RENATO T. TALIDANO, PETITIONER, VS. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, RICKMERS MARINE AGENCY PHILIPPINES, INC./ GLOBAL MANAGEMENT LIMITED/ GEORGE C. GUERRERO, RESPONDENTS.

Talidano versus National Labor Relations Commission

The Case

This is a petition for certiorari brought by Renato T. Talidano, a seafarer engaged as an engine fitter, against the National Labor Relations Commission, the Rickmers Marine Agency Philippines, the foreign principal Global Management Limited, and George C. Guerrero. Talidano asks the Supreme Court to annul the rulings of the labor tribunals that denied his claim for disability benefits, sickness allowance, and damages after he was diagnosed with diabetes mellitus during a brief deployment aboard an ocean-going vessel. The case matters because it is the Court's clean statement of the two elements of compensability for a seafarer's illness, and of why diabetes mellitus, a metabolic and familial disease, is not presumed to arise out of the work of a seaman who served less than a month at sea.

Procedural History

Talidano filed a complaint before the Labor Arbiter for non-payment of disability benefits, sickness allowance, and damages. The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint for lack of merit, finding that the illness was not work-related. Talidano appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission, which affirmed the Labor Arbiter's decision in January 2011 and later denied his motion for reconsideration. Talidano then went up to the Supreme Court by a petition for certiorari under Rule 65, alleging grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of the Commission.

Facts

In March 2009, Talidano was hired as an engine fitter to serve aboard the vessel Norasia Vaparaiso for seven months at a monthly salary of 625 dollars, with the usual benefits of fixed overtime pay and vacation leave pay. He joined the vessel in April 2009. After about three weeks on board, he felt physical discomfort and body weakness, accompanied by blurring of vision.

When the vessel reached Argentina in May 2009, he was allowed to consult a doctor, who diagnosed him with ketosis secondary to diabetes mellitus. He was confined in a hospital for five days, then signed off from the vessel and repatriated to the Philippines. Upon arrival, the company-designated physician examined him and declared his ailment not work-related. His claim for sickness allowance and reimbursement of medical expenses was denied by the local agency, although sickness allowance had been paid to him until the condition was so declared.

Talidano consulted other physicians. An audiogram suggested hearing loss, and an occupational health expert issued a medical certificate stating that his diabetes mellitus was aggravated by exposure to physical and emotional stress at work and that, because of the complication on his vision, he could not be expected to return to his previous employment as a seafarer and ship fitter. The employer maintained that his stint was only twenty-nine days, that the illness was not shown to be caused by his employment, and that he never moved for the appointment of a third doctor.

Issues

• Whether or not the National Labor Relations Commission committed grave abuse of discretion in finding that Talidano's illness was not work-related.
• Whether or not Talidano is entitled to total and permanent disability benefits despite the finding that his diabetes mellitus was not work-related.

Applicable Provisions

Section 20, paragraph B, of the 2000 Amended Standard Terms and Conditions Governing the Employment of Filipino Seafarers on Board Ocean-Going Vessels provides:

In case of permanent total or partial disability of the seafarer caused by either injury or illness the seafarer shall be compensated in accordance with the schedule of benefits enumerated in Section 32 of this Contract. Computation of his benefits arising from an illness or disease shall be governed by the rates and the rules of compensation applicable at the time the illness or disease was contracted.

This is the contractual source of the two elements of compensability: the illness must be work-related, and it must have existed during the term of the employment contract.

Section 32-A of the same Standard Terms and Conditions provides:

For an occupational disease and the resulting disability or death to be compensable, all of the following conditions must be satisfied: 1) The seafarer's work must involve the risks described herein; 2) The disease was contracted as a result of the seafarer's exposure to the described risks; 3) The disease was contracted within a period of exposure and under such other factors necessary to contract it; and 4) There was no notorious negligence on the part of the seafarer.

Talidano invoked this provision to argue that even if diabetes mellitus is not a listed occupational disease, his illness satisfies these conditions and is therefore compensable.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that the Commission did not commit grave abuse of discretion. Entitlement to disability benefits is governed not only by medical findings but also by law and by contract, and the Court found that Talidano failed to prove that his ailment was work-related and was acquired during his less than a month of sea deployment. He adduced no evidence that his work exposed him to harmful substances or chemicals suspected to increase the risk of acquiring diabetes. The Court explained that diabetes mellitus develops over a considerable period of time and is a metabolic and familial disease to which one is predisposed by heredity, obesity, or old age. In the absence of substantial evidence, his working conditions cannot be assumed to have increased the risk of contracting the disease.

The Court also rejected reliance on the pre-employment medical examination. Such an examination may show enough for the vessel interests to decide whether a seafarer is fit for overseas employment, but it cannot be relied upon to inform them of the seafarer's true state of health, and it could not have divulged the illness because at that time the condition was not yet critical. Disability arising from a pre-existing illness is not compensable.

On the second issue, the Court held that Talidano was not entitled to total and permanent disability benefits. The Standard Terms and Conditions provide that the company-designated physician determines the seafarer's fitness or unfitness for work, and that if the seafarer's own doctor makes a contrary finding, the opinion of a third doctor may be agreed jointly between the employer and the seafarer as final and binding on both. Talidano did not avail of this procedure, so the Court was left without choice but to uphold the certification of the company-designated physician that the illness is not work-related. The Court acknowledged that the beneficent provisions of the Standard Employment Contract are liberally construed in favor of Filipino seafarers, but found that the factual circumstances did not justify the grant of the benefits prayed for.

Doctrine

For a seafarer's injury or illness to be compensable, two elements must concur: first, the injury or illness must be work-related; and second, the work-related injury or illness must have existed during the term of the seafarer's employment contract. These elements flow from Section 20, paragraph B, of the Standard Terms and Conditions.

Where the illness is not a listed occupational disease, the seafarer may still recover by satisfying all four conditions of Section 32-A: that the work involved the risks described, that the disease was contracted as a result of exposure to those risks, that it was contracted within a period of exposure and under the other necessary factors, and that there was no notorious negligence on his part.

Diabetes mellitus is not presumed work-related. It is a metabolic and familial disease that develops over a considerable period of time and is affected by factors outside the working environment, such as heredity, obesity, and old age. A pre-employment medical examination does not prove that the illness was acquired during employment, and disability arising from a pre-existing illness is not compensable.

Finally, the company-designated physician's assessment governs unless the seafarer's doctor makes a contrary finding and the parties jointly agree on a third doctor whose opinion is final and binding. A seafarer who skips this procedure leaves the Court no choice but to uphold the company-designated physician's certification.

Disposition

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, upholding the denial of Talidano's claims for disability benefits, sickness allowance, and damages.

Remember This

Memorize the two elements of seafarer compensability: the illness must be work-related, and it must have existed during the term of the employment contract. Examiners use this case to test the Section 32-A conditions for non-listed occupational diseases, the non-compensability of diabetes mellitus and pre-existing illness, and the binding effect of the company-designated physician's finding when no third doctor is jointly agreed upon.