8/27/2020
E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly
Medical Certification[8] dated September 20, 2006, Sales was assessed with disability
grading "8", describing it as "partial permanent disability." Sales' physician advised that
"[h]e requires constant physical therapy/rehabilitation and may require surgery in the
future if his pain symptoms [worsen]. He is totally UNFIT TO WORK as a Seaman."
The following day, on September 21, 2006, the company-designated physician issued a
Medical Certification[9] advising Sales to continue physical therapy sessions. He was
also advised to undergo surgery, which is a more "definitive treatment", but Sales,
again, refused. In a Letter[10] dated September 22, 2006, the company-designated
medical director reported that Sales had undergone 10 physical therapy sessions. The
report further stated that "(t)here is no visible problem with ambulation. At this point,
patient is advised against lifting heavy objects which gives him 1/3 loss of lifting power
x x x." The company-designated physician issued Sales' disability assessment with
"GRADE 11."[11]
On October 4, 2006, Sales filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations
Commission (NLRC) claiming entitlement to permanent and total disability benefits,
attorney's fees, and moral and exemplary damages. Sales argues that he remained
unfit for sea duty for more than 120 days. He lost his capacity to obtain employment as
seaman; that he was not able to get any employment due to his conditions. Sales also
claims that he should be compensated for disability benefits under the provisions of the
Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) because he sustained his injuries from an
accident on board the vessel.
On September 28, 2007, the NLRC, though Labor Arbiter (LA) Ligerio Ancheta, ruled in
favor of Sales. The LA held that Sales should be paid permanent and total disability
benefits in accordance with the CBA. He was able to prove having sustained an injury
onboard the vessel which eventually caused his disability. The LA was unconvinced of
the allegations of CTI that no accident took place onboard M/V Acushnet. Had there
been no accident during Sales' employment with the company, CTI would not have
repatriated Sales to the Philippines nor covered for his medical expenses thereafter. The
LA sustained the assessment of Sales' physician in finding Sales "TOTALLY UNFIT TO
WORK AS A SEAMAN."
CTI appealed the LA's decision with the NLRC arguing that the assessment of Sales'
physician should not be upheld because he is not the company-designated physician.
CTI emphasized that, despite recommendation of the company doctor, Sales refused to
undergo surgery, which amounted to a breach of duty.
On April 2, 2009, the NLRC reversed and set aside the decision of the LA. Contrary to
the findings of the LA, the NLRC held that there was no evidence of Sales' accident and
that the latter failed to elaborate the incidents of the accident that caused his medical
injury. Hence, there was no basis to apply the provisions of the CBA for purposes of
payment of disability benefits. The NLRC also held that the initial medical assessment
of Sales abroad and the MRI readings of the company-designated physician gave the
impression that his conditions of "degenerative change of the lumbar spine" was
internal to his body and not caused by an external incident, such as the accident that
Sales alleged. Finally, the NLRC held that while Sales' physician assessed him to be
https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/65532
2/7