Vergara v. Hammonia Maritime (2008): The 120 and 240 Days

In April 2000, a manning agency hired Jesus Vergara for its foreign principal to work as a pumpman on an ocean-going vessel for nine months. He was a member of a seafarers' union with a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with the principal.

In August 2000, while fixing a hydraulic valve on board, he began losing vision in his right eye. A doctor in a foreign port diagnosed bleeding in the eye. He was sent home on September 5, 2000. The company-designated physician confirmed the diagnosis and referred him to an eye specialist, who treated him with laser procedures and eye surgery between November 2000 and January 2001.

On January 31, 2001, he was declared fit to resume sea duty, and he signed a certificate of fitness for work in the company physician's presence. He then went to two doctors of his own choice. One said he was not fit to work as a pumpman. The other said he was fit to work but had a Grade X permanent partial disability.

He claimed disability and sickness benefits under the POEA Standard Employment Contract and the CBA. The Labor Arbiter ruled for him. The NLRC reversed and dismissed the complaint because he had been declared fit to work. The Court of Appeals dismissed his petition. He went to the Supreme Court, arguing that he should be considered permanently and totally disabled because the fit-to-work declaration came more than 120 days after his disability began.

Is a seafarer whose treatment lasted more than 120 days automatically entitled to permanent total disability benefits? Whose medical findings prevail when the seafarer's own doctors disagree with the company-designated physician?

The Supreme Court denied the petition.

Law and contract govern. The Court said "Entitlement to disability benefits by seamen on overseas work is a matter governed, not only by medical findings but, by law and by contract." The law is the Labor Code chapter on disability benefits, including the article that was then Article 192 and is today Article 198 [192], with Rule X of the rules implementing Book IV of the Labor Code. The contract is the POEA Standard Employment Contract and the CBA.

The provisions the Court read together. Article 192(c)(1), as quoted by the Court, deems total and permanent a "Temporary total disability lasting continuously for more than one hundred twenty days, except as otherwise provided in the Rules". Rule X, Section 2, as quoted, allows the income benefit beyond 120 days, but not beyond 240 days from onset, where the injury or sickness "still requires medical attendance beyond 120 days". Section 20(3) of the POEA contract, as quoted, gives the seafarer sickness allowance until he is declared fit to work or his permanent disability is assessed by the company-designated physician, "but in no case shall this period exceed one hundred twenty (120) days."

How the periods work. The Court explained that the seafarer must report to the company-designated physician within three days of arrival. During treatment, up to 120 days, he is on temporary total disability. "If the 120 days initial period is exceeded and no such declaration is made because the seafarer requires further medical attention, then the temporary total disability period may be extended up to a maximum of 240 days, subject to the right of the employer to declare within this period that a permanent partial or total disability already exists." He may also be declared fit to work at any time.

When disability becomes permanent. The Court held that "a temporary total disability only becomes permanent when so declared by the company physician within the periods he is allowed to do so, or upon the expiration of the maximum 240-day medical treatment period without a declaration of either fitness to work or the existence of a permanent disability." Here, the 120 days were exceeded, but the fit-to-work declaration came well within 240 days. So there was no disability to compensate.

The third doctor. Under the POEA contract and the CBA, the company-designated physician determines fitness or unfitness. If the seafarer's own doctor disagrees, a third doctor may be jointly agreed upon, whose decision is final and binding. The seafarer did not use this procedure, so the company physician's certification prevailed. He had also accepted the assessment and signed a certificate of fitness, and he questioned the company physician's competence only before the Supreme Court.

Crystal Shipping read in context. The seafarer relied on Crystal Shipping v. Natividad (2005), which said that being unable to work for more than 120 days is permanent total disability. The Court said that statement "cannot, however, be simply lifted and applied as a general rule for all cases in all contexts." In Crystal Shipping, the disability had gone beyond 240 days without a fit-to-work declaration.

A seafarer's temporary total disability during treatment lasts up to 120 days, extendable up to 240 days when further medical attention is needed; it becomes permanent only when the company-designated physician so declares within those periods, or when 240 days pass without a declaration of fitness or of permanent disability; and a disagreement between the company physician and the seafarer's doctor is settled by a jointly chosen third doctor.

Vergara is the starting point of the 120-day and 240-day rules for seafarer disability claims. It ended the reading of Crystal Shipping as a simple 120-day count. Later, in Elburg Shipmanagement v. Quiogue (2015), the Court summed up the rules and said the extension to 240 days applies only when the company-designated physician has a sufficient justification, which the employer must prove. Later rulings may refine these rules further.

This page describes the contract terms only as the Court quoted them in 2008. It does not compute disability benefits or state benefit amounts, which depend on the contract, the CBA and the facts of each case.

Here is a made-up illustration, with invented names. Rommel, a seafarer, is repatriated for a back injury. The company-designated physician records on day 100 that he needs more therapy, and on day 200 declares him fit to work. His own doctor disagrees. Under the reasoning in Vergara, a fit-to-work declaration within the extended period generally stands unless the disagreement is referred to a jointly chosen third doctor. Whether the extension was justified would be judged today under the rules set out in Elburg.

For a case of your own, see where to find legal help.