4/9/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly on permanent disability, particularly Article 192(c)(1), to seafarers, is already a settled matter.[44] This Court, in the recent case of Magsaysay Maritime Corporation v. Lobusta, [45] reiterating our ruling in Remigio v. National Labor Relations Commission, [46] explained: The standard employment contract for seafarers was formulated by the POEA pursuant to its mandate under Executive Order No. 247 to “secure the best terms and conditions of employment of Filipino contract workers and ensure compliance therewith” and to “promote and protect the wellbeing of Filipino workers overseas.” Section 29 of the 1996 POEA [Standard Employment Contract] itself provides that “[a]ll rights and obligations of the parties to [the] Contract, including the annexes thereof, shall be governed by the laws of the Republic of the Philippines, international conventions, treaties and covenants where the Philippines is a signatory.” Even without this provision, a contract of labor is so impressed with public interest that the New Civil Code expressly subjects it to the “special laws on labor unions, collective bargaining, strikes and lockouts, closed shop, wages, working conditions, hours of labor and similar subjects.” Thus, the Court has applied the Labor Code concept of permanent total disability to the case of seafarers. In Philippine Transmarine Carriers v. NLRC, seaman Carlos Nietes was found to be suffering from congestive heart failure and cardiomyopathy and was declared as unfit to work by the company-accredited physician. The Court affirmed the award of disability benefits to the seaman, citing ECC v. Sanico, GSIS v. CA, and Bejerano v. ECC that “disability should not be understood more on its medical significance but on the loss of earning capacity. Permanent total disability means disablement of an employee to earn wages in the same kind of work, or work of similar nature that [he] was trained for or accustomed to perform, or any kind of work which a person of [his] mentality and attainment could do. It does not mean absolute helplessness.” It likewise cited Bejerano v. ECC, that in a disability compensation, it is not the injury which is compensated, but rather it is the incapacity to work resulting in the impairment of one’s earning capacity.[47] In Vergara v. Hammonia Maritime Services, Inc.[48] this Court, further clarifying the application of the Labor Code, its implementing rules and regulations, and the terms of the POEA SEC with regard to a seafarer’s entitlement to disability benefits, held: The standard terms [of the POEA SEC] agreed upon, x x x, are to be read and understood in accordance with Philippine laws, particularly, Articles 191 to 193 of the Labor Code and the applicable implementing rules and regulations in case of any dispute, claim or grievance. Award of Disability Benefits elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/55083 8/15