Austria vs. Court of Appeals

A permanent partial disability benefit may be converted to a permanent total disability benefit where the employee's injury or sickness renders them unable to perform their customary job for more than 120 days, thereby demonstrating a loss of earning capacity, notwithstanding prior compensation for a partial disability.

Pablo A. Austria was employed as a bag piler at Central Azucarera de Tarlac from June 1, 1977, to July 20, 1997. His duties required carrying and piling heavy sacks of refined sugar, assisting in random weighing and repair work, cleaning, and performing other manual tasks assigned by his superiors. In 1994, he began experiencing severe back pain. An MRI revealed a small disc protrusion at the L4 and L5 levels, for which he underwent laminectomy in 1995. Subsequent x-rays in 1997 and 1998 confirmed osteoarthritis of the lumbar spine.

• Employment and Duties: Petitioner worked as a bag piler at Central Azucarera de Tarlac for twenty years. His responsibilities included carrying and piling sacks of refined sugar, assisting the production checker in random weighing, cleaning the warehouse and conveyor, assisting in repair and maintenance during off-season, and performing other related manual work assigned by his superiors.
• Illness and Medical Intervention: In 1994, petitioner began suffering severe back pain. An MRI on November 18, 1994, revealed a small disc protrusion at the L4 and L5 levels. He underwent laminectomy on March 17, 1995. Subsequent x-rays taken in 1997 and 1998 confirmed osteoarthritis of the lumbar spine.
• Claim for Benefits: On account of his osteoarthritis, petitioner filed a claim with the SSS under PD 626. The SSS granted permanent partial disability benefits, released in three installments: eight months starting September 1, 1995; seven months starting May 10, 1996; and fifteen months starting April 1, 1997.
• Denial of Conversion: Petitioner requested the SSS to convert his permanent partial disability benefit to permanent total disability. The SSS denied the request, citing a lack of illness progression and asserting that the lumbo-sacral x-ray findings were unrelated or of a different disease entity. The ECC affirmed the denial, holding that based on the degree of disability at the time of separation from service, petitioner had already availed of the maximum benefits for his osteoarthritis. The Court of Appeals dismissed the petition, ruling that the law does not allow the conversion of permanent partial disability to permanent total disability.

• Entitlement to Conversion: Petitioner argued that the Court of Appeals erred in denying his claim for additional benefits and in ruling that the law prohibits the conversion of his permanent partial disability benefit to a permanent total disability benefit.

• Lack of Illness Progression: Respondent SSS countered that clinical records showed no progression of the illness already granted under the previous EC disability, and that the lumbo-sacral x-ray findings could not solely justify an extension as they were of a different disease entity.
• Maximum Benefits Availed: Respondent ECC maintained that considering the degree of disability at the time of separation from service, petitioner had already received the maximum benefits to which he was entitled for his osteoarthritis.
• Prohibition on Conversion: Respondent Court of Appeals asserted that the law does not allow the conversion of permanent partial disability to permanent total disability.

• Conversion of Disability Benefits: Whether a permanent partial disability benefit may be converted to a permanent total disability benefit under PD 626 as amended.

• Conversion of Disability Benefits: The conversion of permanent partial disability benefit to permanent total disability benefit is permissible where the employee's ailment qualifies as such. The test for permanent total disability is the capacity of the employee to continue performing work notwithstanding the disability incurred. Disability is intimately related to earning capacity and must be understood more on the loss of earning capacity than its medical significance. Because petitioner's work as a bag piler required carrying heavy loads and performing manual labor, his lumbar spine illness rendered him incapable of performing his usual work. Nothing in the law prohibits such conversion, and prior jurisprudence has allowed it. Denial of the claim would be inconsistent with the primary purpose of PD 626 to provide meaningful protection against loss of income and the constitutional mandate to afford full protection to labor.

• Permanent Total Disability Test — Permanent total disability is determined by the capacity of the employee to continue performing work notwithstanding the disability incurred. If the injury or sickness renders the employee unable to perform their customary job for more than 120 days, and they do not fall under the coverage of Rule X of the Amended Rules on Employees Compensability, the employee suffers from permanent total disability regardless of whether they lose the use of any body part. The test is applied here to a bag piler whose lumbar spine illness prevented him from carrying heavy loads, thereby establishing his entitlement to permanent total disability benefits.
• Loss of Earning Capacity Concept — Disability is intimately related to earning capacity and must be understood less on its medical significance and more on the loss of earning capacity. Permanent total disability does not require absolute helplessness but rather the incapacity to perform gainful work of the same kind or similar nature that the employee was trained for or accustomed to perform, which incapacity is expected to be permanent.

• "the test of whether or not an employee suffers from ‘permanent total disability’ is a showing of the capacity of the employee to continue performing his work notwithstanding the disability he incurred. Thus, if by reason of the injury or sickness he sustained, the employee is unable to perform his customary job for more than 120 days and he does not come within the coverage of Rule X of the Amended Rules on Employees Compensability (which, in more detailed manner, describes what constitutes temporary total disability), then the said employee undoubtedly suffers from ‘permanent total disability’ regardless of whether or not he loses the use of any part of his body."
• "Disability is intimately related to one’s earning capacity. It should be understood less on its medical significance but more on the loss of earning capacity."

• Vicente vs. Employees’ Compensation Commission, 193 SCRA 190 (1991) — Followed. Established the test for permanent total disability based on the capacity to continue performing work and the inability to perform customary job for more than 120 days.
• Gonzaga vs. Employees’ Compensation Commission, 127 SCRA 443 (1984) — Followed. Defined permanent total disability as disablement to earn wages in the same kind of work or work of a similar nature, emphasizing that it does not mean absolute helplessness but incapacity to perform gainful work.
• Bejerano vs. ECC, 205 SCRA 598 (1992) — Followed. Stated that disability is intimately related to earning capacity and should be understood more on the loss of earning capacity than its medical significance.
• GSIS vs. CA, 304 SCRA 243 (1999); GSIS vs. CA, 260 SCRA 133 (1996); GSIS vs. CA, 285 SCRA 430 (1998); Diopenes vs. GSIS, 205 SCRA 331 (1992); Aquino vs. ECC, 201 SCRA 84 (1991) — Followed. Cited as prior rulings where the Court allowed the conversion of permanent partial disability benefit to permanent total disability benefit.
• ECC vs. Sanico, 321 SCRA 268 (1999) — Followed. Cited for the primary purpose of PD 626, which is to provide meaningful protection to the working class against the hazards of disability, illness, and other contingencies resulting in the loss of income.

• Section 2, Rule VII, Amended Rules on Employees Compensation — Defines permanent total disability as the inability to perform any gainful occupation for a continuous period exceeding 120 days, and permanent partial disability as the permanent partial loss of the use of any part of the body. Applied to distinguish the types of disability and to determine that petitioner's inability to perform his customary work for over 120 days constituted permanent total disability.
• Articles 191, 192, and 193, Labor Code, as Amended — Govern disability benefits. Cited to show that nothing in the law prohibits the conversion of permanent partial disability benefit to permanent total disability benefit if the employee's ailment qualifies.
• Section 3, Article XIII, 1987 Constitution — Mandates that the State shall afford full protection to labor. Applied to support the ruling that the conversion of benefits must be allowed to fulfill the constitutional mandate and the purpose of PD 626.

Panganiban, and Carpio, JJ., concur. (Sandoval-Gutierrez, J., on leave).