4/14/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly assessment different from that made by the company-designated physician. This outcome, which accorded with the procedure expressly set in the POEASEC, was unavoidable for him, for, as well explained in Hernandez v. Magsaysay Maritime Corporation: Under Section 20 (A) (3) of the 2010 POEA-SEC, "[it] a doctor appointed by the seafarer disagrees with the assessment, a third doctor may be agreed jointly between the Employer and the seafarer. The third doctor's decision shall be final and binding on both parties." The provision refers to the declaration of fitness to work or the degree of disability. It presupposes that the company-designated physician came up with a valid, final and definite assessment as to the seafarer's fitness or unfitness to work before the expiration of the 120-day or 240-day period. The company can insist on its disability rating even against a contrary opinion by another doctor, unless the seafarer signifies his intent to submit the disputed assessment to a third physician. The duty to secure the opinion of a third doctor belongs to the employee asking for disability benefits. He must actively or expressly request for it. (Underscoring and emphasis in the original) Moreover, the failure of the respondent to signify the intent to submit himself to the third physician was a direct contravention of the terms and conditions of his contract with the petitioners. Such contravention disauthorized the making of the claim for the benefits. On the basis of the foregoing, the respondent's claim for disability benefits predicated on his physician's assessment would be bereft of basis considering that his non-compliance with the procedure expressly provided by law led to the fit-to-work assessment by the company-designated physician becoming the controlling and only reliable medical assessment.[31] (Additional emphasis supplied; citations omitted) Hence, on the basis of the medical assessment issued by the company-designated physicians, Solacito should be considered able and fit to work, and therefore not entitled to any disability benefit — not even a partial disability benefit. Again, the assessment of the company-designated physicians is already binding on Solacito given his premature filing of the complaint and his failure to observe the procedure under Section 30(B)(3) of the POEA-SEC. There is, therefore, no basis to ascribe a disability rating to Solacito. Moreover, as explained by the Court in Caredo v. Maine Marine Philippines, Inc.,[32] the determination of the fitness of a seafarer for sea duty is the province of the company-designated physician.[33] It is therefore beyond the courts' authority, nay expertise, to prescribe a disability rating to Solacito in contravention of the valid and binding findings of the company-designated physicians. The records also bear that the company-designated physicians issued said final and definitive medical assessment within 240 days. Particularly, the Medical Report dated January 7, 2010 was issued after 188 days from his medical repatriation. Even the https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/66216 10/14