4/15/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly Respondents cannot also validly argue that the POEA-SEC takes precedence over the terms of the CBA, in that, death must be work-related in order to be compensable. The Court has already settled that, in the event that the clauses in the CBA provide for greater benefits to the seafarer, the same must prevail over the standard terms and benefits formulated by the POEA in its Standard Employment Contract inasmuch as a contract of labor is so impressed with public interest that the more beneficial conditions must be endeavored in favor of the laborer. This is in keeping with the avowed policy of the State to give maximum aid and full protection to labor as enshrined in Article XIII of the 1987 Constitution.[112] Thus, the CA ruled correctly when it held that petitioner is entitled to death benefits, transportation expenses and burial expenses. Petitioner is not entitled to insurance benefits under R.A. No. 10022 Section 23 of R.A. No. 10022 provides for the compulsory insurance coverage of migrant workers. It reads: Section 23. A New Section 37-A of Republic Act No. 8042, as a mended, is hereby added to read as follows: SEC. 37-A. Compulsory Insurance Coverage of Agency Hired workers. - In addition to the performance bond to be filed by the recruitment/manning agency under Section 10, each migrant worker deployed by a recruitment /manning agency shall be covered by a compulsory life insurance policy which shall be secured at no cost to the said worker. Such insurance policy shall be effective for the duration of the migrant worker's employment contract and shall cover, at the minimum: (a) Accidental death, with at least fifteen thousand United States dollars (US$15,000.00) survivor's benefit payable to the migrant worker's beneficiaries; Without question, respondents become liable for the payment of the compulsory life insurance benefit of US$15,000.00 only when the employee died of an accidental death. Inasmuch as the Court had already ruled that Manuel committed suicide, the CA correctly deleted the award of US$15,000.00 by way of life insurance in favor of the petitioner. Even assuming that respondents failed to procure a life insurance coverage for Manuel as mandated by R.A. No. 10022, such failure does not merit the automatic award of the aforementioned sum to the petitioner as the same pertains to the minimum of the life insurance policy coverage to be paid by the insurance company only to qualified beneficiaries and for such causes as specified therein, and is not a penalty or fine to be paid by the manning agency. Petitioner is entitled to overtime pay, owner's bonus, https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/66237 26/37