6/7/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly "[W]e awarded benefits to the heirs of the seafarer therein who worked as radioman on board a vessel; and who, after ten months from his latest deployment, suffered from bouts of coughing and shortness of breath, necessitating open heart surgery. We found in said case that the seafarer's work exposed him to different climates and unpredictable weather, which could trigger a heart attack or heart failure. We likewise ruled in said case that the seafarer had served the contract for a significantly long amount of time, and that his employment had contributed, even to a small degree, to the development and exacerbation of the disease."[25] [Emphasis supplied] Although the employer is not the insurer of the health of his employees, he takes them as he finds them and assumes the risk of liability. The quantum of evidence required in labor cases to determine the liability of an employer for the illness suffered by the employee under the POEA-SEC is not proof beyond reasonable doubt but mere substantial evidence, xxx.[26] All told, petitioner having established through substantial evidence that his illness was aggravated by his work condition, and hence, compensable, no grave abuse of discretion can be imputed against the NLRC in upholding the Labor Arbiter's grant of disability benefits. For reasons herein detailed, the Court finds that the decision of the NLRC is devoid of capriciousness or whimsicality. WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is GRANTED. The assailed Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals are hereby REVERSED. The decision of the Labor Arbiter as modified by the decision of the National Labor Relations Commission, granting petitioner permanent disability benefits and attorney's fees in the sum equivalent to 10% of the award, is hereby REINSTATED. SO ORDERED. Velasco, Jr., (Chairperson), Peralta, Reyes, and Jardeleza, JJ., concur. March 9, 2016 N O T I C E OF J U D G M E N T Sirs/Mesdames: Please take notice that on ___February 24, 2016___ a Decision, copy attached hereto, was rendered by the Supreme Court in the above-entitled case, the original of which was received by this Office on March 9, 2016 at 10:48 a.m. elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/61708 7/9