On November 14, 2016, Berto was engaged him as ordinary seaman by Colombia Shipping. His employment was covered by a Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) approved contract and PHIL Model LNG 2016 Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA).

On December 5, 2016, Berto left the country for Cartagena, Colombia where he would board the freighter “Escobar” . Upon his arrival, Berto billeted him at the Columbiana Hotel while awaiting embarkation on December 7, 2016.

Unfortunately, on the day of his embarkation, Berto slipped while taking a shower at the Columbiana Hotel and fell on his buttocks. He felt excruciating pain and recurring numbness in his lower back and extremity. The incident, however, did not hinder him from boarding the vessel. Upon embarkation, Berto reported the accident to Pablo, one of the ship’s officer and requested for pain reliever. The latter relayed the incident to the chief mate. Instead of compassionately acting on his request, Berto was ordered to immediately go to work. He was made to carry heavy baggage and cans of grease the whole day.

Due to the strenuous work on the first day and lack of medical attention, Berto’s back pain worsened and he had difficulty getting out of bed the next day. Thus, he was sent to a hospital in Cartagena, Colombia where he was diagnosed with mechanical lumbago. Later, Berto’s worsening back pain led to his repatriation and when he arrived in Manila, was diagnosed to be suffering from disk desiccation and mild posterior disk bulge.  In his Medical Evaluation Report, an independent physician assessed Berto to be suffering from total and permanent disability and declared him unfit for sea duty in whatever capacity. When Berto demanded disability benefits under the CBA in view of his untreated medical condition, the shipping company declined stating that Berto’s bathroom injury is not work-related injury and non-compensable.

Is Berto’s Injury considered work-related and compensable injury?

The Supreme Court ruled that slipping in the bathroom floor is not an unforeseen injurious occurrence that could not be reasonably anticipated. For once a person enters the bathroom, he knows for a fact that the floor could get slippery and cause him bodily injuries. Too, there is no showing of any measures petitioner adopted to at least lessen or avoid the injury caused by a slippery floor. Thus what happened to Berto cannot be considered the incident as an “accident” within the contemplation of the POEA-SEC contract.

The Supreme Court nevertheless finds that Berto suffered compensable injury under Section 20(A) of the POEA-SEC. For an injury or disability to be compensable under this provision, two (2) elements must concur: (1) the injury or illness must be work-related; and (2) the work-related injury or illness must have existed during the term of the seafarer’s employment contract. For a disability claim to prosper, a seafarer only needs to show that his work and contracted illness have a reasonable linkage that must lead a rational mind to conclude that his occupation may have contributed or aggravated the disease.

For the first element, the POEA-SEC defines work-related injury as one “arising out of and in the course of employment.” Jurisprudence further teaches that compensable illness or injury cannot be confined to the strict interpretation. of the POEA-SEC as pre-existing conditions may be compensable if aggravated by the seafarer’s work.

Here, it is undisputed that before actual boarding of the vessel on December 7, 2016, Berto slipped in the bathroom of Colombiana Hotel and suffered injury. To reiterate, this, by itself, is not compensable. But when Berto boarded his assigned vessel, he immediately reported the incident to the Pablo, the ship’s officer, as well as the excruciating pain and recurring numbness he had been experiencing on his lower back and extremity after said incident. Apparently, he was already suffering from mechanical lumbago and perianal abscess at this point. He requested for pain reliever but was not given any. And instead of showing compassion, his superiors ordered him to immediately get to work, making him carry heavy baggage and cans of grease.

These circumstances show that the injury Berto suffered at the Colombiana Hotel which would have otherwise been not compensable was aggravated by his work on board the vessel. Indeed, due to the strenuous work on the first day and lack of medical attention, petitioner’s condition worsened, and he even had difficulty getting out of bed the next day. In view of the factual backdrop, the Supreme Court ruled that Berto’s injury was work-related or more specifically, work-aggravated. As for the second requisite of a compensable injury, suffice it to state that Pablo’s condition was aggravated by his work during the term of his employment contract.

(based on the Supreme Court decision in “Calera vs.Hoegh Fleet Services Philippines,”G.R. No. 250584, June 14, 2021″. Names were changed for purposes of this article.)