6/7/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly with a permanent disability since he can no longer perform his work which he is previously engaged in. (Emphasis supplied) Petitioner asked respondents for payment of his disability benefits, but respondents refused. Efforts toward an amicable settlement was unsuccessful. Hence, on September 13, 2012, petitioner filed a complaint[22] before the Labor Arbiter, praying that his disability be declared as work-related, total and permanent, and that respondents be declared solidarity liable to pay him permanent total disability benefit, moral and exemplary damages and attorney's fees. In their Position Paper,[23] respondents stated that in view of the medical report of their accredited doctor dated September 11, 2012 stating that petitioner can eventually resume his sea duties, they declined petitioner's claim for permanent total disability benefit. The Labor Arbiter's Ruling In a Decision[24] dated November 22, 2013, the Labor Arbiter held that petitioner was permanently and totally disabled and that he could no longer resume sea duty. The Labor Arbiter cited the medical report dated September 11, 2012 of the companydesignated physician, which stated that petitioner did not pass the functional capacity test done according to petitioner's job description and he should continue flexibility and strength exercises through his physiatrist. The Labor Arbiter found as unmeritorious respondent's contention that petitioner's resumption of work at sea is expected, because petitioner did not pass the functional capacity test and was required to continue physical therapy, and he was still suffering from disability and has not returned to his previous job for more than 120 days. The Labor Arbiter cited Crystal Shipping, Inc. v. Natividad,[25] which held that permanent disability is the inability of a worker to perform his job for more than 120 days, regardless of whether or not he loses the use of any part of his body. The Labor Arbiter stated that while the company-designated physicians did not state in categorical terms that petitioner was permanently disabled, they did not also state that he was already fit to work with disability Grade 8 and petitioner has not returned to his previous job for more than 120 days. The Labor Arbiter held that the findings of the company-designated physicians is not binding on the Labor Arbiter or the courts for the said reports would have to be evaluated on their inherent merit. The Labor Arbiter ruled that petitioner's employment was covered by the ITF Uniform "TCC" Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), and petitioner is entitled to disability compensation under Section 21 (a) and (b) thereof in the amount of US$156,816.00. The dispositive portion of the Decision reads: WHEREFORE, a Decision is hereby rendered ordering Respondents Crossworld Marine Services, Inc. and Golden Union Shipping Company, S.A. to jointly and severally pay complainant Eugenio M. Gomez permanent disability benefit Grade 1, in the amount of US$156,816 or its peso elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/63243 4/17