G.R. No. 216795 , April 1, 2019
Maersk-Filipinas Crewing Inc. and A.P. Moller A/S, Petitioners, vs. Edgar S. Alferos, Respondent.

FACTS

Petitioners employed respondent Edgar Alferos as an Able Seaman. On December 20, 2012, while on board, he experienced severe lower back and abdominal pain with difficulty urinating. After initial treatment in Dubai, his condition persisted, leading to his medical repatriation on January 12, 2013. The company-designated physicians diagnosed him with prostatitis, ruled out urolithiasis, and treated him accordingly. On March 5, 2013, after a series of evaluations, the company physician declared Alferos fit to resume sea duties, and he signed a “Certificate of Fitness to Work.”
Dissatisfied, Alferos sought a second opinion from his own doctors without notifying the petitioners of his intent to do so. His chosen physicians diagnosed him with nephrolithiasis, diabetic nephropathy, and other conditions, ultimately declaring him unfit for sea duty. Relying on this assessment, Alferos filed a complaint for permanent total disability benefits before the Labor Arbiter, which was granted. The NLRC affirmed the award. The Court of Appeals dismissed the petitioners’ certiorari petition, upholding the NLRC’s decision.

ISSUE

Whether the seafarer’s claim for disability benefits, based solely on the assessment of his personal physician and filed without first invoking the third-doctor referral provision under the POEA-SEC, is valid and premature.

RULING

The Supreme Court REVERSED the Court of Appeals and DISMISSED the seafarer’s claim. The Court held that the assessment of the company-designated physician is prima facie controlling in determining a seafarer’s disability claim. The POEA-SEC provides a specific conflict-resolution mechanism: if the seafarer disagrees with the company doctor’s assessment, he must signify his intent to submit the dispute to a third physician jointly agreed upon by the parties. This procedure is mandatory.
In this case, Alferos completely bypassed this procedure. He unilaterally consulted his own doctors and immediately filed a claim based on their contrary findings without first notifying the petitioners of the conflict to trigger the third-doctor referral. By doing so, he violated the terms of the POEA-SEC. His claim was therefore premature and without legal basis. The law requires the seafarer to take positive action to challenge the company assessment through the prescribed mechanism. His failure to comply rendered the conflicting assessment from his personal physician inconsequential, leaving the fit-to-work declaration by the company-designated physician as the valid and binding evaluation. Consequently, no disability benefits could be awarded.