5/28/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly Just the same, in several cases, cardiovascular disease, coronary artery disease, as well as other heart ailments were held to be compensable.[33] Likewise, petitioners failed to refute respondent’s allegations in his Position Paper that in the performance of his duties as Able Seaman, he inhaled, was exposed to, and came into direct contact with various injurious and harmful chemicals, dust, fumes/ emissions, and other irritant agents; that he performed strenuous tasks such as lifting, pulling, pushing and/or moving equipment and materials on board the ship; that he was constantly exposed to varying temperatures of extreme hot and cold as the ship crossed ocean boundaries; that he was exposed as well to harsh weather conditions; that in most instances, he was required to perform overtime work; and that the work of an Able Seaman is both physically and mentally stressful. It does not require much imagination to realize or conclude that these tasks could very well cause the illness that respondent, then already 47 years old, suffered from six months into his employment contract with petitioners. The following pronouncement in a recent case very well applies to respondent: x x x His constant exposure to hazards such as chemicals and the varying temperature, like the heat in the kitchen of the vessel and the coldness outside, coupled by stressful tasks in his employment caused, or at least aggravated, his illness. It is already recognized that any kind of work or labor produces stress and strain normally resulting in wear and tear of the human body.[34] Notably, it is “a matter of judicial notice that an overseas worker, having to ward off homesickness by reason of being physically separated from his family for the entire duration of his contract, bears a great degree of emotional strain while making an effort to perform his work well. The strain is even greater in the case of a seaman who is constantly subjected to the perils of the sea while at work abroad and away from his family.”[35] Assessment by company-designated physician The company-designated physician must arrive at a definite assessment of the seafarer’s fitness to work or permanent disability within the period of 120 or 240 days, pursuant to Article 192 (c)(1) of the Labor Code and Rule X, Section 2 of the AREC.[36] If he fails to do so and the seafarer’s medical condition remains unresolved, the latter shall be deemed totally and permanently disabled. Respondent was repatriated on September 18, 2005. He was further examined by the company-designated physician Dr. Cruz on September 21, 23 and 30, 2005; October 6, 2005; February 2, 13 and 17, 2006; March 6 and 20, 2006; and on April 19, 2006. And beginning from the February 2, 2006 medical report, respondent was diagnosed by Dr. Cruz with severe 3-vessel coronary artery disease, and was scheduled for coronary artery bypass surgery on February 24, 2006. After surgery, respondent continued his treatment with Dr. Cruz, who on the other hand continued to diagnose respondent with severe coronary artery disease even on respondent’s last consultation on April 19, elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/56669 9/14