresponding benefits under the Social Security Law.
Decision:
o
o
o
o

o
o
o

Aylade failed to show complete documents to strengthen her claim that Tana was not her
employee
Margarita Tanas testimony corroborated by 2 other witnesses
o Mr. Tana was paid a daily wage which Ayaldes overseer disbursed every 15 days.
No particular form of evidence is required to prove the existence of an employer-employee
relationship. Any competent and relevant evidence to prove the relationship may be admitted.
the testimonial evidence of the claimant and her witnesses constitute positive and
credible evidence of the existence of an employer-employee relationship between Tana
and Ayalde.
Tana and his family lived inside the plantation of Ayalde thus the logical explanation is
that he was working exclusively for Ayalde throughout the year.
Ayalde exercised control over Tana indirectly, through her overseer.
There is substantial evidence that Tana was paid a daily wage thus he is entitled to
compulsory coverage.

Ayalde failed to counter these positive assertions. Even on the assumption that there were no
deductions, the fact remains that Tana was and should have been covered under the Social
Security Law. The circumstances of his employment place him outside the ambit of the exception
provided in Section 8(j) of Republic Act No. 1611, as amended by Section 4 of R.A. 2658.

WHEREFORE, in view of all the foregoing, the Decision of the Court of Appeals in C.A.-G.R. SP
No. 16427 and the Resolution dated June 14, 1991 are hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The
Resolution of the Social Security Commission in SSC Case No. 8851 is REINSTATED.