[av_one_full first min_height=” vertical_alignment=” space=” custom_margin=” margin=’0px’ padding=’0px’ border=” border_color=” radius=’0px’ background_color=” src=” background_position=’top left’ background_repeat=’no-repeat’ animation=”]
[av_heading heading=’The case of the missing doctor’s declaration’ tag=’h3′ style=’blockquote modern-quote’ size=” subheading_active=’subheading_below’ subheading_size=’15’ padding=’10’ color=” custom_font=”]
BY DENNIS R. GORECHO
[/av_heading]
[av_textblock size=” font_color=” color=”]
THE COMPANY-designated physician is duty-bound to timely issue to a repatriated sick or injured seafarer a declaration/ certification on his fitness for sea-service or a final disability assessment. Failure to do so would give rise to the conclusion that the seafarer’s disability is total and permanent.
In the case of Dario A. Carcedo (substituted by his wife Priscilla Carcedo) vs Maine Marine Philippines, Inc. and/or Ma. Corazon Geuse-Songcuya (G.R. No. 203804, April 15, 2015), Carcedo, the seafarer, was medically repatriated due to a wounded foot.
After his right big toe was amputated, the company-designated doctor recommended an impediment disability grading of eight percent loss of the toe.
Unfortunately, the suffering of Carcedo did not end as he again underwent medical procedure on his foot. He then sued for total and permanent disability benefits, sickness allowance and other damages. In the meanwhile, a doctor of his choice again operated of him and removed a second toe.
The arbiter supported the company-designated doctor’s findings while the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), on appeal, awarded Carcedo full disability benefits. The Court of Appeals, however, upheld the eight percent disability grading made by the company-designated physician in accordance with the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA).
Before the Supreme Court, Carcedo’s position was sustained and he was awarded the full disability compensation.
The Supreme Court made it clear that the seafarer’s right to disability benefits is governed not only by the CBA and the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration – Standard Employment contract entered into by the parties, but also the provisions on disability of the Labor Code and the Amended Rules on Employee Compensation (AREC) implementing Title II, Book Code concept of permanent total disability applies to seafarers whereby it is not the injury which is compensated in a disability compensation matter, but rather the incapacity to work resulting in the impairment of one’s earning capacity.
The High Court pointed out that the declaration/ certification of the company-designated physician as to (a) the fitness of the seafarer to engage in sea duty or (b) his final disability assessment, during the 120-day or 240-day treatment period allows the employer to determine whether the seafarer is fit for sea duty or permanently disabled and the degree of such disability.
The absence of such declaration/ certification transforms the temporary total disability status of the seafarer to permanent total disability, regardless of the disability grade.
Thus, citing the case C.F. Sharp Management vs Joel D. Taok (G.R. No. 193679, July 18, 2012), a seafarer may sue for total and permanent disability benefits if, among others, (1) the company-designated physician failed to issue said declaration even after lapse of the 120-day period and there is no indication that further medical treatment would address his temporary total disability hence, justify an extension of the period to 240 days, and (2) 240 days had lapsed without any certification being issued by the company-designated physician.
The Supreme Court found the eight percent disability grading assessment of the company-designated physician to be merely an interim one and not final since Carcedo continued with his medical treatments beyond the 120-day period and the extended temporary disability period of after 120-day period but less than 240 days. No definitive impediment rating of Carcedo’s disability was ever given.
In the same token, the said eight percent disability grading assessment did not include a certification of the seafarer’s fitness for sea duty, which ought to be the job of the company-designated physician.
***
Atty. Dennis R. Gorecho is a graduate of the University of the Philippines – College of Law (1998) and is currently a junior partner of Sapalo Velez Bundang Bulilan (SVBB) law offices. He heads the seafarers’ division.
He is a speaker on nationwide paralegal seminars on seafarers’ rights. He is presently the executive vice president of the Maritime Law Association of the Philippines (MARLAW), and an active member of the Maritime Forum Inc., the National Seafarers Day (NSD) committee and International Pro Bono Network.
The SVBB law works hand in hand with various seafarers welfare organizations such as the Apostleship of the Seas (AOS) Philippines, Luneta Seafarers Welfare Foundation (LUSWELF), International Seafarers Welfare Assistance Network (ISWAN) and United Filipino Seafarers (UFS).
Atty. Gorecho is a legal commentator on maritime issues on print, radio and TV. He also co-anchors the radio program Bantay OCW Usapang Marino aired over Radio Inquirer/ DZIQ every Wednesday, 10:30a.m. to 12 noon.
For comments, please send email to info@sapalovelez.com or call 09175025808/ 09088665786./PN
[/av_textblock]
[/av_one_full]
