Smoking and stress

Smoking , by itself, cannot  be a factor that bars compensation for the  seafarer’s death due to  illnesses such as aneurism.

 The tendency of seafarers to smoke is  often associated with  the stress experienced at sea.

 Seafarers are exposed to extreme weather conditions: rough seas and storms result in the rolling and pitching of the ship, leading to an unstable environment that makes physical work difficult.

Most seafarers are exposed to ongoing elevated stress levels something which has a negative impact on physical and mental health not to mention that it can lower work performance.  There might be variations of stress levels due to the type and nature of the work depending on the duties that have been assigned to the seafarer.

 Extremely high number of working hours over a lengthier period of time combined with lack of      sleep can elicit chronic fatigue, health problems and safety risks on the vessels.

 What makes the job more difficult, aside from exposure to fluctuating temperatures caused by variant weather changes, the job obviously entails laborious manual tasks conducted in a moving ship, which makes for increased work-related stress.

 In most cases, employers use as a defense the seafarer’s admission of being smoker  to deny claims for disability or death benefits  as they argue that genetic predisposition has caused his ailment and that his smoking habits hastened its development.

In the case of Dohle vs. Heirs of Gazzingan (G.R. No. 199568, June 17, 2015) the Supreme Courtstressed that  smoking, by itself, can not  be a factor that bars compensation for the illness such as  dissecting aneurysm.   

While smoking may contribute to the development of the disease, it is not the only possible cause. Other factors such as working and living under stressful conditions also contribute to its development.

 Aortic dissection, also called dissecting aneurysm, is a potentially life threatening condition in which there is bleeding into and along the wall of the aorta, the major artery leaving the heart. The condition starts with a tear in the wall of the major artery carrying blood out of the heart and as the tear extends along the wall of the aorta, blood enters the aortic wall and "dissects" or separates the layers of the aorta from one another which leads to aortic rupture or decreased blood flow to the organs. This can then result in heart attacks, strokes, paralysis, and renal failure among other medical conditions.

The Supreme Court noted that the  ailment’s risk factors, which include but are not limited to aging, connective tissue and rare genetic disorders, atherosclerosis, inflammation, trauma, high blood pressure, heart surgery/procedures, and pregnancy, do not seem to be direct causes of the disease, such that having one makes the chances of getting the condition higher but does not always lead to aortic dissection.

The Supreme Court then stressed that smoking habit cannot be used to deny the claims as  the exact cause of aortic dissection (as well as other illnesses)  is still unknown and remains under investigation.

(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)

Stroke and seafarer's stress

A seafarer who suffered stroke on board the vessel must be compensated due to work-related stress.

 In the case of  Magsaysay Mitsui OSK Marine, Inc, v. Bengson (G.R. No. 198528, October 13, 2014⁾  disregarded the employer’s   claim that the seafarer’s hypertensive cardio-vascular disease is not compensable on the sole basis of its company-designated physician’s declaration that such illness is not work-related.

The Supreme Court ruled that the seafarer’s  illness, which has likewise been diagnosed as intracerebral hemorrhage or hemorrhagic stroke, is a serious condition, and could be deadly.

The Supreme Court noted  that the  seafarer has been working for the company since 1988 and has been serving as Third Mate for twelve (12) years.  

Having worked for the principal  since 1988 under employment contracts that were continuously renewed, it can be said that the seafarer  spent much of his productive years with the principal; his years of service certainly took a toll on his body, and he could not have contracted his illness elsewhere except while working for the principal. 

As Third Mate, he was saddled with heavy responsibilities relative to navigation of the vessel, ship safety and management of emergencies. 

The seafarer  was subjected to physical and mental stress and strain: as Third Mate, he is the ship’s fourth in command, and he is the ship’s safety officer; these responsibilities have been heavy burdens on his shoulders all these years, and certainly contributed to the development of his illness. 

Besides, it is already recognized that any kind of work or labor produces stress and strain normally resulting in wear and tear of the human body.

An overseas worker, having to ward off homesickness by reason of being physically separated from his family for the entire duration of his contract, bears a great degree of emotional strain while making an effort to perform his work well.

The strain is even greater in the case of a seafarer who is constantly subjected to the perils of the sea while at work abroad and away from his family.c

The Court has ruled that the list of illnesses/diseases in Section 32-A of the  POEA Standard Employment Contract (SEC) does not preclude other illnesses/diseases not so listed from being compensable. The POEA contract  cannot be presumed to contain all the possible injuries that render a seafarer unfit for further sea duties.   And equally significant, it is not the injury which is compensated, but rather it is the incapacity to work resulting in the impairment of one’s earning capacity.

An employee’s disability becomes permanent and total when so declared by the company-designated physician, or, in case of absence of such a declaration either of fitness or permanent total disability, upon the lapse of the 120 or 240-day treatment period while the employee’s disability continues and he is unable to engage in gainful employment during such period, and the company-designated physician fails to arrive at a definite assessment of the employee’s fitness or disability.

In many cases decided in the past, the Supreme  Court has held that cardiovascular disease, coronary artery disease, and other heart-related  ailments (including stroke)  are compensable. 

Thus, in Fil-Pride Shipping Co., Inc. v. Balasta, (G.R. No. 193047, March 3, 2014) severe 3-vessel coronary artery disease which the seaman contracted while serving as Able Seaman was considered an occupational disease.  In Villanueva, Sr. v. Baliwag Navigation, Inc., (702 SCRA 311).  it was held that the 2000 POEA-SEC considers heart disease as an occupational disease. 

 In Jebsens Maritime, Inc. v. Undag (662 SCRA 670) the Court held that hypertensive cardiovascular disease may be a compensable illness, upon proof.  In Oriental Shipmgt. Co., Inc. v. Bastol ( 622 SCRA 352) and Heirs of the late Aniban v. NLRC (347 Phil. 46)  it was held that myocardial infarction as a disease or cause of death is compensable, such being occupational.  Iloreta v. Philippine Transmarine Carriers, Inc (607 SCRA 796)  held that hypertensive cardiovascular disease/coronary artery disease and chronic stable angina are compensable.  

Micronesia Resources v. Cantomayor (552 Phil. 130)  stated that a finding of coronary artery disease entitles the claimant – a seaman Third Officer – to disability compensation.  In Remigio v .NLRC (521 Phil. 330) the Court held that the claimant – a musician on board an ocean-going vessel – was entitled to recover for suffering from coronary artery disease.  In Sepulveda v. ECC, (174 Phil. 242) it was declared that the employee’s illness, myocardial infarction, was directly brought about by his employment as schoolteacher or was a result of the nature of such employment.

 (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)