Compulsory insurance coverage of a deceased OFW

The compulsory insurance coverage  for overseas Filipino workers (OFWs), including seafarers, was  primarily designed for the protection of the interests and welfare of the worker  and their families.

Under Section 37–A of R.A. No. 8042, as amended by R.A. No. 10022, otherwise known as “Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995,” states that each migrant worker, including seafarers,  deployed by a recruitment or manning agency shall be covered by a compulsory insurance policy which shall be secured at no cost to the said worker, which shall remain valid during the duration of the employment and shall cover (1) accidental death, (2) natural death, (3) permanent total disablement, (4) repatriation cost, (5) subsistence allowance, (6) money claims, (7) compassionate visit, (8) medical evacuation, and (9) medical repatriation.

With respect to an OFW’s untimely  death, the minimum insurance benefits payable to   his beneficiaries shall include  (a) at least Fifteen Thousand United States Dollars (US$15,000.00)  for  accidental death  or (b) at least Ten Thousand United States Dollars (US$10,000.00)  for natural death.

The insurance provider shall likewise arrange and pay for the repatriation of the worker’s remains and belongings.

The insurance provider shall also render any assistance necessary in the transport, including but not limited to locating a local and licensed funeral home, mortuary or direct disposition facility to prepare the body for transport, completing all documentations, obtaining legal clearances, procuring consular services, providing death certificates, purchasing the minimally necessary casket or air transport container, as well as transporting the remains including retrieval from site of death and delivery to the receiving funeral home and back to the residence of the worker in the Philippines or to any place in the Philippines in accordance with the worker’s will, if there is any.

The extent of the said benefits shall be regardless of the cost, the primary test of compliance being the complete repatriation of the worker’s  remains  and his personal belongings.

Under the law, any claim arising from accidental death, natural death or permanent total disablement shall be paid without the necessity of proving fault or negligence of any kind on the part of the  migrant worker.

In the case of work-related death of the seafarer, during the term of his POEA-approved contract,  the employer shall pay his beneficiaries the Philippine Currency equivalent to the amount of Fifty Thousand US dollars (US$50,000) and an additional amount of Seven Thousand US dollars (US$7,000) to each child under the age of 21 years old  but not exceeding four (4) children.  The amount usually is higher if the death is covered by a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA).

The POEA contract defined "work-related injury" as "injury(ies) resulting in disability or death arising out of and in the course of employment" and "work-related illness" as "any sickness resulting to disability or death as a result of an occupational disease listed under Section 32-A of the contract.

The insurer must pay the seafarer’s beneficiaries  initially the amount of US$15,000.00 for accidental death or US$10,000.00 for natural death  during the contract in the event that there is a legal issue whether or not  the nature of  the death is work-related, such as in cases of suicide, since   there is no necessity of proving fault or negligence of any kind on the part of the  seafarer.

However, Migrante Hongkong  is campaigning against the implementation of the  OFW compulsory insurance. . They noted that HongKong  employers are already required by law to get insurance for their domestic workers. If they don’t get one, and something happens to their worker, employers will be liable and must make sure that they will be responsible for the expenses.

Migrante argues that the new mandatory insurance order will just add to the list of expenses that employers are made to pay for and will merely increase friction between the employer and worker, and might lead to non-rehiring.

 
(Atty. Gorecho heads the seafarers’ division of the  Sapalo Velez Bundang Bulilan  law offices. For comments, email info@sapalovelez.com, or call 09175025808 or 09088665786)

Beneficiaries of seafarer’s death compensation

The legal battle for death compensation of the deceased seafarer, in some instances, becomes a  “telenovela” case due to confusion as to the rightful recipients of the death benefits.

Under an employment contract duly approved by the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA), in the case of work-related death of the seafarer, during the term of his contract,  the employer shall pay his beneficiaries the Philippine Currency equivalent to the amount of Fifty Thousand US dollars (US$50,000) and an additional amount of Seven Thousand US dollars (US$7,000) to each child under the age of twenty-one (21) but not exceeding four (4) children, at the exchange rate prevailing during the time of payment. The amount usually is higher if the death is covered by a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA).

The confusion arise since the terms 'allottee' and 'beneficiary' were  undefined in the previous POEA employment contracts.

Under the current contract, the 'allottee' is the person designated by the seafarer as the recipient of his or her salary allotment.

On the other hand, the beneficiary is the person(s) to whom the death compensation and other benefits are paid and is based on the Philippine law on succession. Thus, not all allottees are automatically considered as beneficiaries.

Simply stated, the right of the allottee, as the terms suggest, is limited to the allotment of the seafarer which is equivalent to at least 80% of his or her monthly basic salary.

Legal or intestate succession takes place if a person dies without a will. And in the absence of heirs instituted in a will, the law vests the inheritance, in the legitimate and illegitimate relatives of the deceased, in the surviving spouse, and in the State in accordance with the rules set forth in the New Civil Code (NCC), Articles 960 and 961.

The law on rules on legal or intestate succession provides that in every inheritance, the relative nearest in degree excludes the more distant ones and that the succession to property by heirs pertains first to the direct descending line (Articles 962 and 978). 

Thus, if a seafarer's mother is his allottee and he dies survived by his wife and one child, the death compensation is paid to the wife and child and not to the mother, in accordance with the Philippine law on succession.

If a widow/ widower  and legitimate children are left, the surviving spouse  is entitled to the same share as that of each of the children.

When the widow/ widower  survives with legitimate parents, the surviving spouse shall be entitled to one-half of the death benefits, and the legitimate parents to the other half. 

If a widow/widower survives with illegitimate children, she/he  shall be entitled to one-half of the death  benefits, and the illegitimate children  to the other half. 

            An illegitimate child shall receive a share equivalent to half of the legitimate child's share. 

If legitimate parents, the surviving spouse, and illegitimate children are left, the parents  shall be entitled to one-half of the death benefits, and the other half shall be divided between the surviving spouse and the illegitimate children so that such widow  shall have one-fourth of the death benefits, and the illegitimate children the other fourth. 

An adopted child is entitled   in the same manner as a legitimate child.

In case of a legal separation, if the surviving spouse gave cause for the separation, he or she shall not have any of the rights granted by law.

As long as the marriage was not annulled at the time of death, the surviving legitimate  spouse will enjoy the rights regardless of their years of physical separation.

The basis of the rules on intestate succession was explained by the Supreme Court in this manner: “The law of intestacy is founded on the presumed will of the deceased. Love, it is said, first descends, then ascends, and finally, spreads sideways. Thus, the law first calls the descendants, then the ascendants and, finally, the collaterals, always preferring those closer in degree to those of remoter degrees, on the assumption that the deceased would have done so had he manifested his last will. Lastly, in default of anyone called to succession or bound to the decedent by ties of blood or affection, it is in accordance with his presumed will that his property be given to charitable or educational institutions, and thus contribute to the welfare of humanity.” (In the Matter of the Intestate Estate of Cristina Aguinaldo-Suntay vs. Isabel Cojuangco-Suntay (GR No. 183053; June 16, 2010)

 (Atty. Gorecho heads the seafarers’ division of the  Sapalo Velez Bundang Bulilan  law offices. For comments, email info@sapalovelez.com, or call 09175025808 or 09088665786)

Disability due to accident

Is the injury suffered by the seafarer the result of an “accident” thereby entitling him to higher disability benefits under the collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA)?

This is the question posed in the April 23, 2014 case of “Carlo F. Sunga v. Virjen Shipping Corporation, Nissho Odyssey Ship Management Pte. Ltd., and Capt. Angel Zambrano” which was decided by the Supreme Court under G.R. No. 198640.

The seafarer in this case, a member of the Associated Marine Officers’ and Seamen’s Union of the Philippines (AMOSUP), entered into a contract of employment as Fitter on board an ocean-going vessel for nine (9) months.  His employment was covered by a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) executed between AMOSUP and his employers.

One time, while on board, the seafarer had to lift a 200-kilogram globe valve from the lower floor of the engine room to its installing position.  As it was being positioned, one of the oilers lost his grip of the valve, thus, causing its whole weight to crash on the seafarer.  At that point, he felt his back snap.  Since then, he started to experience pain which led him to request for repatriation which was accordingly granted.

Reporting to the company-designated doctor, the seafarer underwent medical examination and was issued medical certificates: the first, recommending a Grade 8 disability based on the POEA-Standard Employment Employment Contract (SEC), and the second, a disability grading of 25% in accordance with the CBA.  His employers offered the amount of US$16,795.00 as full settlement for his disability benefits based on the POEA-SEC but he rejected it and demanded that his benefits be based on the disability grading of 25% based on the CBA.  His employers claimed that he failed to present any proof that his disability was the result of an accident and it was simply an illness r an anatomical defect.

The arbiter and the NLRC ruled in favor of the seafarer, basing his disability benefits on the CBA.  The Court of Appeals ruled otherwise and applied only the POEA-SEC, noting that the back injury which the seafarer suffered was reasonably anticipated since carrying heavy objects can cause injury and that lifting and carrying heavy objects are part of his duties as Fitter.  There was no mishap, occurrence or fortuitous event when the injury was incurred.

The Supreme Court affirmed the rulings of the arbiter and the NLRC and found that the seafarer’s injury was the result of the accidental slippage in the handling of the 200-kilogram valve based on circumstantial evidence.  the High Court observed that the seafarer did not incur the injury while solely performing his regular duties but an “intervening event transpired,” i.e., when the oiler lost his grip of the valve, which brought upon the injury on the seafarer.  Such an incident cannot be considered foreseeable nor can it be reasonably anticipated.

The duty of the seafarer here was not to routinely carry a 200-kilogram valve singlehandedly, but only to change the valve.  An “accident” therefore, pertains to an unforeseen event in which no fault of negligence attaches to the defendant.  As defined in Black’s Law Dictionary, “accident” is “an unintended and unforeseen injurious occurrence; something that does not occur in the usual course of events or that could not be reasonably anticipated.”  As such, the seafarer’s disability benefits fall within the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) coverage, which provides that “A seafarer who suffers permanent disability as a result of an accident whilst in the employment of the Company shall be entitled to compensation according to the provisions of this Agreement.”   

#Article of Atty. Augusto R. Bundang of SVBB Law orignally published in the Tinig ng Marino July August 2014 issue.