3/31/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly labor complaint for total and permanent disability benefits, sickness allowance, medical benefits, damages and attorney's fees. On November 23, 2016, the Labor Arbiter rendered a Decision[14] granting Briones' claims for total permanent disability and sick wage benefits, damages and attorney's fees. In resolving the labor complaint in favor of Briones, the Labor Arbiter reasoned out that the disability provision in the POEA Standard Employment Contract (POEASEC) recognizes the seafarer's right to seek a second medical opinion and prerogative to consult a physician of his choice. The Labor Arbiter opined that while the POEA-SEC provides for the designation of a third doctor in case of difference between the company-designated doctor's assessment and that of the seafarer's doctor of choice, the provision, however, is merely directory and not mandatory. The fact that Briones initiated the complaint for permanent disability benefit based on her personal doctor's findings is sufficient notice to MSMI to exercise the option to refer the same to a third doctor. Finally, the Labor Arbiter viewed Dr. Magtira's Medical Report more complete and exhaustive than the certification issued by the company-designated doctor, which was merely concerned with the examination of the complaint for purposes of diagnosis and treatment rather than a determination of Briones' fitness to resume her work as a seafarer. On appeal, the NLRC reversed and set aside the Labor Arbiter's decision. In its Decision dated March 8, 2017, the NLRC pointed out that the ruling in Maersk Filipinas Crewing, Inc./Maersk Services Ltd., et al. v Mesina,[15] wherein it was ruled that referral to a third doctor opinion is merely directory and not mandatory, was superseded by the ruling in INC Shipmanagement Incorporated (now INC Navigation Co. Philippines, Inc.), et al., v. Rosales,[16] and reiterated in the subsequent case of Silagan v. Southfield Agencies, Inc., et al., [17] which described the nature of the referral to a third party doctor opinion as a mandatory procedure. It, thus, ruled that the failure of Briones to comply with the mandatory procedure makes her complaint susceptible to dismissal for being premature. In contrast to the Labor Arbiter's findings, the NLRC upheld the company-designated physician's findings as against Dr. Magtira's unfit to work certification. It took note of the medical treatment provided by the company-designated physician after her repatriation on September 24, 2015, and the MRI and series of physical therapy sessions undertaken by Briones until December 1, 2015, when her Lumbago was declared to have been resolved. This was after the result of the MRI was found to be unremarkable and the physical exercises required from Briones were done without complaints from her. Thus, the NLRC concluded that Dr. Magtira's medical opinion, which was: arrived at only after a single consultation, cannot override the assessment of the company-designated physician who had treated and monitored Briones' condition for months. Aggrieved, Briones elevated the Decision of the NLRC, dated March 8, 2017, to the CA via Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court. In a Decision[18] dated January 12, 2018, the CA granted the petition and nullified the decision of the NLRC, except with respect to the award of sickness allowance in favor of Briones. The CA held that while the seafarer's non-compliance with the conflict-resolution procedure results in the affirmance of the fit-to-work certification of the company-designated physician, the seafarer's compliance with such procedure, however, presupposes that the https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/66202 3/10