Julian was hired by Index Agency, a licensed manpower and recruitment corporation, which had a Service Agreement with Kainan Resto, a fast food restaurant, for the provision of ancillary and support services. Index Agency assigned Julian to work at Kainan Resto as a cashier and counter clerk, whose duties involved taking customer orders, receiving payments, preparing food orders, and serving food to customers. Julian was accused of short-changing a customer during one transaction. He was immediately dismissed from service by the manager of Kainan Resto. Julian filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against Index Agency and Kainan Resto. In its defense, Kainan Resto argued that Julian was not its employee but that of Index Agency, given that Index Agency is a licensed manpower and recruitment corporation. Is Kainan Resto correct? Explain briefly. (5 points)
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
No, Kainan Resto is not correct. Under Article 106 of the Labor Code and D.O. No. 174-17, labor-only contracting exists where the contractor supplies workers performing activities directly related and necessary to the principal
Unlock the full Labor Law answers365 days of full access. GCash, Maya and card accepted.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
Under Article 106 of the Labor Code, what is the legal effect when a contractor engages in prohibited labor-only contracting?
In prohibited labor-only contracting, the principal employer is declared the direct employer of the workers.
What is the legal nature of a registration certificate issued to a manpower agency by the Department of Labor and Employment?
A registration certificate creates only a disputable presumption of legitimate job contracting.
Why was Kainan Resto held to be the direct employer of cashier and counter clerk Julian?
Kainan Resto was the direct employer because Julian performed core fast-food duties and was directly dismissed by its manager.
Under Department Order No. 174-17, which factor indicates prohibited labor-only contracting?
Choices available with full access.
When an employer-employee relationship is established between a principal and a labor-only contractor's worker, what is the liability for illegal dismissal?
Choices available with full access.
Learn more about these topics
1. Labor-Only Contracting
Under Article 106 of the Labor Code and Department Order No. 174-17, labor-only contracting is an arrangement where a contractor or subcontractor merely recruits, supplies, or places workers to perform services for a principal employer. Labor-only contracting is explicitly prohibited by law. It exists when the contractor lacks substantial capital or investment in tools and machinery, and the workers perform activities directly related and necessary to the principal's core business. In such cases, the contractor is treated as a mere agent, and the principal becomes the direct employer of the supplied workers.
2. License Disputable Presumption
A certificate of registration issued by the Department of Labor and Employment to a manpower agency merely creates a disputable presumption that the contractor is a legitimate job contractor. This administrative presumption is not conclusive and can be easily rebutted by evidence showing that the contractor operates as a labor-only contractor. When supplied workers perform functions directly related to the principal's main business operations or when the principal directly controls the workers, the contractor's registration license will not shield the principal from being declared the direct employer of the workers.
3. Directly Related Activities
To determine whether an employment arrangement constitutes illegal labor-only contracting, labor tribunals evaluate the nature of the tasks assigned to the contractor's personnel. Performing duties that are directly related, necessary, and vital to the principal's main business operations indicates labor-only contracting. Furthermore, when the principal's own supervisory managers exercise direct control over the workers—such as issuing workplace orders, evaluating performance, or imposing summary dismissal—the principal acts as the true direct employer, making the principal fully liable for illegal dismissal and statutory employment benefits.