[70] SONZA V.

ABS-CBN BROADCASTING CORPORATION reason of his peculiar skills and talent as a TV host and a
G.R No. 165756 | June 5, 2009 | Nachura, J radio broadcaster. Unlike an ordinary employee, he was free
to perform the services he undertook in accordance with his
SUMMARY: own style.
● NLRC: Affirmed the LA’s decision, and denied Sonza’s subsequent
PROVISIONS APPLICABLE: Motion for Reconsideration.
○ It was erroneous to assert that MJMDC is a mere labor-only
DOCTRINE: contractor of ABS-CBN such that there exists and ER-EE
relationship between the latter and Sonza. On the contrary,
FACTS: MJMDC is an agent of Sonza as admitted in the May 1994
● In May 1994, respondent ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corp signed an Agreement.
Agreement with Mel and Jay Management and Development Corp ○ The NLRC pointed out that the jurisdiction over the present
(MJMDC) owned and managed by Mel Tiangco and Jay Sonza. controversy properly belongs to the regular courts because
● Referred to in the Agreement as “AGENT,” MJMDC agreed to provide they arise from an alleged breach of contractual obligation
SONZA’s services exclusively to ABS-CBN as talent for radio and ● Court of Appeals: Dismissed Sonza’s special petition for certiorari.
television. ○ The appellate court agreed with the NLRC’s finding that no
○ He was to host a radio program and a TV show both entitled employer-employee relationship existed between Sonza and
“Mel and Jay.” ABS-CBN.
● Sometime in 1996, Sonza resigned due to “recent events concerning
his programs and career.” He informed the network through a letter ISSUE w/ HOLDING & RATIO:
that though he is waiving the right to recover the remaining talent fee [1] Whether or not an employer-employee relationship existed between
stipulated in the contract, he reserves the right to seek recovery of petitioner Jay Sonza and respondent ABS-CBN [NO]
ther benefits under the Agreement. ● The Court noted that this was a case of first impression. This was
● On 30 April 1996, SONZA filed a complaint against ABSCBN before the first time that the Court resolved the nature of the relationship
the Department of Labor and Employment, National Capital Region in between a television and radio station and one of its “talents.”
Quezon City. SONZA complained that ABS-CBN did not pay his ● The existence of an ER-EE relationship is a question of fact. Thus,
salaries, separation pay, service incentive leave pay, 13th month pay, the factual findings of the LA and the NLRC are afforded not only
signing bonus, travel allowance and amounts due under the respect but also finality when supported by substantial evidence.
Employees Stock Option Plan (“ESOP”). ○ Substantial evidence: such relevant evidence as a
● Labor Arbiter: Dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction. reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a
○ The LA is not the proper venue because there was no conclusion
employer-employee (ER-EE) relationship between ABS-CBN ● The elements of an ER-EE relationship are:
broadcasting and Sonza. (a) The selection and engagement of the employee;
○ LA noted that Sonza was a “talent” who cannot be (b) The payment of wages;
considered as an employee. He was engaged by ABS-CBN by (c) The power of dismissal; and
 (d) The employer’s power to control the employee on the means ○ Since this is a case of first impression, the Court referred to
and methods by which the work is accomplished. a foreign case law in analysing the present case.
(i) This element, the “control test,” is the most ○ Albert-Velez v. Corporacion De Puerto Rico (WIPR): A
important. television program host is an independent contractor.
● Applying the four-fold test, the Court that no ER-EE relationship ○ First, contrary to Sonza’s claims, ABS-CBN did not exercise
existed between petitioner and respondent. control over the means and methods of his work. He was
● Selection and engagement engaged specifically to host the “Mel & Jay” programs and
○ ABS-CBN engaged Sonza’s services to co-host its TV and was not assigned any other work. To perform his work, he
radio program because of his peculiar skills, talent and only needed his skills and talent.
celebrity status. This specific selection and hiring is ■ He was not instructed on how to say his lines, the
indicative, but not conclusive, of an independent way he appeared on TV or how he sounded on air.
contractual relationship. ■ ABS-CBN could not dictate the content of Sonza’s
○ In any event, the method of selecting and engaging Sonza script. That he was prohibited from criticizing ABS-
does not conclusively determine his status. CBN’s shows merely implies that he had a free-hand
● Payment of Wages on what to say or discuss provided he did not attack
○ Sonza argues that ABS-CBN directly paying him his talent ABS-CBN.
fees, as well as the granting of privileges and benefits him, ■ The network’s power not broadcast Sonza’s shows
shows that he was an employee of the latter. does not negate his status as an independent
○ However, fees and benefits Sonza received were the result of contractor. ABS-CBN was still obligated to pay him
negotiations that led to the Agreement. If he had truly been his talent fees (which they did). This shows that the
an employee, there would be no need to stipulate on benefits network could not dismiss or discipline him.
such as SSS, Medicare and 13th month pay which the law ■ While it is true that ABS-CBN supplied all the
automatically incorporates into every ER-EE contract. equipment and crew for Sonza’s show, this does not
○ In addition, Sonza’s talent fees are so huge and out of the imply control because the equipment, crew and
ordinary that they indicate more an independent contractual airtime are not “tools and instrumentalities” Sonza
relationship rather than an ER-EE relationship. needed to perform his job.
○ The payment of the benefits directly to Sonza and not ○ Second, Sonza claims that he was an employee because he
MJMDC does not negate his status as an independent was subjected to the network’s rules and standards of
contractor. The parties expressly agreed on such mode of performance. This argument is untenable because the
payment. agreement requires him to abide by the rules and standards
● Power of Dismissal for talents, not for employees. In addition, the code of
○ For any breach of the Agreement, either party may terminate conduct imposed on Sonza is the “Television and Radio
the relationship. Sonza failed to show that ABS-CBN could Code of the KBP” which applies to broadcasters, not to
terminate his services on any other ground. employees of radio and TV stations.
● Control Test
 ■ In any case, not all rules imposed by the hiring party agent for ABS-CBN in entering into the Agreement with
on the hired party indicate that the latter is an Sonza, who himself is represented by MJMDC.
employee of the former. ○ As SONZA admits, MJMDC is a management company
○ Lastly, SONZA insists that the “exclusivity clause” in the devoted exclusively to managing the careers of SONZA and
Agreement is the most extreme form of control which ABS- his broadcast partner, TIANGCO. MJMDC is not engaged in
CBN exercised over him. any other business, not even job contracting.
■ The Court says this argument is futile because being ●
an exclusive talent does not by itself mean that DISPOSITIVE: WHEREFORE, we DENY the petition. The assailed Decision of
Sonza is an employee of ABS-CBN. In the broadcast the Court of Appeals dated 26 March 1999 in CA-G.R. SP No. 49190 is
industry, exclusivity is not necessarily the same as AFFIRMED. Costs against petitioner.
control
■ The hiring of exclusivity talent is a widespread and
accepted practice in the entertainment industry. This
practice is not designed to control the means and
methods of work of the talent, but simply to protect
the investment of the broadcast station.

[2] Whether or not MJMDC is a labor-only contractor of ABS-CBN [NO]

● In a labor-only contract, there are three parties involved:
(1) the “labor-only” contractor;
(2) the employee who is ostensibly under the employ of the
“labor-only” contractor; and
(3) the principal who is deemed the real employer.
● Under this scheme, the “labor-only” contractor is the agent of the
principal. The law makes the principal responsible to the employees
of the “labor-only contractor” as if the principal itself directly hired or
employed the employees.
● The circumstances are not present in this case. There are essentially
only two parties involved in the agreement: SONZA and ABS-CBN.
MJMDC merely acted as Sonza’s agent, as expressly stated in the
Agreement.
○ MJMDC is a corporation organized and owned by Jay Sonza
and Mel Tiangco. The President and General Manager is
Sonza himself. It is absurd to hold that MJMDC acted as