5/28/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly On appeal, the NLRC, in its Decision dated 12 August 2011, modified the Labor Arbiter’s decision. The NLRC held that under the POEA-SEC, petitioner is entitled to US$60,000 as permanent and total disability compensation, plus 10% of the judgment award as attorney’s fees. Based on the findings of petitioner’s doctor, the NLRC ruled that a grade 1 disability rating is more appropriate considering the injury suffered by petitioner. Permanent disability means the inability of a worker to perform his job for more than 120 days. The NLRC noted that even after the lapse of seven months from the time petitioner was repatriated for injuries sustained, petitioner was still unable to resume his usual duties and responsibilities. Thus, petitioner is considered to be totally and permanently unfit to perform his usual duties and responsibilities. However, the NLRC did not sustain the US$80,000 disability benefits claimed by petitioner in the absence of a CBA supporting such claim. Instead, the NLRC ruled that petitioner is only entitled to the US$60,000 disability benefits provided under the POEA-SEC. Petitioner filed a Motion for Summary Correction of the NLRC Decision dated 12 August 2011, alleging that he is entitled to US$80,000 disability benefits pursuant to the Norwegian ASO-AMOSUP CBA. The NLRC noted that there is no evidence from the records that petitioner is entitled to US$80,000 disability benefits based on the alleged ASO-AMOSUP CBA. However, the NLRC noted that in their Rejoinder, private respondents admitted that under the applicable CBA, the maximum amount of disability benefits to a seafarer is US$70,000 and not US$80,000. With this admission, the NLRC concluded that petitioner is entitled to an award of permanent disability benefits in the amount of US$70,000 under the provision of the ASO-AMOSUP CBA. Thus, in its 25 October 2011 Decision, NLRC modified its previous decision and directed private respondents to pay petitioner the amount of US$70,000 as disability benefits plus 10% attorney’s fees. Petitioner appealed to the Court of Appeals. The Ruling of the Court of Appeals The Court of Appeals ruled that it is the company-designated doctor who initially determines the degree of disability of petitioner. However, if petitioner disagrees with the company doctor’s disability rating, petitioner may consult a doctor of his own choice. The Court of Appeals agreed with the Labor Arbiter’s observation that both the company doctor and petitioner’s doctor found petitioner to be suffering from partial permanent disability. However, the Court of Appeals also noted that petitioner’s doctor added in his report that petitioner is “unfit for seaduty in whatever capacity as seaman,” which in effect diagnosed petitioner with total permanent disability. The Court of Appeals further noted that petitioner’s doctor failed to indicate in his report the procedures or tests conducted to properly diagnose petitioner’s condition. In contrast, the company-designated doctor conducted several medical tests and examinations in a span of six months, which included: ambulation and squatting test, squatting and ascending stairs test, left ankle flexing test, and weight bearing test. Only after all the tests were conducted did the company-designated doctor finally issue a Medical Certificate giving petitioner a final disability rating of grade 11. Thus, the Court of Appeals ruled that in the absence of adequate tests and examinations to support his medical report, the findings of petitioner’s doctor cannot prevail over that of the elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/57487 3/13