Case Summary (G.R. No. 208093)
Applicable Law
The decision is based on the 1987 Philippine Constitution alongside relevant provisions from the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) Standard Employment Contract and Labor Code.
Employment Contract and Medical Treatment
Respondent was employed as a Chief Officer under a contract approved by the POEA, with a total monthly salary of US$2,100. Upon reporting for duty, he experienced severe pain in his right foot, which was diagnosed as sciatic neuralgia requiring treatment, leading to his repatriation for further medical care.
Medical Findings
Upon his repatriation, respondent underwent further medical examinations, revealing a large disc herniation at the L5-S1 level with nerve root compression, necessitating physical therapy and potentially surgical intervention.
Legal Complaints and Claims
Respondent filed a complaint against petitioners for failing to provide adequate medical treatment, claiming sickness wages and disability benefits after incurring significant medical expenses. He asserted that petitioners acted with bad faith in denying continued treatment and payment.
Labor Arbiter's Ruling
The Labor Arbiter dismissed respondent's claims stating that petitioners had complied with their obligations, including declaring respondent fit for work, and deemed the Receipt and Quitclaim signed by respondent valid evidence of payment.
NLRC Decision
The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed the Labor Arbiter's decision, stating that the petitioners had not fully complied with their obligation to provide continuous medical treatment. The NLRC ordered petitioners to pay sickness wages and reimbursement of medical expenses, awarding a net amount of US$3,790 after deducting prior payments.
Court of Appeals Confirmation
The Court of Appeals upheld the NLRC's decision with modifications, reiterating that petitioners were responsible for covering the cost of sickness wages for 120 days, reflecting the compulsory entitlements under the Standard Employment Contract.
Arguments and Rulings on Payment Claims
Petitioners argued against the presence of ongoing financial obligations, claiming prior cash advances. However, evidence was found contradicting this, as the vouchers lacked formal documentation. The court upheld that the petitioners had an obligation to provide medical treatment and wage compensation.
Validity of the Qui
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 208093)
Case Overview
- This case involves a petition for review on certiorari filed by Varorient Shipping Co., Inc. and Aria Maritime Co., Ltd. against Gil A. Flores.
- The petition seeks to set aside the Decision of the Court of Appeals dated February 28, 2003, which modified the Decision and Resolution of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) regarding Flores's claims for sickness wages and medical expenses.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the NLRC’s decision to grant Flores certain monetary awards but dismissed other claims for lack of merit.
Background Facts
- On April 7, 1997, Gil A. Flores was employed by Varorient Shipping Co., Inc. for the position of Chief Officer on the M/V Aria under a contract approved by the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA).
- His employment contract stipulated a basic monthly salary of US$1,200.00, along with overtime pay and allowances, totaling US$2,100.00 monthly.
- Flores was deployed on April 16, 1997, and later experienced severe pain in his right foot, diagnosed as "sciatic neuralgia" requiring medical attention in Cameroon.
Medical Treatment and Repatriation
- Flores received treatment for three days and was subsequently declared unfit to work, recommended for repatriation to the Philippines for further treatment.
- Upon returning, he underwent a CT scan revealing a large disc herniation at the L5-S1 level and was advised to undergo physical therapy and potential surgery.
- He sought continued medical assistance from his employer, which was allegedly denied, leading him to seek treatment independently.