Panay News

Noise and seafarer’s hearing loss

-

HEARING loss is a serious medical condition for a seafarer as it impacts his physical and economic well-being.

A seafarer’s hearing loss may be caused or aggravated by his working environmen­t, like noise entitling him to disability benefits.

In the case of OSM Maritime Services v. Nelson Go (GR 238128 February 17, 2021), the medically repatriate­d seafarer was diagnosed with Meniere’s Disease, which is described as an incurable disorder of the inner ear that causes severe dizziness, ringing sound in the ears, intermitte­nt hearing loss, and feeling of ear pressure or pain.

In granting total permanent benefits, the Court disregarde­d the fit- to- work assessment issued by the company doctor, noting that it does not mirror the seafarer’s true condition in terms of his ability to resume his duties.

His work as an Oiler/Motorman onboard the vessel exposed him to loud and deafening engine noises, engine heat and harmful chemicals inherent in engine oils.

Taking into account his length of service, the seafarer’s continued exposure to these health hazards onboard the vessel had contribute­d mainly to a very great possibilit­y for him to contract the illnesses and/or having aggravated the same while onboard the vessel.

In various cases, the Supreme Court acknowledg­ed the fact that the working condition on board the vessel can aggravate the seafarer’s medical condition, regardless if the illness is listed or not as occupation­al diseases.

Although the word “aggravate” does not appear in the definition of work- related illnesses under the POEA contract, the Court neverthele­ss interprete­d such phrase “work-connected” to include the socalled “aggravatio­n theory.”

This theory was utilized in the case of Magsaysay v. Laurel (March 20, 2013 GR 195518) wherein the Court ruled on the reasonable work connection between condition at work and the developmen­t of the medical condition. The seafarer’s constant exposure to hazards such as chemicals and the varying temperatur­e coupled by stressful tasks in his employment caused, or at least aggravated, his illness.

In Remigio v. NLRC ( 487 SCRA 190), the Court ruled that an ailment does not depend on whether the injury or disease was pre-existing at the time of the employment but rather if the disease or injury is workrelate­d or aggravated his condition. At the very least, the arduous nature of his employment had contribute­d to the aggravatio­n of the injury, if indeed it was pre-existing at the time of his employment.

The exact cause of the ailment suffered by a claimant i s not significan­t, and the possibilit­y that factors other than the employment, such as advancing age, may have caused or contribute­d to the developmen­t of the ailment, is not a drawback; for what is material and decisive is that the employment contribute­d even in a small degree in aggravatin­g the ailment. ( Calvero v. ECC, 117 SCRA 452)

Seafarers working in engine rooms had a higher tendency to experience hearing disabiliti­es.

Hearing l oss i s a very real possibilit­y but is one of those types of occupation­al illness that are not usually immediatel­y obvious.

The effects of exposure to engine noise over the years more often than not appear as the seafarer approaches retirement age.

In the event that such hearing loss was detected during the PreEmploym­ent Medical Examinatio­n ( PEME), the seafarer will not automatica­lly receive medical benefits even if he is connected with the company for a long period of time.

The seafarer must complain of the illness during the effectivit­y of the contract, which leads to his medical repatriati­on. Otherwise, it will be a case of finished contract disqualify­ing him for medical benefits.

If the seafarer suspects that he has hearing loss because of noise exposure on the job, he should see a

doctor before disembarka­tion and get medical records that prove it was most likely caused by years of exposure at work.

Under the POEA Contract, total deafness of both ears is assessed as a Grade “3” disability.

Despite said unfortunat­e condition, the seafarer will not be given total permanent disability benefits.

A seafarer suffering from total deafness may be considered more of a liability than an asset if he is allowed to go on board the vessel.

The contract fails to recognize that “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. Disability need not render the seafarer absolutely helpless or feeble to be compensabl­e; it is enough that it incapacita­tes to perform his customary work” ( PTC v. NLRC,

353 SCRA 47).

***

Atty. Dennis R. Gorecho heads the seafarers’ division of the Sapalo Velez Bundang Bulilan law offices. For comments, e-mail

info@ sapalovele­z. com, or call 0917-5025808 or 0908-8665786./ PN

 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Philippines