5/28/2020
E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly
Dr. Nicanor Escutin, a physician of his own choice. In his Disability Report[8] dated 2
October 2010, Dr. Escutin found petitioner to be suffering from “PARTIAL PERMANENT
DISABILITY.” Dr. Escutin concluded that petitioner is “unfit for seaduty in whatever
capacity as seaman.”
Petitioner filed with the NLRC a complaint against private respondents, claiming
disability benefits, sick wages, damages, and attorney’s fees. Petitioner maintained that
he is entitled to full disability benefits of US$80,000, while private respondents insisted
that petitioner is only entitled to US$12,551 based on the disability assessment of the
company-designated doctor.
The Labor Arbiter’s Ruling
The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of private respondents. Citing Section 20 B (2) and (6)
of the 2000 POEA Standard Terms and Conditions Governing the Employment of Filipino
Seafarers On Board Ocean-Going Vessels (also called the “POEA Standard Employment
Contract” or “POEA-SEC”), the Labor Arbiter ruled that “the determination of the proper
payment of disability benefits requires two factors: (1) that the assessment is issued by
the company-designated physician, and (2) the corresponding equivalent of the
assessment as issued by the company-designated physician under the Schedule of
Disability Allowances found in the POEA Contract.”[9] The Labor Arbiter did not give
probative value to the medical report presented by petitioner for the following reasons:
(1) the doctor who issued the report is not the company-designated doctor mandated
under the POEA-SEC; (2) the medical report does not show the manner by which the
examination was conducted; and (3) the medical report dated 2 October 2010 was
made almost four months after petitioner had stopped his medical consultations with
the company-designated doctor, during which period petitioner could have committed
acts which might have aggravated his condition. Besides, the Labor Arbiter stated that
both the company-designated doctor and petitioner’s doctor found petitioner to be
suffering from partial permanent disability.
Furthermore, the Labor Arbiter found no basis for the US$80,000 disability benefits
claimed by petitioner under an alleged Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), which
petitioner failed to present to prove its provisions, especially the amount that he
claimed to be entitled to. Under the POEA-SEC, even a grade 1 disability assessment is
only entitled to US$60,000 disability benefits, to which petitioner is not entitled for lack
of factual and medical basis. Neither the company-designated doctor nor petitioner’s
doctor has declared petitioner to have grade 1 disability. Both the company-designated
doctor and petitioner’s doctor found petitioner as suffering from a “partial permanent
disability.”
Thus, the Labor Arbiter dismissed petitioner’s complaint for lack of merit. However, the
Labor Arbiter found private respondents jointly and severally liable to petitioner in the
amount of US$12,551[10] or its peso equivalent at the time of payment representing
disability benefits plus attorney’s fees equivalent to 10% of the total award.[11]
The Ruling of the NLRC
elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/57487
2/13