Dependent No More: The Non-Applicability of the Dependency Test for POEA Death Benefits
Navigating the law can be as challenging as the seas themselves. For seafarers and their families, their financial security often hinges on the interpretation of key regulations, particularly those governing death benefits under the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) contract.
In the recent case of Macalinao v. Macalinao,[1] the Supreme Court (SC) clarified the treatment of benefits arising from a seafarer’s death under the POEA contract.
The case involved seafarer Pedrito, who married Cerena in 1981. After four years of marriage, the spouses separated, with both contracting second marriages despite their original marriage still being in effect. Pedrito remarried in 1990, and Cerena remarried in 1992. Pedrito passed away in 2015 after 25 years of separation from his legal wife, Cerena. Thus, the question of who should be awarded Pedrito’s death benefits arose.
Citing the case of Social Security System v. Aguas[2] the Court discussed the dependency test:
“In Aguas, the Court ruled that although a husband and wife are obliged to support each other, whether one is actually dependent for support upon the other cannot be presumed from the fact of marriage alone. Further, Aguas pointed out that a wife who left her family until her husband died and lived with other men was not dependent upon her husband for support, financial or otherwise, during the entire period.”
The dependency test, a prerequisite to being entitled to benefits under similar laws, while present under the Social Security System (SSS), Government Service Insurance System (GSIS), and the Workmen's Compensation Act, is conspicuously absent under POEA regulations. The POEA merely provides that death benefits be “payable in accordance with rules of succession under the Civil Code of the Philippines.”[3]
Thus, the SC ruled that the benefits should be distributed to Cerena, the legal spouse of Pedrito, notwithstanding the fact that they had been actually separated for more than 20 years. Interestingly, the Court acknowledged the perceived gap in the law between the POEA regulations and other laws granting survivorship benefits. The POEA's lack of a dependency test creates a situation where a legal spouse, regardless of their relationship status or dependency on the seafarer, can claim benefits, possibly leading to a scenario where actual dependents are left without support. Nevertheless, the Court upheld the non-application of the dependency test to the award of death benefits under the POEA contract, stating that it cannot additionally impose what the pertinent law currently does not. Nor may it deliberate and speculate on the possible reasons for such an omission in the conditions for death benefits in the case of seafarers. The absence of a dependency test in the POEA regulations stands in stark contrast to other social benefit systems such as the SSS, GSIS, and the Workmen's Compensation Act, where the dependency of the beneficiaries is a key criterion for the award of death benefits. This inconsistency may lead to situations where legal spouses, irrespective of their actual dependency, are favored over those who were actually dependent on the deceased. However, this is ultimately a matter for the legislature to address, as all the judiciary can do is apply the law as it stands.
[1] Macalinao v. Macalinao, G.R. No. 250613.
Recommended by LinkedIn
[2] Social Security System v. Aguas, G.R. No. 165546.
[3] POEA Memorandum Circular No. 010-10, Definition of terms, item 3.
About the Author:
Hans Richmond R. Ong is a Junior Associate and a member of the Mergers and Acquisitions, Corporate Services, Technology Media and Telecommunications, Data Privacy Cybersecurity and AI, and Intellectual Property Departments of the Firm. His practice includes providing legal guidance and assisting with compliance matters in Technology, Media, Telecommunications, Data Privacy and Cybersecurity law. He also assists clients in commercial dealings including the conduct of legal due diligence in mergers and acquisitions.