|
The implementation of the newly amended standard employment contract, which its critics say provides diminution of benefits to Filipino seafarers, will be put to test as the Supreme Court reviews a petition questioning the constitutionality of the new contract.
Pedro L. Linsangan, one of the petitioners of Labor Department Order No. 4 before the High Court, says the amendments are "unconstitutional because they violate existing laws and declared policies of the State." The new contract approved by the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) inserted the phrase "work-related."
He has asked the Supreme Court to nullify and stop the implementation of amendments made to the "Standards Terms and Conditions Governing the Employment of Filipino Seafarers On Board Oceangoing Vessels."
Prior to the amendment, in order for a death of a Filipino seafarer working on board an oceangoing vessel to be compensated or his beneficiaries to be entitled to death benefits must only prove that the deceased seafarer had an existing and valid contract of employment approved by the POEA at the time the cause of his death occurred.
It was sufficient that it be proven that the death occurred during the term of the contract or that the disease or injury that caused the death was contracted during the term of the contract for the death to be "compensable." It need not be work-related, he said.
Linsangan, who has filed a number of tort claims as counsel for Filipino seamen in foreign courts such as the US and Panama, said that with the amendment "beneficiaries of Filipino seafarers who would die of a non-work-related disease or injury shall not be able to collect compensation and benefits even though the death occurred during the term of the contract."
He said there is diminution of benefit in the amended section 20(B) and (D) of Department Order no. 4 series of 2000 by inserting the same "work-related" phrase.
|
|
