4/29/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly For this purpose, the seafarer shall submit himself to a post-employment medical examination by a company-designated physician within three working days upon his return except when he is physically incapacitated to do so, in which case, a written notice to the agency within the same period is deemed as compliance. Failure of the seafarer to comply with the mandatory reporting requirement shall result in his forfeiture of the right to claim the above benefits. If 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. (Emphases and underscoring supplied) Based on the aforequoted provision, it is crystal clear that the determination by the company-designated physician pertains only to the entitlement of the seafarer to sickness allowance and nothing more. Moreover, the said provision recognizes the right of a seafarer to seek a second medical opinion and the prerogative to consult a physician of his choice. In fact, it allows a third opinion in case the seafarer’s doctor disagrees with the assessment of the company-designated physician. Therefore, the provision should not be construed that it is only the company-designated physician who could assess the condition and declare the disability of seamen. The provision does not serve as a limitation but rather a guarantee of protection to overseas workers. After all, the POEA-SEC is designed primarily for the protection and benefit of Filipino seamen in the pursuit of their employment on board ocean-going vessels. Its provisions must, therefore, be construed and applied fairly, reasonably and liberally in their favor. Only then can its beneficent provisions be fully carried into effect.[46] In fine, the Court holds that the CA correctly found that the NLRC committed no grave abuse of discretion in ordering payment of disability benefits to Laurel. WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. SO ORDERED. Velasco, Jr., Peralta, Abad, and Leonen, JJ., concur. [1] Annex “A” of Petition, rollo, pp. 60-68. Penned by Associate Justice Mario L. Guarina III with Associate Justice Apolinario D. Bruselas, Jr. and Associate Justice Rodil V. Zalameda, concurring. [2] Annex “C” of Petition, id. at 94. [3] Records, pp. 56-61. elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/55780 12/15