origin. Considering the conflicting findings of the NLRC, the CA and the Labor Arbiter, we are impelled to resolve the factual issues in this case along with the legal ones.15[15]   Section 20 of the Standard Terms and Conditions Governing the Employment of Filipino Seafarers On-Board Ocean-Going Vessels states:   A.   COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS FOR DEATH 1. In case of death of the seafarer during the term of his contact, the employer shall pay his beneficiaries the Philippine currency equivalent to the amount of Fifty Thousand US Dollars (US$50,000) and an additional amount of Seven Thousand US Dollars (US$7,000) to each child under the age of twenty-one (21) but not exceeding four children, at the exchange rate prevailing during the time of payment. (Emphasis supplied)     Thus, as we declared in Gau Sheng Phils., Inc. v. Joaquin, Hermogenes v. Oseo Shipping Services, Inc., Prudential Shipping and Management Corporation v. Sta. Rita, Klaveness Maritime Agency, Inc. v. Beneficiaries of Allas, in order to avail of death benefits, the death of the employee should occur during the effectivity of the employment contract.16[16] For emphasis, we reiterate that the death of a seaman during the term of employment makes the employer liable to his heirs for death compensation benefits, but 15 [15]Prudential Shipping and Management Corporation v. Sta. Rita, G.R. No. 166580, February 8, 2007, 515 SCRA 157, 167. See also White Diamond Trading Corporation v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 186019, March 29, 2010. 16 [16] Estate of Posedio Ortega v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 175005, April 30, 2008, 553 SCRA 649, 655-656.