Short answer. Generally no. Article 82 excludes "workers who are paid by results" from the Labor Code Title covering hours of work, overtime, and related pay, but only to the extent the Secretary of Labor's regulations place them in that category. Being paid piece-rate alone does not automatically remove these protections; it depends on how the arrangement is classified.
What the law says
workers who are paid by results as determined by the Secretary of Labor in appropriate regulations
Labor Code, Article 82 — Who Is Covered. Read the full provision →
What Article 82 excludes
Article 82 sets out who the Labor Code's Title on hours of work reaches, and it excludes several categories by name, including "workers who are paid by results as determined by the Secretary of Labor in appropriate regulations." This is the Title that carries the hours-of-work rules most piece-rate questions are really about — the standards behind overtime and related pay entitlements — so a worker who genuinely falls inside this exclusion sits outside that coverage for as long as the arrangement lasts.
The exclusion is not self-executing
The clause does not simply say workers paid by results — it says workers paid by results "as determined by the Secretary of Labor in appropriate regulations." That phrase matters: the law hands the classification to regulation rather than settling it in the statute itself. Calling an arrangement piece-rate or pakyawan in a contract does not, by itself, decide the question; whether a specific worker actually falls within the excluded category depends on how the applicable regulations define and apply it to that kind of work.
Why this distinction exists
The Title's hours-of-work rules, including overtime, are built around measuring time actually worked and paying a premium for time worked beyond the normal hours. Pure results-based pay does not fit that structure the same way an hourly or daily wage does — there is no fixed number of hours against which overtime is measured when someone is paid strictly for output. That mismatch, not the labels piece-rate or by results on their own, is what the exclusion is built to address, which is also why the Secretary of Labor's regulations, not a blanket rule, decide where the line falls.
What to check before assuming either way
Because the classification turns on regulation rather than the statute's own words, a worker paid piece-rate should not assume the exclusion applies just because pay is computed per unit produced, nor assume it does not apply just because the work feels supervised like ordinary employment. The actual arrangement — how the pay is set, how the work is directed, and whether it fits what the Secretary of Labor's regulations describe as work paid by results — is what decides whether the Title's overtime and related pay rules reach that worker, not the label attached to the pay scheme.