RP diplomats urged to defy direct-hiring rule

An alliance of migrants groups in the Middle East on Saturday called on Philippine ambassadors in the region to suspend the implementation of the controversial policy on direct hiring of Filipinos by foreign employers. Migrante International-Middle East urged the embassies to defy the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration’s Memorandum Circular No. 4 (POEA MC 4) and to follow the lead of the embassy in Singapore. “We are pleased that the Philippine Embassy in Singapore has headed the call of overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) and Migrante to stop the implementation of the directive. “We are urging all Philippine ambassadors in the ME countries to do the same and eventually scrap it (circular)," said John L.C. Monterona, Migrante-ME Regional Coordinator in a press statement. The Philippine Embassy in Singapore has suspended the implementation of the POEA MC 4 amid concerns that the policy would discourage foreign employers from hiring workers from the Philippines. Several OFW groups have denounced the policy, particularly the requirement on foreign employers to post a repatriation bond of $5,000 plus $3,000 performance bond in recruiting a Filipino. The performance bond would be used to pay workers’ salaries should labor disputes erupt and the repatriation bond would be spent to send back to the Philippines remains of OFWs in cases of death. In a statement on Saturday, Monterona said:“We have exposed through our critique paper and several statements the real nefarious intent behind implementing such policy because it is not meant to protect Filipino migrant workers as it is to squeeze more money from us in the name of protecting our rights." Dissenting voices Migrante-Kuwait chairperson Gil Lebria said that POEA MC 4 would discourage foreign employers from hiring Filipinos due to the required bond totaling $8,000. “Due to MC 4, Kuwaiti employers will now be hiring domestic service workers from other Asian countries like Bangladesh, Nepal, Thailand and Malaysia, Lebria added. Cyrine Pinpin of Migrante-United Arab Emirates feared that the performance and repatriation bonds would ultimately be passed on to the workers through salary deductions and other means. “Some employers are changing, by force or by threat, the contract of our workers when they arrive in work sites. They could easily recoup the amount they shelled out on the bonds," Pinpin said. He said the claim that Philippine foreign posts reviewed work contracts of OFWs and that the bonds could guarantee workers’ protection is “absolutely untrue." “Several work contracts that were supposedly verified and signed by Philippine labor officers were found to have been substituted - with lower salaries. Verification was only meant to exact fees because job site inspections were not necessarily done," Nhel Morona, secretary general of Migrante-UAE said. He cited several cases of contract substitution in Fujairah. Likewise, John de Jesus, Migrante-Qatar coordinator, said that contract substitution is rampant, and that the Philippine government can do better in addressing the problem by fielding OFW-friendly officers. “Not even a million dollar bond could shield us against unscrupulous employers," De Jesus said. “What we need are embassy officials who have experience in labor-crisis management and would not compromise our rights especially of those having been economically, physically and sexually abused," he said. Meanwhile, the Kapatiran sa Gitnang Silangan (KGS), the Riyadh-based organization assisting distressed Filipino migrant workers, said that the new guideline would hit hard several Filipino consultants in various fields, particularly those in the IT and banking sectors. “Who ever crafted these circular has only money-making motives at the expense of the workers. For sure, foreign employers would shy away from hiring Filipinos and hire other nationalities to save the $8,000 bond for every hired Filipino worker," said Mario Ben, KGS spokesman. “Where will the money from the bonds go, and how would it be used if worker has problems with employer? If the worker-employer relationship is going well, who would benefit from the money?" Ben added. Migrante-ME is undertaking a signature campaign and a series of consultations and discussions among Filipino migrants to convince them to appose POEA MC 4. “Officers and members of Migrante chapters in the ME will troop to their respective Philippine Embassy offices this week to urge ambassadors to defy the new guidelines on direct hiring," Monterona said. DoLE explanation In a statement earlier on Saturday, Labor Secretary Arturo Brion asserted that the new guidelines on direct hiring of Filipinos by foreign employers were intended to “strengthen the protection mechanisms for overseas Filipino workers." The policy was meant to reinforce the provision of the Philippine Labor Code that prohibits direct hiring of Filipino workers, except for selected employers such as diplomats, heads of international organizations and other employers as may be approved by the secretary of labor and employment, he explained. The statement posted past midnight Friday on the website of the Department of Labor and Employment, Brion said “some people who are against the policy are trying to sow confusion among OFWs and foreign employers by giving false information about its implementing guidelines." “Contrary to what the critics say, employers will have to pay only the premium of the US$5,000 repatriation bond and performance bond equivalent to three months salary of the worker," Brion said. “The repatriation bond shall guarantee the actual cost of repatriation of remains of directly hired OFW following death from any cause, and actual cost incurred for repatriation from other causes such as violation or non-compliance with the contract among others. The performance bond shall guarantee compliance of the contract for its entire duration," he explained. “The bond shall be secured from any Philippine bonding company accredited by the Supreme Court. Premiums for the bonds shall be paid by the employer," the labor chief added. The new guidelines also require the foreign employer to provide medical insurance to the worker at an amount equivalent to those provided to nationals of the host country. Under the existing POEA rules, the general procedure for the recruitment and deployment of OFWs is through POEA-licensed recruitment agencies. These agency-hired workers are protected under existing regulations such as bonding requirements for licensed recruitment agencies, which guarantees compliance to the terms of the employment contract, particularly relating to money claims of the workers. Brion said legislation may be needed to amend the Labor Code if its provisions no longer serve their purpose. "If this law is no longer a wise law, then the appropriate step is to secure an amendatory legislation. In the meanwhile, we have to apply the current law, adjusted by our rules to the extent allowable," he asserted. “In direct hiring, recruitment agencies are not involved and compliance to the contract is therefore dependent on the capability of the foreign employer," he said. However, Brion said the DOLE is open to exemptions from the total implementation of the POEA guidelines on a per country, employer or workers classification based on the request of the Philippine Overseas Labor Offices (POLOs). “The POLO should be able to justify such exemptions based on the existing rules and regulations in the host country providing for the protection of the workers in the area of repatriation and repatriation bonds. The POLO should likewise be able to inform DOLE of the mechanisms on the effective implementation or enforcement of such laws and regulations," he said. POEA records show that in 2007, a total of 26,753 OFWs in the household and other services were directly hired by foreign employers. The biggest employer of directly hired household service workers was Italy at 5,564 followed by Canada and Spain, while the Middle East hired the most number of non-household service OFWs on direct hiring basis. - GMANews.TV