6/5/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly xxxx WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant petition is hereby GRANTED. The decision of the NLRC is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE and the decision of the Labor Arbiter is REINSTATED. And the complaint is hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit.[9] 4. On motion for reconsideration, the appellate court stood pat on its ruling and denied petitioner's claim for disability benefit: The instant case arose from the complaint of [petitioner] for disability benefits granted under the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC) for seamen. Records show that [petitioner] was last deployed for the period from 07 July 2001 until 12 April 2002 when [petitioner] disembarked after completion of contract. [Petitioner] underwent another medical examination on July 2002, for possible re-deployment but was declared "unfit to work." From the above facts it is clear that [petitioner] was no longer under any POEA-SEC, a requirement for one to enjoy the disability benefits provided therein. Seafarers are contractual employees. Their employment is governed by the contracts they sign every time they are re[-]hired and their employment is terminated when the contract expires. Their employment is contractually fixed for a certain period of time. They fall under the exception of Article 280 whose employment has been fixed for a specific project or undertaking the completion or termination of which has been determined at the time of engagement of the employee or where the work or services to be performed is seasonal in nature and the employment is for the duration of the season. When [petitioner] disembarked, it was because of the completion of his contract or his contract had ended. And he had no complaints whatsoever. When [petitioner] was found to be unfit to work, he was no longer a subject of any POEA Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC) for which disability benefits is a part of and of which [petitioner] is claiming to be entitled to. For being not covered by a POEA-SEC, [petitioner] cannot make any claim based on the POEA-SEC. Accordingly, the Motion for Reconsideration is hereby DENIED for lack of merit.[10] Hence, this appeal by certiorari of petitioner positing reversible error in the appellate elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/60102 6/15