Ajero v. Employees Compensation Commission
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Correa A. Ajero, a classroom teacher for thirty-five years, contracted Pulmonary Tuberculosis and Cancer of the Breast while in the employ of the Bureau of Public Schools. She was confined and treated for these ailments. Her application for total and permanent disability compensation under Commonwealth Act No. 186 was approved by the GSIS Medical Director. Procedural History: Ajero also filed a claim for income benefit under Presidential Decree No. 626. The GSIS denied this claim, stating the ailments were not occupational diseases. The Employees' Compensation Commission (ECC) affirmed the GSIS decision. The Petition: Ajero sought review of the ECC's decision, arguing her illnesses should be compensable.
Issue(s)
Whether the petitioner's illnesses, Pulmonary Tuberculosis and Cancer of the Breast, are compensable under Presidential Decree No. 626. Whether the petitioner is entitled to disability compensation benefits.
Ruling
The decision of the Employees' Compensation Commission is set aside. The Government Service Insurance System is ordered to pay Correa Ajero P6,000.00 as disability benefits and P600.00 as attorney's fees.
Ratio Decidendi
On the compensability of Pulmonary Tuberculosis and Cancer of the Breast: The Employees' Compensation Commission denied the claim, stating that Cancer of the Breast is not an occupational disease and there was no proof of exposure to carcinogens. For Pulmonary Tuberculosis to be compensable, it required close contact with infected individuals or working with infectious material, which the petitioner's work as a teacher did not entail. The ECC also noted that the petitioner had not proven that her working conditions increased the risk of contracting these diseases. However, the Court noted that Pulmonary Tuberculosis is generally known as an occupational hazard of the teaching profession due to factors like long hours of preparation, constant contact with students who may be ill, meager income leading to poor nutrition and exhaustion, and performance of duties outside the classroom exposing teachers to various hazards. The Court emphasized that Pulmonary Tuberculosis does not develop suddenly and takes years to incapacitate a person, suggesting it must have supervened during her employment. Having supervened during her employment, the illness of Pulmonary Tuberculosis is disputably presumed to be compensable under Section 44 of the Workmen's Compensation Act. Furthermore, even under the Amended Labor Code (Presidential Decree No. 626), the illness of Pulmonary Tuberculosis was considered directly caused by the nature of her duties as a classroom teacher, making it compensable. Despite the ECC's reasoning, the Court found merit in the petitioner's appeal, considering the nature of the teaching profession as a known source of occupational hazards, particularly Pulmonary Tuberculosis. The disputable presumption of compensability for illnesses contracted during employment, coupled with the direct causal link between the teaching duties and the illness, led to the reversal of the ECC's decision. On the entitlement to disability compensation benefits: The Court clarified that the approval of disability by the GSIS under Commonwealth Act No. 186 does not automatically mean entitlement to income benefits under Presidential Decree No. 626, as the latter requires different conditions and requisites, specifically that the sickness must be an occupational disease or the risk of contracting it must be increased by working conditions.
Main Doctrine
While the approval of disability by the GSIS does not automatically entitle an employee to income benefits under PD 626, illnesses contracted during employment are disputably presumed compensable, especially if they are occupational hazards of the profession and the risk of contracting them is increased by working conditions.