4/9/2020
E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly
the examining physician, Dr. Lyn dela Cruz-De Leon, that there was nothing wrong or
irregular with his medical certificate.
Respondent went to petitioners' office for an explanation, but he was merely told to
wait for their call, as he was being lined-up for a flight to the ship's next port of call.
However, respondent never got a call from petitioners.
On May 16, 2000, respondent filed a complaint against petitioners for illegal dismissal,
payment of salaries for the unexpired portion of the employment contract and for the
award of moral, exemplary, and actual damages as well as attorney's fees before the
Regional Arbitration Branch No. 7 of the NLRC in Cebu City.[4]
In their Position Paper,[5] petitioners stated that to comply with the standard
requirements that only those who meet the standards of medical fitness have to be
sent on board the vessel, respondent was referred to their accredited medical clinic, the
Christian Medical Clinic, for pre-employment medical examination on January 17, 2000,
the same day when respondent was supposed to fly to Germany to join the vessel.
Unfortunately, respondent was not declared fit to work on January 17, 2000 due to
some medical problems.
Petitioners submitted the Affidavit[6] of Dr. Lyn dela Cruz-De Leon, stating that the said
doctor examined respondent on January 17, 2000; that physical and laboratory results
were all within normal limits except for the finding, after chest x-ray, of Borderline
Heart Size, and that respondent was positive to Hepatitis B on screening; that
respondent underwent ECG to check if he had any heart problem, and the result
showed left axis deviation. Dr. De Leon stated that she requested for a Hepatitis profile,
which was done on January 18, 2000; that on January 20, 2000, the result of the
Hepatitis profile showed non-infectious Hepatitis B. Further, Dr. De Leon stated that
respondent was declared fit to work only on January 21, 2000; however, the date of the
Medical Certificate was January 17, 2000, which was the date when she started to
examine the patient per standard operating procedure.
Petitioners argued that since respondent was declared fit to work only on January 21,
2000, he could not join the vessel anymore as it had left the port in Germany.
Respondent was advised to wait for the next vacancy for boatswain, but he failed to
report to petitioners' office, and he gave them an incorrect telephone number. During
the mandatory conference/conciliation stage of this case, petitioners offered respondent
to join one of their vessels, but he refused.
Petitioners further argued that they cannot be held liable for illegal dismissal as the
contract of employment had not yet commenced based on Section 2 of the Standard
Terms and Conditions Governing the Employment of Filipino Seafarers on Board OceanGoing Vessels (POEA Memorandum Circular No. 055-96), which states:
SEC 2. COMMENCEMENT/DURATION OF CONTRACT
elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/21705
2/12