3/25/2021
E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly
xxx
"4.
The liabilities of the employer when the seaman
suffers injury or illness during the term of his
contract are as follows:
xxx
c.
The employer shall pay the seaman his basic wages
from the time he leaves the vessel for medical
treatment. After discharge from the vessel, the
seaman is entitled to one hundred percent (100%) of
his basic wages until he is declared fit to work or the
degree of permanent disability has been assessed by
the company-designated physician, but is [sic] no
case shall this period exceed one hundred twenty
(120) days. For this purpose, the seaman shall
submit himself to a post-employment medical
examination by the company-designated physician
within three working days upon his return, except
when he is physically incapacitated to do so, in which
case the written notice to the agency within the
same period is deemed as compliance x x x.
"5.
In case of permanent total or partial disability of the
seamen [sic] [during] the term of employment
caused by either injury or illness, the seamen [sic]
shall be compensated in accordance with the
schedule of benefits enumerated in Appendix 1 of
this Contract. Computation of his benefits arising
from an illness or disease shall be governed by the
rates and the rules of compensation applicable at the
time of [sic] the illness or disease was contracted."
The aforecited provisions of the POEA Standards [sic] Employment Contract
is clear and unmistakable that its literal meaning should be preserved.
Thus, the only question at which the liability of respondents is anchored is
whether complainant was really fit to work in his position as radio operator.
If this is so, it could mean that he is not entitled to disability compensation
which respondents vigorously disputed, citing in support the certification
made by Dra. Victoria Forendo [sic] Cayabyab, allegedly "the officially
accredited and designated physician of respondents, which is likewise,
accredited with the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration" where
it is stated that "Nothing [sic] his job description as a radio operator, Mr. de
Lara may be allowed to go back to work." (Annex D & E). Complainant on
the other hand disputes respondent's above posture contending that the
more persuasive and authentic evidence for purposes of deciding his fitness
or lack of fitness to work is the certificate issued by Ms. Naneth [sic]
Domingo-Reyes, MD, FPMA where it appears that after submitting himself to
https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/50003
2/16