5/28/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly vessel. LA Guerrero brushed off Constantino’s allegation of bad faith against the petitioners for not re-deploying him as it was unsubstantiated and cannot overcome Dr. Lim’s fit-to-work certification. LA Guerrero awarded Constantino sickness allowance for 120 days for failure of the petitioners to present proof that he had been paid. The labor arbiter likewise awarded him attorney’s fees because he was compelled to file a complaint to enforce his rights. Both parties appealed. Constantino insisted that he is entitled to permanent partial disability benefits based on Dr. Almeda’s assessment of his medical condition arrived at with candidness and sincerity compared with Dr. Lim’s fit-to-work pronouncement which was issued so that petitioners could avoid liability. The petitioners, on the other hand, disputed the award to Constantino of sickness allowance and attorney’s fees, presenting check vouchers as proof of payment[14] of the allowance. Also, they argued that Constantino was not entitled to attorney’s fees because he should not have filed the complaint in the first place. In its October 28, 2005 resolution,[15] the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), set aside the appealed decision and dismissed the complaint for lack of merit. It agreed with LA Guerrero’s opinion that Dr. Lim’s fit-to-work certification for Constantino should prevail over Dr. Almeda’s medical report which merely interpreted the initial diagnosis of Dr. Lim. It set aside the sickness allowance award to Constantino in view of the proof of payment presented by the petitioners. Constantino moved for reconsideration, but the NLRC denied the motion, leaving him no option but to file a petition for certiorari with the CA, charging the NLRC with grave abuse of discretion for dismissing the complaint. The CA Decision In its decision under review,[16] the CA partially granted the petition. It refused to give credit to the fit-to-work assessment issued to Constantino by Dr. Lim. The assessment, the CA stressed, was not based on Dr. Lim’s own findings but on the opinion of an orthopedic surgeon (or other specialist) that Constantino was already fit to work, but whose medical report was not even shown by the petitioners. It dismissed Dr. Lim’s medical report as “self-serving and biased in favor of the respondents,” citing an earlier ruling of this Court[17] in support of its opinion. The CA found the medical report of Dr. Almeda, Constantino’s chosen physician, more credible as it was based on his own personal assessment of Constantino’s ailment and he is more qualified than Dr. Lim, who is not a specialist in orthopedics. Further, the appellate court noted that even after Constantino was declared fit to work, he was still unable to work and neither was it shown that he was re-deployed or efforts were made by the petitioners to have him re-deployed. Additionally, it believed that Constantino’s failure to perform his work for 120 days is another indicator that Constantino suffered from permanent disability. The CA held that it cannot rely on the certification of fitness for work signed by Constantino to absolve petitioners from liability as it was in the nature of a quitclaim where it was not even shown that he received anything in signing the document. The elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/57526 3/9