University of the Philippines Manila
College of Arts and Sciences
Department of Social Sciences
Padre Faura, Manila
MANAGING PHILIPPINE LABOR MIGRATION:
GOVERNMENT AND NGO INTERVENTIONS FOR THE PROTECTION OF
FILIPINO MIGRANT WORKERS
An Undergraduate Thesis
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Bachelor of Arts in Development Studies
Ciara May Rabino Daquis
2006 – 02505
Professor Roland G. Simbulan
Adviser
March 2012
University of the Philippines Manila
College of Arts and Sciences
Department of Social Sciences
APPROVAL SHEET
In partial fulfillment of the course requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts in
Development Studies, this undergraduate thesis entitled “Managing Philippine Labor
Migration: Government and NGO Interventions for the Protection of Filipino Migrant
Workers”, prepared and submitted by Ciara May R. Daquis, is hereby recommended for
approval.
Professor Roland G. Simbulan
Thesis Adviser
Department of Social Sciences
College of Arts and Sciences, UP Manila
This thesis is hereby accepted and approved as partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts in Development Studies.
Professor Carl Marc L. Ramota
Chairperson
Department of Social Sciences
College of Arts and Sciences, UP Manila
1|DAQUIS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
My utmost appreciation and gratitude to all those who helped make this endeavor possible:
To Prof. Roland Simbulan, our dear adviser, for the guidance throughout the duration of this study.
Building from this little idea of yours certainly turned out to be better.
To the Filipino migrant workers and migrant communities in the Middle East and Hong Kong who
took time to share their experiences. Maraming salamat po.
To Undersecretary Esteban Conejos, the staff of the Office for Migrant Workers Affairs – DFA, and the
staff of the Philippines posts in the Middle East and Hong Kong for the prompt assistance to this
study.
To Migrante Middle East regional coordinator Mr. John L.C. Monterola, Mr. Norman Uy Carnay of the
Mission for Filipino Migrant Workers (MFMW) in Hong Kong, Mr. Jun Tellez, Mr. Rey Asis, and Ms. Eni
Lestari of the International Migrants Alliance (IMA) for the unwavering assistance to this study.
To Michael Abrigo for the valuable inputs on data collection and the enlightening discussions on
migration policy and development.
To Aby, for a decade of friendship which included paying for the library fines on my overdue books.
The review of literature wouldn’t have been complete if not for you.
To the team that made the hardest decision I ever made worth all the trouble – George, Roj, Lysa, Tin
and BB, Radx and Macky, Ate Melai, Sher, Nina, Eu, Caresse. Thank you for the nights out, the
sleepovers, the early morning rush, and the car stuffing :). It has been a wonderful year and I sure
have enjoyed the aftermath of every deadline we all worked so hard to meet. Cheers to all our hard
work and perseverance.
To Prof. John Ponsaran for the motivation and the unnecessary pressure. Yours is definitely not a
thankless job. You know what I mean. I hope you’ll never get tired of inspiring students to achieve
greater things.
To my parents, for 23 years of putting up with my failures and shortcomings. I love you both.
Finally, this is dedicated to the millions of fathers, mothers, sisters and brothers, friends and
relatives, to the millions of Filipinos whose sacrifices can never be equated with any amount of
foreign currency. More than anything, we, your families, couldn’t be more proud of your
contributions to this country. These are the things that we do for family.
2|DAQUIS
ABSTRACT
At present, there is no denying that labor migration has become an enduring feature of the
Philippine economy. The government, albeit in denial of its labor export policy, explicitly acclaims
migration as an engine of economic growth through remittances. However, while the economic
consequences of labor outflow has come to be viewed as positive, Philippine labor migration has
become a far complex phenomenon, one that entails a variety of issues and concerns that continue to
pose unprecedented challenges for the government.
Of primary concern in managing this
phenomenon is that of ensuring the welfare of migrant workers on-site in their destination countries.
This study looks at the on-site situation of Filipino migrant welfare and protection, an aspect
of migration often overlooked in the larger studies of Philippine labor outflow. Drawing from
interviews with key government officials and the accounts of NGOs engaged in migrant affairs in the
Middle East and Hong Kong, the study presents an evaluation of state mechanisms and NGO services
for migrant protection. Results of the study highlight, first, the gaps in the implementation of service
delivery provisions as indicated in the legal framework and, second, the increasing importance of
NGO interventions in these aspects.
The study also looks at the emerging discourse which situates the role of the state in
managing labor migration. Focusing on the increasingly aggressive role of the government in the
promotion of overseas employment and the conflict that this ensues with the state’s capability to
genuinely pursue migrant welfare and protection, the study finds that this deployment-protection
conundrum, particularly in this era of global financial and economic difficulties, presents a serious
policy issue that has both critical social and economic implications and can greatly undermine
protection of Filipino migrant workers.
3|DAQUIS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Approval Sheet
1
Acknowledgements
2
Abstract
3
Chapter I
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
IX.
X.
XI.
XII.
XIII.
Introduction
Statement of the Problem
Research Objectives
Review of Related Literature
Methodology and Research Design
Population and Sampling
Theoretical Framework
Conceptual Framework
Variables Definitions
Instruments and Data Collection
Data Analysis
Scope and Limitations
Significance of the Study
Chapter II
I. Framework of State Mechanisms for Protection
A. Legal Framework
B. Government Policy
C. Institutional Structures
D. Country-Team Approach
E. Resources
6
8
8
9
12
12
13
14
15
16
17
17
18
20
21
21
22
25
25
II. NGOs Engaged in Migrant Affairs
A. Migrante Middle East
B. Mission for Filipino Migrant Workers – HK
C. International Migrants Alliance
26
26
27
27
III. Trends in Philippine Labor Outflow
28
Chapter III. Data Presentation and Analysis
I. Government Provision of Services and On-site Assistance
A. Middle East
1. Migrant Situationer in the Middle East
2. Assessment of State Mechanisms
a. Provision of legal assistance
b. Welfare services
B. Hong Kong
1. Migrant Situationer in Hong Kong
30
31
39
39
40
42
4|DAQUIS
2. Assessment of State Mechanisms
a. Provision of legal assistance
b. Welfare services
44
44
47
II. NGO Interventions
A. Case Studies
1. Migrante Middle East
2. MFMW – HK
3. IMA
B. Trends, Limitations and Constraints in NGO Intervention
49
III. Government Response to Criticism
A. Legal assistance system
B. Selective accommodation at FWRCs
C. Response to emergency situations
64
65
66
67
IV. Migrant Workers’ Protection in the Context of Labor Export Policy
and the Globalization of Labor Markets
68
49
51
54
56
Chapter IV
I. Conclusion
II. Recommendations
75
77
Bibliography
78
List of Interviews
81
Appendix
A. Interview Questions and Transcripts of Interview
1. Government agencies
2. NGOs
B. Migrant Workers Survey
1. Survey questionnaire
2. Profile of respondents
C. Advisory on the Use of Social Media – PH Embassy in Riyadh
83
121
132
5|DAQUIS
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
What was once touted as only a temporary measure to address the economy’s runaway
unemployment, labor migration has become a rather permanent feature of the Philippine economy.
During the latter part of the 1990s, in spite of the fact that the outflow of Filipino laborers had been
around for more than two decades at that time, the government viewed migration still as a
temporary phenomenon. Relying on the expectation that the country’s local economy was poised for
growth, the government remained hopeful that a sustained economic growth will create new job
opportunities locally. More than a decade later, however, Filipino labor outflow remains unabated.
The motivation to seek opportunities overseas has not changed (Tigno, 1998). The push factors are
still economic in nature. Pull factors, on the other hand, continue to be defined by the demand from
destination countries (Orbeta & Abrigo, 2009). The government, albeit in denial of its labor export
policy, explicitly1 acclaims migration as an engine of economic growth through remittances. After
more than thirty years of labor outflow, the reality is that migration has become not just a choice for
greener pastures abroad or as another prospect and alternative, but, seemingly, as the only option
there is for millions of Filipinos who hope to uplift their lives in the absence of employment
opportunities in the country. In 2010, an estimated 1.4 million Filipinos left the country to take on
this lone option.
At present, there is no denying that migration has been an enduring feature of the Philippine
economy. However, while the economic consequences of labor outflow has come to be viewed as
positive, Philippine labor migration has become a far complex phenomenon, one that entails a variety
1
Sec. 2 (c) of the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995 (R.A. 8042) firmly states that “the State does not
promote overseas employment as a means to sustain economic growth and achieve national development.” In contradiction
to this, in 2001, former Labor Secretary Patricia Sto. Tomas was quoted saying that “the government will be taking on an
even more active role in pushing overseas employment as a strategy to boost economic growth and bring about full
employment.” Migration News 8(5) May 2001.
6|DAQUIS
of issues and concerns that continue to pose unprecedented challenges for the government. As a
major sending country, of primary concern in managing this phenomenon is that of ensuring the
welfare of the migrant workers on the job site in their destination countries. While the government
has institutionalized migration infrastructures that handle migrant workers’ on-site concerns,
problems continue to abound and government response has been particularly criticized as
insufficient and inefficient. Despite the existence of legislative mechanisms such as the Migrant
Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995, delivery of services to migrant workers, alongside other
concerns such as legal and social issues, continues to be a problematic area in managing migration.
Past assessments of the Philippine government’s response to the call for stronger state effort
towards on-site protection of migrant workers reveal contending views and opinions. In the face of
the globalization of the labor market during the past two decades, there has been a rising concern
about the role of the state in promoting labor export as an economic policy and subsequent to this
was the fear for the welfare of the growing migrant worker population. The execution of Filipina
domestic worker Flor Contemplacion in Singapore in 1995 crystallized this welfare concern and, in
many ways, affirmed the incapacity of the government mechanisms to pursue migrant workers
welfare. On one hand, the case increased the pressure on the government and on the other raised
public awareness of the plight of overseas Filipino workers and prompted the non-government
sector to intervene. It is from at this point in the history of the country’s labor migration that nongovernment organizations (NGOs) in the field of migrant affairs gained prominence.
This study is organized into four chapters. The opening chapter discusses the methodology
and other particulars of the conduct of the study. Chapter II lays out the framework for the
assessment of state mechanisms for protection. Also included in this chapter are NGO profiles and an
overview of trends in Philippine labor migration. In Chapter III, data on the current implementation
of the state mechanisms for protection in the Middle East and Hong Kong are presented and
7|DAQUIS
analyzed. This is followed by the three cases of NGO interventions. Results of the migrant workers’
survey on on-site assistance are also incorporated in this chapter. The chapter ends with the
government’s response to criticisms and a discussion of migrant welfare protection in the context of
the globalization of the labor market. Finally, Chapter IV closes the study with conclusion and
recommendations.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The apparent failure of the Philippine government to protect our migrant workers on the job
site raises the question of whether the state mechanisms for assisting migrants with their worksite
concerns are adequate and still relevant to the changing conditions and complexities of Philippine
relations with receiving states. Often, particularly in recent years, NGOs have filled in the gap,
responding to migrants’ on-site concerns, while lobbying for relevant policies and advocating for
migrant rights on the home front.
In this context, this study tried to address the problem of how our migrant workers are
protected on the worksite and how government and NGOs address this problem. This study delved
into the factors that determine and influence protection mechanisms and compared and assessed
government and NGO mechanisms used to respond to the on-site issues and concerns of Filipino
migrant workers.
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
In light of the complexities of managing labor migration, this study sought to explore the
current state mechanisms and NGO interventions for the on-site protection of Filipino migrant
workers.
8|DAQUIS
This study aimed to achieve the following objectives:
1. To present an analysis of the government’s current mechanisms for the on-site protection of
Filipino migrant workers
o
To assess the current government framework for managing labor migration in the
context of its labor export policy
o
To investigate factors that influence the working of these mechanisms
2. To trace the involvement of NGOs in responding to the on-site concerns of Filipino migrant
workers
o
To identify NGO mechanisms for the on-site protection of migrant workers
o
To outline the challenges inhibiting NGOs from fully extending their services
3. To present a comparison of the government and NGO protection mechanisms
o
To evaluate the responsiveness of these mechanisms through inputs from Filipino
migrant workers
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
What accounts for the sudden proliferation of non-government organizations (NGOs) has
been the subject of development discourse in recent years. In the past decade or so, an extensive
research on the NGO phenomenon emerged within development studies (Lewis & Opoku-Mensah,
2006). Lewis (2003) attributes this dramatic expansion in the profile of NGOs in the arena of
international development to the emergent view of NGOs as sources of both new and alternative
development theories and practice. NGOs are usually referred to in research literature as the third
sector in development. In the context of Third World development, the term NGO has become a
fitting and functional description for the emerging type of organizations characterized as “everything
that government agencies were not,” a reference to the nature of NGOs as non-politicized, efficient,
non-bureaucratic and innovative (Sama, 2009).
9|DAQUIS
However, the theorization of the NGO phenomenon remains a relatively weak track in
research. As Lewis and Opoku-Mensah (2006) note, one of the key limitations of NGO research within
development studies is the lack of contextualization and weak theorization of the NGO phenomenon.
Across literature, it is argued that the policy debate on NGOs particularly illustrates the conflict
between private interest and public good, thus exemplifying the conflict between liberalism and
socialism. That is to say that, as Kamat (2004) articulates, the NGO debate remains trapped within an
atheoretical framework of the state set against civil society, with the caution of the erosion of state
power on one end and an indication of movement toward democracy on the other.
In development research, NGO literature focuses on the roles that these organizations play
both at the national and global contexts. Simmons (1998) identifies four ways in which NGOs affect
state and multilateral institutions: setting agenda, negotiating outcomes, conferring legitimacy, and
implementing solutions. With regard to the relation of NGOs to state institutions, most studies on the
emergence of NGOs argue that the creation of such organizations has been facilitated by state failure.
On the other hand, the contending view is that NGOs do not exist as alternative institutions for
services traditionally provided by the government, but instead, as Salamon (1987) argues, exist in
partnership with the government to form a “third party government”. Nevertheless, across literature
there appears to be a consensus that the failure of the state to carry out traditional functions such as
delivery of services to the public has opened up areas for NGO intervention. Brown and Korten
(1991) contend that state failure gives rise to a situation in which NGOs transpire as innovative
responses. In the same vein, Sim (2003) theorizes that the rise of NGOs in the past decade reveals the
“depth of civil responses” to systemic failure and gaps in the context of aid and support needed by
various groups and populations. Thus, as a continuing trend, NGOs have emerged to take on projects
that were formerly assumed by government agencies (Sama, 2009).
10 | D A Q U I S
However, while traditional NGO roles vis-à-vis systemic failure model have been confined to
the “supply side,” i.e., delivery of public services or assistance to official state agencies in program
implementation, as Clark (1993) notes, much of the recent literature on the work of NGOs now center
upon what is called the “demand side,” which expands the role of NGOs into activism, campaigning,
and advocacy. In this context, Morales (1990) notes that, in areas where the state has failed to lead,
NGOs should shoulder the rising challenge and responsibility of advocating alternative strategies and
programs.
This strand of research literature on government-NGO relations is particularly important in
this study of managing Philippine labor migration and migrant welfare protection. Huguet (2007)
discerns that certain migrant situations are often overlooked in the study of migration flows. One of
these, he notes, is the inability of governments to offer significant protection to migrants.
Furthermore, he contends that in transnational migration in Asia, few migrant workers actually
benefit directly from formal government protection mechanisms. NGOs, on the other hand, while
determined to make up for the services and protection the government is unable to provide, often
encounter official obstacles among other technical difficulties. However, despite this roadblock, NGOs
continue to play a significant role in the protection of migrant workers. Sim (2003), in a study of
Southeast Asian migrant workers and NGO presence in Hong Kong, observes that while migrant
NGOs continue to play its primary role of providing assistance to workers, the scope of their presence
and work has been extended. The study affirms the significant role and relevance of NGOs in
addressing the on-site issues of migrant workers, responding to the systemic failure of mainstream
state institutions. In their study of Filipino migrant workers in Japan, Ball and Piper (2002) conclude
that NGOs will continue to play a critical role in pushing for greater state and multilateral
institutional accountability.
11 | D A Q U I S
METHODOLOGY and RESEARCH DESIGN
The study employed a qualitative, descriptive research design, providing an opportunity to
outline the mechanisms of both the government and NGOs in responding to the on-site concerns of
migrant workers and consequently allowing for an evaluation and comparison of both mechanisms.
Survey methodology was used to gather data from Filipino migrant workers. A quantitative
approach was used to summarize and evaluate the responses from the survey. Further details on the
survey are discussed in the instrument and data collection section below. A copy of the survey
questionnaire is provided in Appendix B.
POPULATION AND SAMPLING
This study focused on those departments and attached agencies of the government whose
primary concern is the provision of on-site services and handling worksite issues of migrant workers.
These are the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) and its consular offices and embassies in Hong
Kong and the Middle East region, the DFA Office of the Undersecretary for Migrant Workers Affairs
(OUMWA) and the Department of Labor and Employment’s (DOLE) Philippine Overseas Labor Offices
(POLOs).
The choice of the Middle East and Hong Kong as focus regions of the study transpired out of
practical reasons and theoretical considerations. NGOs that were the focus of the study were
Migrante International and its attached office in the Middle East (Migrante ME), the Mission for
Filipino Migrant Workers (MFMW) in Hong Kong, and the International Migrants Alliance (IMA), an
international NGO based in Hong Kong.
12 | D A Q U I S
For the sample from the migrant workers population, snowballing and purposive sampling
were the methods used because of time and technical constraints. There were a total of 61
respondents at the end of the survey period.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
In an attempt to integrate international political and economic aspects of managing labor
migration, this study was conducted from an economic theoretical perspective and within the
framework of international relations. The dependent variables in this research, mechanisms for onsite protection of migrant workers, and the independent variables, politico-economic constraints,
foreign policy, and internal structural constraints, were studied within the framework of these
perspectives.
Developed within an economic perspective, Tvedt’s (1998) theory on the emergence of NGOs
utilizes the performance failure theory to explain the dynamics between governments and the
involvement of NGOs in the provision of public services. Building upon the performance failure
theory, Tvedt theorizes that a continuing unsatisfied demand for public goods or services in the
society serves as a cause for the existence of the NGO sector. State failure is perceived as one of the
key causes of the emergence and continued growth of the NGO sector. Anchored on the purpose of
serving rather than earning profits, these organizations have been particularly prevalent in the Third
World where the delivery of services to the public is a task often left unfulfilled by the government. In
this situation, whether state failure is due to resource issues or political considerations, NGOs are
known to step in and strive to fill in for the government. In this study, the performance failure theory
was used to analyze and interpret the profile of NGOs serving Filipino migrant workers.
One of the questions that drive this study is that of the role of the state in the migration
process and the globalization of labor markets and, in the case of Philippine labor migration, its
13 | D A Q U I S
implications on the capacity of the state to pursue the welfare of migrant workers. Cerny’s (1997)
theory of the competition state discusses the power of the state “with regard to a range of key tasks,
roles, and activities, in the face of processes of globalization.” It argues that adjustment to an open
global economy is not the only aim of state intervention, but is also aimed at sustaining, promoting,
and expanding the economy. Furthermore, Cerny theorizes that such strategies undermine the
“generic function of the state seen in terms of traditional conceptions of social justice and the public
interest.” Thus, to be more competitive in international terms and to sustain prosperity of the
domestic economy, the “loss of key traditional social and economic state functions” has to be accepted.
In line with this, the position of the state in the globalization of labor markets is also a discourse in
foreign policy. Medina (1995) discerns that it is also in the arena of foreign policy and international
relations that the government fails to assert its “sovereign right to protect the interests of Filipinos,”
echoing again the failure of state mechanisms to provide protection to its citizens. To the extent of
this study, the theory of competition state and foreign policy theories served as frameworks in
understanding the aggressive role of the state in promoting labor migration.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
On-site protection of Filipino Migrant Workers
Gaps in the state mechanism
NGO interventions
State mechanisms for protection
Government politicoeconomic policy
Foreign Policy
Resource and structural
constraints
14 | D A Q U I S
VARIABLE DEFINITION
On-site protection – refers to the protection of migrants’ welfare and rights during their stay on the
worksite in destination countries.
State mechanisms – refers to the strategies and programs of the government implemented by its
agencies and concerned departments.
NGO interventions – strategies and programs initiated and implemented by the non-government
sector and similar organizations.
Migration infrastructure – a system of institutions that facilitate the migration and the welfare
protection of transnational workers
Government politico-economic policy – pertains to the range of political considerations and
overall economic strategy of the state.
Foreign policy – state policy towards its diplomatic relations with other nations.
Resource and structural constraints – pertains to the range of budgetary, organizational, and
administrative constraints that can inhibit or influence the implementation of service provision and
programs.
15 | D A Q U I S
INSTRUMENTS and DATA COLLECTION
The instruments used in this study were the following:
1. Research on background data through an extensive review of published literature and official
documents
2. In-depth interviews with concerned government departments and related agencies (DFAOUMWA and POLO) and key NGOs ( Migrante ME, MFMW, IMA)
3. Correspondence with Philippine embassies and consulates
4. Survey questionnaire administered to Filipino migrant workers
Interviews with NGOs were conducted through email correspondence, except that for
Migrante Middle East Chapter which was personally conducted in Manila. As for the government
agencies, request for interviews were sent to Philippine Embassies in the Middle East and the
Consulate General in Hong Kong. The PH Embassies in Amman, Muscat, Kuwait, and the PCG in Hong
Kong have initially responded to the request; however, only that in Muscat was able to complete the
interview. For the POLOs, request for interviews were also sent through email. Two POLOs in the
Middle East, those in Kuwait and Jeddah, have initially responded; however, only that in Jeddah was
able to complete the interview. While direct correspondence with these posts abroad have been
unfortunately limited, the interview with DFA-OUMWA, the main state agency for migrant affairs and
to which these overseas posts primarily report, have substantially provided primary data and
supplemented needed data from the posts abroad.
A survey questionnaire developed and used to gather insights from Filipino migrant workers
was administered online. Survey questions were translated to Filipino. The questionnaire was hosted
at http://bitly.com/A0LTcY and went live 8th of January 2012. Survey link was posted in various
16 | D A Q U I S
migrant workers online groups in social networking sites and in general internet listings. There were
a total of 61 respondents when the survey was closed on the 25th of February.
Official statistics and other numerical data were obtained from PH government agencies.
Official reports and other pertinent documents from PH posts in the Middle East and Hong Kong, as
well as the DFA Reports to Congress, were provided by the database section of OUMWA, with due
permission for release from the Undersecretary.
DATA ANALYSIS
Data gathered and collected were analyzed using the theories outlined in the research
framework section. The analysis of government mechanisms for protection and the factors that
influence its structure and implementation was analyzed using the theory of competition state and
foreign policy theories. The performance failure theory provided the framework in exploring the
involvement of NGOs in supposedly state-managed migrant affairs.
Data obtained from the survey were processed through SPSS and were analyzed using
various descriptive statistical tools.
SCOPE AND LIMITATION
The life-cycle approach to migration divides the phenomenon into four phases: recruitment,
actual deployment, migrant return, and reintegration. This study, however, is directed at on-site
protection and, as such, concerns only the protection of Filipino migrant workers during the actual
deployment stage. While this is the case, other protective mechanisms that have direct effect on onsite protection but are not necessarily employed at the actual deployment stage were also discussed.
17 | D A Q U I S
Correspondence from the migrant workers was limited to land-based migrants currently
working or has worked for the last 10 years in the Middle East or in Hong Kong. These sites have
been chosen to allow for the manageable analysis of the data, given time constraints and technical
matters. Furthermore, these sites house a large population of Filipino migrant workers, and in recent
years, have experienced political crisis and other events that are known to pose threat to migrant
welfare.
The sampling method and sample size used for the migrant workers survey limited the
generalizability of the findings. It is acknowledged that the use of snowball method and a convenient
sample limited the generalizability of the study’s findings on the entire migrant population in the
focus regions. Furthermore, the absence of random sampling did not permit the analysis of the data
collected using inferential statistics.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
It has been said that migration affects almost every aspect of the Filipino life. A large portion
of the population has either been abroad or has a relative who is working abroad or had worked
abroad. The experiences of Filipino migrant workers are constantly in the news and the welfare of
these modern-day heroes is a concern that continues to dominate public discourse on government
policies on labor migration.
Two reasons highlight the necessity for studies like this. First, the on-site protection of
Filipino migrant workers is often overlooked in larger studies of labor migration. Focus has been
mostly directed at the study of remittances and the economic impacts of labor outflow while the
issue of migrant protection on the worksite remains despite the continuing cases of migrant worker
abuses and other worksite problems. This draws attention to the need for an assessment of the
18 | D A Q U I S
government’s current mechanism for on-site protection of migrant workers and an analysis of the
subsequent involvement of the NGO sector in pursuing migrant welfare.
Second, the recent wave of political unrest that swept the Middle East where there is a high
concentration of Filipino workers provides a context from which the protection mechanisms can be
evaluated. The various accounts of migrant workers experiences as reported during these events
underscore the need for an examination of the protection strategies of the government and NGOs
alike.
Finally, the researcher sincerely hopes that the results of this study will shed light on the
current dilemma of protecting Filipino migrant workers at a time when the state increasingly
supports labor migration and contribute to the furthering of our call for greater protection of our
migrant workers.
19 | D A Q U I S
CHAPTER II
I. Framework of State Mechanisms for Protection
As a major labor-sending country, the challenge for the Philippine government has always
been to protect and ensure the welfare of overseas Filipino workers (OFWs). Generally, two policy
tracks have been the cornerstone of state mechanisms for protection: regulatory measures and the
provision of support services. By and large, regulatory measures address pre-deployment
considerations, putting in place mechanisms for selective deployment. These measures at the predeployment stage of the labor migration process play a significant part in guaranteeing the safety and
rights of the migrant workers on-site; this study, however, as aforementioned, is focused on the
mechanisms for protection at the worksite. In the subsequent sections, only regulatory measures that
have a direct impact on on-site condition will be discussed.
Licensing of recruitment agencies and
accreditation of employers
Regulatory measures
Bilateral labor agreements, international
protocols
Certification of destination countries
STATE MECHANISM
Pre-deployment
assistance
Legal assistance
Provision of support
services
ONSITE SERVICES
Welfare services
Migrant return and reintegration program
Figure 1 Components of the state mechanism for protection
20 | D A Q U I S
Legal Framework
All Filipino workers, whether working domestically or outside the country, should enjoy the
protective mantle of Philippine labor laws and social protection. However, it was not until 1995 that
a legal framework for the protection of Filipino migrant workers has been established. Republic Act
No. 8042, the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995 (MWA)2, enacted during the same
year that Filipina domestic worker Flor Contemplacion was sentenced to death in Singapore, became
the legal mandate for the extension of government support to OFWS in their destination countries.
The Philippine government’s life-cycle approach to migration serves as the blueprint for R.A.
8042, addressing migrant workers’ concerns from pre-deployment, actual deployment, up to
reintegration when the contract expires or when the migrant decides to return home for good. Part
III of the Act is dedicated to service provision; the main state mechanism for on-site protection is
adequately detailed in this part of the Act. A summary of these and other relevant provisions is
presented in Table 1.
Government Policy
The Philippine government’s policy on migrant welfare and protection rests on the
standpoint that “protection starts at home”. The philosophy behind selective deployment – sending
migrant workers only to destination countries pre-approved by the government based on the
provisions set in Sec. 4 of the MWA3 – is that it is, in part, a guarantee that workers will be protected
and their welfare ensured in the destination countries. Hence, regulatory measures (see Figure 1)
serve as the first step in migrant welfare protection. The enforcement and, subsequently, the
“Overseas Filipinos” as defined by Sec. 3c of the MWA refers to dependents of migrant workers and other Filipinos in
distress as mentioned in Sections 24 and 26 of the Act.
3 The revised MWA states that the deployment of OFWs can only be allowed in a country that is, first, a signatory to a
multilateral convention protecting the rights of migrant workers or has existing labor laws protecting the rights of migrant
workers or has a bilateral labor agreement with the Philippines. As a second requirement, that country must be taking
“concrete and positive measures” to protect the rights of migrant workers (Conejos, 2012).
2
21 | D A Q U I S
effectiveness of these regulatory measures particularly the certification process, however, has been
the subject of criticism in recent years4.
In terms of on-site assistance, the policy of the Philippine government is rooted in its oath to
uphold the dignity and rights of all Filipinos overseas. Thus, as stated in Sec. 2 of MWA as amended
by R.A. No. 10022, government assistance extends to all distressed Filipinos overseas whether
regular (documented) or irregular (undocumented)5.
Institutional structures
Government agencies on foreign affairs and labor and employment, along with new offices
created to address specific concerns on migrant affairs, take on the role of overseeing the
administration and supervision of these state mechanisms. The mandates and duties of these
government agencies and offices are clearly defined to focus on the delivery of on-site protection and
welfare services.
1. Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA)
As the primary agency concerned with promoting the interests of Filipinos overseas, the DFA,
through its embassies and consulates, is at the forefront of ensuring the welfare of Filipino migrant
workers in their destination countries. The MWA provided for the establishment of an office focused
on responding to the growing need of the Filipino migrant population for legal services, creating the
Office of the Legal Assistant for Migrant Workers Affairs (OLAMWA) under DFA. OLAMWA was later
renamed to the Office of the Undersecretary for Migrant Workers Affairs (OUMWA) in 2003,
The Commission on Audit, in its 2007 Sectoral Audit of the Government’s Overseas Workers Welfare Program, noted that
Filipino workers are continuously being deployed to countries which do not guarantee protection of workers as per the
conditions set in Sec.4 of R.A. 8042 and to which the Philippine government has no bilateral agreement with. COA remarked
that such practice contributes in the commonly reported cases of contract violation, exploitation and abuse, and nonpayment of wages.
5 ILO, IOM, and other international bodies have refrained from using the term “illegal” migrants and have instead opted to
adopt the use of the terms “regular” and “irregular” to reflect the idea that “both from a juridical and an ethical point of view,
no human being can be considered illegal.” For an in-depth discussion of the rights-based approach to migration, see
Biccohi&LeVoy (2007).
4
22 | D A Q U I S
extending the range of its tasks from primarily rendering legal assistance to distressed OFWs to
generally including all other functions relating to the promotion of migrant welfare and protection
(Orbeta, Abrigo, & Cabalfin, 2009).
2. The Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE)
The International Labor Affairs Services (ILAS) of DOLE handles the task of promoting
migrant welfare by providing policy guidelines and labor personnel to the Philippine Overseas Labor
Office (POLO). Headed by labor attachés and established in destination countries with a large
concentration of Filipino migrant workers, POLOs enforce DOLE’s policies on labor migration and
ensure “that labor and social welfare laws in the foreign countries are fairly applied to migrant
workers”. The Office has three primary functions: to ensure the welfare of migrant workers through
the verification of employers; the delivery of on-site services and assistance on labor-related
concerns; and to conduct labor market surveys for new employment opportunities. While the Office
also handles majority of POEA’s overseas-related activities, it is not directly accountable nor
organizationally attached to POEA (Agunias, 2008). POLO, in line with the country-team approach of
the government, is based at and is under the administrative supervision of Philippine embassies and
consulates where it is located.
Though primarily a local agency concerned with the facilitation of the government’s overseas
employment program, the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA) also extends on-site
services through its welfare officers and agency representatives in Philippine embassies and
consulates in selected destination countries.
23 | D A Q U I S
Table 1
1995 MWA Provisions on On-site Protection
Section
Sec. 2
Title
Declaration of Policies
…the State shall, at all times, uphold the dignity of its citizens whether in country or overseas, in
general, and Filipino migrant workers, in particular, continuously monitor international
conventions, adopt/be signatory to and ratify those that guarantee protection to our migrant
workers, and endeavor to enter into bilateral agreements with countries hosting overseas Filipino
workers.
…the State shall provide adequate and timely social, economic and legal services to Filipino
migrant workers.
…it is imperative that an effective mechanism be instituted to ensure that the rights and interest of
distressed overseas Filipinos, in general and Filipino migrant workers, in particular, whether
regular / documented or irregular / undocumented, are adequately protected and safeguarded.
Sec. 4
Deployment of Migrant Workers
The State shall deploy overseas Filipino workers only in countries where the rights of Filipino
migrant workers are protected.
Sec. 19
Establishment of a Migrant
Workers and Other Overseas
Filipinos Resource Center
…there shall be establish a Migrant Workers and Other Overseas Filipinos Resource Center with
the following services:
Counseling and legal services;
Welfare assistance including the procurement of medical and hospitalization services;
Gender sensitive programs and activities to assist particular needs of women migrant workers;
Monitoring of daily situations, circumstances and activities affecting migrant workers and other
overseas Filipinos.
Sec. 27
Highest Priority Concern of the
Secretary of Foreign Affairs
The protection of the Filipino migrant workers and the promotion of their welfare, in particular,
and the protection of the dignity and fundamental rights and freedoms of the Filipino citizen
abroad, in general, shall be the highest priority concerns of the Secretary of Foreign Affairs and the
Philippine Foreign Service Posts.
Country-Team Approach
The protection of migrant workers’ rights and the promotion of their welfare constitute the
highest priority concerns of the Secretary of Foreign Affairs and the Philippine Foreign Service Posts.
To this end, the government has adapted a country-team approach which serves as the main state
strategy in responding to migrant concerns. Accordingly, on a per country basis, all officers,
representatives, and personnel of the Philippine government posted overseas, regardless of their
mother agency, operate as one country-team headed by the ambassador.
Resources
To facilitate the implementation of these mechanisms, the government has streamlined state
resources, setting up funds specifically allocated for on-site assistance. With the DFA at the forefront
of migrant workers’ on-site protection, financial resources are coursed through the department’s
offices.
1. Assistance-to-Nationals (ATN) Fund
The ATN fund covers expenses for the assistance of Filipinos overseas, including migrant
workers. The P300-million fund is utilized for repatriation expenses such as airfare and visa fees,
shipment of remains to the Philippines, jail visitation, and other on-site concerns.
In 2011, the DFA budget suffered a 40-percent decrease, reducing the department’s budget
from P19 billion from the previous year to just almost P11 billion. Subsequently, the ATN fund in
2011 was reduced from P200 million to P109 million. As per DFA data in September 2011, P165,
894,326.59 of the ATN fund has been utilized for OFW assistance.
25 | D A Q U I S
2. Legal Assistance Fund (LAF)
Use of the LAF is exclusive for the extension of legal assistance to distressed overseas Filipino
workers. Initially, the 100-million-pesos fund was set up with resources coming from the
Presidential Contingency Fund (P50 million), President’s Social Fund (P30 million), and OWWA
Welfare Fund (P20 million). With the enactment of the MWA, balances of existing funds which have
been specifically set aside for legal assistance or defense fund for migrant workers were turned over
to the Fund. Costs and expenditures that can be charged against the fund, as provided for by the law,
include the fees of foreign lawyers who will represent Filipino workers and other costs of going to
court and bail bonds. As of September 2011 statistics, nearly P74 million of LAF has been utilized.
II. Non-governmental Organizations Engaged in Migrant Affairs
Apart from formal government channels, non-governmental organizations and similar
institutions engaged in migrant affairs render relevant services and assistance to migrant workers
communities. The oftentimes negative experiences of Filipino migrant workers in the decades-long
run of the overseas employment program of the government has spurred the growth and
necessitated the intervention of non-government actors.
This section presents the profiles of NGOs engaged in migrant affairs that have served as
cases in point for this study – Migrante Middle East chapter, the Mission for Filipino Migrant Workers
(MFMW) in Hong Kong, and the International Migrants Alliance (IMA).
Migrante Middle East
One of the most recognized NGOs in Filipino migrant affairs, Migrante International has been
at the forefront of assisting distressed overseas Filipino workers and advocating migrant welfare and
26 | D A Q U I S
protection. Migrante’s Middle East chapter was established in 1985 and has since then been an active
voice for the Filipino overseas workers community in the Middle East.
Migrante International is essentially an alliance made up of different Migrante chapters and
several OFW groups. The Middle East chapter is also networked with other OFW organizations that
affiliates with Migrante International, for instance, the Kapatiran sa Gitnang Silangan (KGS), a
grassroots movement of Filipino migrant workers that has been in the Middle East even before the
establishment of the Migrante chapter in the region. The current Regional Coordinator of Migrante
ME is Mr. John Leonard Monterola, an OFW himself, based in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. At the
global level, Migrante is affiliated with the International Migrants Alliance and is, in fact, among its
founding members.
Mission for Filipino Migrant Workers (MFMW)
Established in 1981, MFMW is a non-profit migrant-service provider located in Central Hong
Kong. For 30 years now, the Mission has been extending assistance and support services to
distressed Filipino migrant workers, most of them women domestic workers who suffered
maltreatment and abuse from their employers, while at the same time advocating migrants’ rights. In
addressing the immediate needs of Filipino migrant workers in distress, MFMW notes that its
strategy – Crisis Intervention and Prevention through Migrant Empowerment (CIPME) – is a
comprehensive approach focused on service provision and at the same time migrant empowerment.
International Migrants Alliance (IMA)
Founded in 2008, the International Migrants Alliance is composed of more than 120 migrant
organizations, grassroots movements, and migrant-serving institutions from different countries.
Raising the issue of forced migration and the rights and welfare of migrant workers at the
international level, IMA addresses the problem and difficulty of organizing migrant workers from
27 | D A Q U I S
different origin and destination countries. In destination countries with a huge concentration of
migrant workers, IMA engages with target groups, i.e. host governments as well as sending
governments, to express their concerns and demand for assistance. IMA’s secretariat is based in
Hong Kong. Current chairperson is Ms. Eni Lestari, an Indonesian migrant worker who is also based
in HK.
III. Trends in Philippine Labor Outflow
Philippine labor migration has been described as serving as “a pair of crutches for the local
economy6”, implying the use of overseas employment as a strategy to achieve the two main objectives
of easing local unemployment and generating foreign exchange. From the onset of the country’s third
wave of labor outflow in the mid-70s up to the present exodus of Filipino skilled workers and
professionals, these two objectives have remained the cornerstone of the government’s overseas
employment program. In essence, the country’s economy has remained dependent on these crutches,
still unable to stand on its own after more than thirty years of labor outflow. Migration for
development in the Philippine case has never translated to long-term growth; in reality, it has
become a form of a moral hazard. In the microsense it has affected the financial discipline of Filipino
households. From the macroperspective, it led to government reliance of economic “growth” on
remittances, which has almost rendered local job creation as an inexistent economic strategy.
While local economic conditions have been consistent push factors, pull factors continue to
be defined by the international labor market demands. The market for overseas labor may have
diversified over the years, following the opening up of more Asian and also European countries to the
foreign workforce (Battistella & Asis, 2011); however, this did not significantly alter the rankings of
the major OFW destinations. In the past decade, top destination countries have remained more or
Philippines Overseas Migration Amidst the Asian Crisis, paper prepared for the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (FES) Southeast
Asian Regional conference on migrant workers and the Asian crisis: towards a trade union position.
6
28 | D A Q U I S
less the same, with deployment figures for the Middle East and Asia in the top spots. Since 2004,
labor flows to these top 10 destinations comprise no less than 70% of the total land-based
deployment figures. In 2010, 79.9% of the total number of land-based Filipino migrant workers was
deployed to these top 10 destinations7.
Deployed Land-based Filipino Migrant Workers
No of Filipino migrnat Workers
(in thousands)
800
700
600
500
Asia
Middle East
400
Other regions
300
200
100
0
Figure 2 Historic flow of land-based migrant workers by major region
Source: Philippine Statistical Yearbook 2007, 2008 – 2010 figures from NSCB and POEA
Given the extent of Filipino labor outflow and the socio-cultural characteristics of these
destinations, it is for these reasons that the Middle East and Hong Kong (the consistent top
destination in Asia) were selected as the focus regions for the assessment of the state mechanisms
outlined in the previous section.
Percentage figures calculated from the data published in POEA’s Overseas Employment Statistics 2010. Of the ten top
destination countries since 2004, only two were not ME or Asian countries – Canada and Italy – both in the lower half of the
ranking.
7
29 | D A Q U I S
CHAPTER III
Data Presentation and Analysis
Drawing from the interviews with key government officials and NGOs, this chapter presents a
picture of on-site migrant welfare and protection from the perspectives of the state, NGOs engaged in
migrant affairs, and Filipino migrant workers themselves. Current assessment of state mechanisms in
the two focus destination areas will first be presented, followed by cases of NGO interventions in
migrant welfare and protection in these areas. Inputs from Filipino migrant workers gathered
through the survey conducted are also incorporated. Lastly, government response to criticisms is
presented and a subsequent analysis of migrant welfare and protection in the context of labor export
and labor market globalization closes the chapter.
I. Government Provision of Services and On-site Assistance
The extension of legal assistance and relevant social services to distressed migrant workers
and other overseas Filipinos constitute the main state instrument for on-site protection. As such,
these two components will be the basis for assessment of government protection mechanism in the
focus regions of the study.
1. Legal Assistance
Distressed migrant workers who have labor-related concerns, e.g. substitution of contract,
non-payment of wages, and other cases that need legal counseling may visit the Philippine embassy
or consulate to seek the assistance of the labor or legal officer. In the case of those workers facing
charges, it is also within the responsibility of the Philippine team to hire foreign lawyers that shall
represent the distressed worker in court.
30 | D A Q U I S
POLOs handle conciliation and mediation. If the mechanism fails to have the concerned
parties arrive at a settlement agreement, the POLO will subsequently endorse a complaint to the
POEA office in Manila for action.
As previously discussed, the law specifically states that access to legal assistance to be
provided by the government extends to all Filipino migrant workers regardless of status, that is,
whether they are regular (documented) or irregular (undocumented).
2. Social and Welfare Services
The Filipino Workers Resource Center (FWRC), under the administrative jurisdiction and
within the premises of Philippine embassies or consulates and operated and maintained by POLOs,
serves as the focal venue for the provision of on-site social services. Operational 24-hours daily
including weekends and holidays, the Center is directed to provide legal assistance, psychological
counseling, and temporary shelter to distressed migrant workers and other overseas Filipinos. Apart
from this, the Center should also be able to run post-arrival and pre-return orientation programs, as
well as training, skills upgrading, and gender-sensitive (for women migrants) programs. The Center
is also tasked with the “monitoring of daily situations, circumstances and activities affecting migrant
workers and other overseas Filipinos.”
A. Middle East
The Middle East region has been the destination of Filipino labor outflows since the start of
the government’s overseas employment program in the 1970s. From mainly construction jobs in the
infrastructure sector of the Gulf countries, the subsequent decades saw Filipino migrant workers
taking on jobs in the service, domestic work, and in recent years in the health sector. The Kingdom of
Saudi Arabia (KSA) and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) remain the top destinations in the region,
accounting for 72% of total deployment to the region in 2010. The sheer volume of Filipino labor
31 | D A Q U I S
force outflow to these countries, along with the significant socio-cultural differences between the
Philippines and the Middle East, instantly necessitates that the government mechanisms for
protection should be adequately working in the region.
OFW Deployment in the Middle East
2010
KSA
UAE
2009
Rest of Middle
East
2008
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Deployment (in thousands)
Figure 3. KSA and UAE portion of the total OFW deployment in the Middle East. Tabulated from the statistics
from POEA, DFA, and OWWA reports.
Figure 4. Middle East countries
Source: Map by Chuncui Velma Fan of the Migration Policy Institute. From MPI’s Insight (2007).
32 | D A Q U I S
At present, there are fifteen (15) POLOs located in the Middle East. Of the 15, four are located
in KSA, the top destination in the region, and two are in UAE.
Abu Dhabi, UAE
Alkhobar, KSA
Amman
Bahrain
Dubai, UAE
Israel
Jeddah, KSA
Kuwait
Lebanon
Libya
Muscat
Onaizah Central Region, KSA
Qatar
Riyadh, KSA
Syria
The most common concerns as reported by POLOs in the Middle East are labor-related cases,
mostly contract violations, and various forms of abuse and maltreatment. Labor cases include unpaid
or delayed salaries, illegal deductions, contract substitution, and non-payment of overtime work and
entitlements and benefits upon end of employment contract. Abuse and maltreatment cases range
from poor living conditions, verbal, physical, and sexual abuses, to forced work even upon end of
contract and false accusations of wrong doings, such as theft, by the employer. Looking at the survey
33 | D A Q U I S
of Filipino migrant workers (n=61), out of the 18 in the Middle East who claimed that they have
encountered a problem on-site, 11 (61%) have cited experiencing delayed, non-payment, and
receiving unjust wages. Discrimination and poor working conditions are two other most cited
problems encountered on-site.
Table 2. Frequency of OFWs who encountered on-site problems by study region
Recode by Region
Middle East
EncProb
Hong Kong
Total
yes
18
6
24
not yet
33
4
37
51
10
61
Total
Note: N=61. Respondents from the Middle East region are from KSA, UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait,
Oman, and Qatar. For the detailed profile of respondents, see Appendix B.
Table 3. Frequency of OFWs who encountered wage-related problems
Recode by Region
Middle East
EncProb2a
Total
Hong Kong
Total
no
7
1
8
yes
11
5
16
18
6
24
Note: Wage-related problems (variable EncProb2a), as defined in the survey, refer to delayed, nonpayement, or unjust wages.
34 | D A Q U I S
Figure 5. Percentages of on-site problems encountered (Middle East and Hong Kong data)
Note: EncProb2a = delayed, non-payment or unjust wages; EncProb2b = maltreatment or abuse;
EncProb2c = substitution or violation of contract signed in PH; EncProb2d = poor working conditions;
EncProb2e = discrimination.
There are also numerous cases of petty crimes committed by Filipino workers such as theft,
gambling, and fighting. On the other hand, it is noteworthy that while concerns have been focused on
labor-related problems, in terms of Filipino-committed offenses, a substantial number of cases in the
Middle East can be attributed to cultural differences. The possession of liquor, gambling, and adultery
and even flirting, are some of the more common cases, as the Shari’ah law especially in Saudi Arabia
is strictly implemented. Looking at the case of Abu Dhabi, Doha, and Riyadh, a breakdown of cases by
nature shows that what we may not consider as unlawful here in the Philippines are offensive and
punishable under the laws in the Middle East.
35 | D A Q U I S
Table 4. Breakdown of Cases by Nature (Jan – June 2010, 2011)
Nature of Case
Adultery
Alcohol-related
(illegal possession and drinking w/o
permit)
Love case / Immorality
(homosexuality, prostitution, flirting)
Witchcraft
Abu Dhabi
19
Doha
6
Riyadh
-
8
2
50
8
21
207
-
-
7
Source: From DFA Reports to Congress, Jan – June 2010, 2011
Just this February, the PH Embassy in Riyadh released a statement8 warning and advising
OFWs in KSA to take precautions with regard to their use of social media sites and online networking.
This is due to the complaint received by the concerned PH post from Saudi officials that local citizens
have voiced out negative reactions over a provocative photo of a female “model” in KSA uploaded
online by a Filipino community group. In the released statement, the embassy in Riyadh reminded
the Filipino community in the region to be mindful of the local customs and social practices as to not
elicit the attention of local authorities.
The post in Doha reports that on average, 80% of the cases against Filipinos in Qatar are
what they call as love cases. Such cases can be attributed to the Filipinos’ lack of substantial
knowledge about the local cultural and social practices in the Middle East, a concern which can be
addressed, as the DFA remarks, through pre-deployment orientations on Shari’ah law. Other posts in
the Middle East have also relayed the same recommendation of intensifying the pre-deployment
orientation of workers on the culture and living environment in the host countries.
8
See Appendix C for a copy of the statement released 21 February 2012 by the PH Embassy in Riyadh.
36 | D A Q U I S
STATISTICS ON DISTRESSED FILIPINO WORKERS IN THE MIDDLE EAST 9
Table 5. Number of Filipinos in jails, detention centers, under house arrest or with pending cases in the Middle East
July – Dec
2010
Male
Female
Jan – June
2011
Male
Female
Bahrain
62
Iran
10
12
50
17
Israel
236
3
7
Iraq10
No
report
/
/
18
3
6
No
report
/
/
9
6
11
Jordan
38
41
195
0
38
47
7
11
KSA
830
364
466
623
0
47
326
297
Kuwait
297
Lebanon
51
7
290
Oman
6
1
50
140
34
Qatar
62
4
2
6
21
119
Syria
28
26
36
61
0
34
4
2
1
27
25
33
28
UAE
461
143
318
489
0
25
160
329
Table 6. Number of Filipinos sheltered 11
July – Dec
2010
FWRC /
Gov’t
custody
NGO
institutions
Jan – June
2011
FWRC /
Gov’t
custody
NGO
institutions
Bahrain
Iran
Iraq
325
5
0
325
662
622
5
4
0
Jordan
KSA
Kuwait
Lebanon
Oman
Qatar
Syria
UAE
147
1661
1328
232
600
38
255
838
0
147
no exact
count
No exact
count
0
4
Israel
No exact
count
0
1328
209
600
37
23
54
223
54
no exact
count
1661
224
2885
2885
265
838
1
600
255
255
600
50
115
50
115
739
739
10
Data tabulated from reports of the Philippine Embassies and PCGs to the DFA and DFA Reports to Congress for the years 2010 and 2011.
No report received. While nearly 2,500 Filipinos are working in US compounds in Iraq, the site visit conducted by Special Envoy Roy Cimatu and Labor Attaché Borja of POLODamascus in August 2010 concludes that “working within the safe confines of these bases, Filipino workers have found not only conducive western-standard working conditions
but, more importantly, extra-ordinary high paying jobs that make the salary rates for similar positions in the rest of the Middle East pale by comparisons.” (DFA Report to
Congress)
11 Data tabulated from the DFA’s Reports to Congress for the periods July – December 2010 and January –June 2011, the latest available data. Note that these are official figures
recorded; cases that were unreported, for instance, runaways who were discretely sheltered by local NGOs and other Filipinos, are not included.
9
10
37 | D A Q U I S
Looking at data on Filipinos who have been in jails and detention centers in the Middle East,
Saudi Arabia, unsurprisingly, has the greatest need for legal assistance. In the POLO in Jeddah, for
instance, which handles the whole Western region of KSA where there are close to 300 000 Filipinos,
cases handled over the past years number over a thousand each year.
Table 7. Labor cases handled and workers assisted through conciliation-mediation
services
PARTICULARS
No. of Cases Handled
No. of workers involved
2008
3,702
3,702
2009
2,170
2,170
2010
3,921
3,921
2011
1,828
2,063
TOTAL
11,621
11,856
Source: POLO – Jeddah Accomplishment Reports for CY 2008, 2009, 2010 & 2011
The OFWs in the Middle East have affirmed this pressing need for legal assistance. Among the
on-site services and assistance included in the survey, 83% of the respondents have cited legal
assistance as the most needed service.
Figure 6. On-site services most needed by OFWs. Data includes respondents’ inputs from HK.
Note: LA = Legal assistance; PC = Psychological counseling; FMA = Free medical assistance;
TS = Temporary shelter; IC = Information center
38 | D A Q U I S
Assessment of State Mechanisms
1. Provision of legal assistance
Bureaucratic, inefficient, and “selective” provision of legal services
The process of providing legal assistance, however, is criticized by NGOs working in the
Middle East for being bureaucratic. Upon the distressed OFW’s request for legal assistance, the
concerned embassy will first forward the request, including the post’s own recommendations, to the
DFA in Manila for approval. OUMWA will evaluate the request and only upon the approval of the
undersecretary will funds for legal assistance to the case be released and remitted to the foreign post
concerned. According to NGOs, not all requests are approved and there is no transparency regarding
the guidelines for approval of OUMWA. The mere process of requesting for legal assistance takes
time, leaving the distressed OFW without any counsel and vulnerable to conviction, whether or not
that OFW is guilty of the case filed.
In relation to this bureaucratic process, another criticism of the government’s legal
assistance scheme in the Middle East is the inadequate provision of lawyers. The current system of
hiring foreign lawyers to represent Filipinos facing charges in court is on a case-to-case basis. NGOs
remark that because of this arrangement, most distressed Filipinos attend hearings in lower courts
without the aid of lawyers. In such situation, they become vulnerable to incrimination because
whether the charges are true or not, language barriers make it hard for them to follow and
understand the proceedings and they are prone to improperly answering questions of the
prosecution. And even in the case that an interpreter is provided, the distressed Filipino is still left
without proper counsel as the interpreter cannot do anything aside from translating the proceedings
to English; they cannot advice nor give any legal instruction. If the interpreter provided is a foreign
one, as in some cases, the concern is that the distressed OFW may not be sure if the translation is
truthful. Conviction rate is subsequently high, and it is only when an appeal is filed that the embassy
normally provides a lawyer.
39 | D A Q U I S
The two previous observations and criticisms of the current scheme of the government’s
provision of legal assistance lead to the question of how properly the LAF is being utilized. There are
two central issues in this concern. First, the LAF, as previously discussed, is coursed through OUMWA
and, at present, there is no official appropriation scheme for the Fund; release of funds is on a caseto-case basis, as previously discussed. Considering the huge number of Filipinos needing legal
assistance, regardless of the nature of the case, there has been a proposal that the LAF be
“percentage-appropriated”. Such strategy can concentrate the funds on regions where there have
been record number of cases that need legal assistance and can subsequently fast-track the release of
funds for assistance. Second issue is the hiring of foreign lawyers. In destination countries such as
KSA for instance, where there is a large number of Filipinos facing charges in court which needs
representation, the case-to-case basis hiring proves to be difficult and inefficient. The alternative
proposal to address this concern is to hire foreign lawyers on a retention basis. Because foreign
lawyers will be hired on a contract basis, all cases that need legal assistance will handled by them and
they can be called on immediately in case a distressed Filipino needs representation. This may prove
to be an efficient way not only to respond to the time concern but also to the management of funds.
2. Welfare services
Selective accommodation at FWRCs and inadequate space and facilities at the shelter
In terms of welfare services, POLOs handle the provision of service delivery as stipulated by
the legal framework. Based on the 2007 Sectoral Performance Audit of COA12, there are only 12
FWRCs or shelters operated by POLO in the region. Thus, not all POLOs in the Middle East maintain a
shelter – as of the Jan-June 2011 DFA RTC, posts in Baghdad and Damascus have recommended the
establishment of an FWRC. Moreover, the existing shelters in the Middle East are housing only female
distressed Filipino workers. Male distressed workers, who are significant in number, many of whom
are overstaying and/or undocumented (what most would call as “TNTs”), do not have a shelter to
12
COA’s 2007 report only lists 14 POLOs (excluding Iraq and Syria) as of their 2006 audit date.
40 | D A Q U I S
run to for assistance. Instead, these distressed male workers are forced to seek shelter and ask for
assistance from co-workers, friends, or Filipino organizations in the region; however, this proves to
be risky as absconding is a violation of the immigration law in the Middle East, particularly in Saudi
Arabia, and the act of taking in an undocumented or runaway worker is also deemed an offence.
A number of FWRCs are also not adequate, in terms of space and facilities, for the growing
number of distressed Filipino workers seeking shelter. The FWRC in Kuwait, for instance, has enough
space for only 50 Filipinos. However, considering the huge number of those workers that need to be
provided shelter (see Table 6), as could be seen in the official report of the Philippine embassy that
an average of 150 to 200 workers are being accommodated at any time, there is a serious problem of
overcrowding. This overcrowding exacerbates the already problematic condition of the FWRC,
having no adequate basic facilities that could be used by the distressed Filipinos. The problem is
recognized by the embassy and is currently seeking for space to transfer the operations of the FWRC.
However, while the limitation of space in the facility to accommodate distressed OFWs is a
major concern in the provision of welfare services, what could be a better way to ease the
overcrowding in the shelter is to speed up the resolution of the cases of these Filipino workers so
that they could be repatriated back to the Philippines. By attending to these cases and facilitating its
speedy disposition, overcrowding in the FWRC can be prevented and the space could be freed up to
accommodate other Filipinos that might need assistance.
These concerns and observations have been raised during the interview with DFA Migrant
Workers Affairs Undersecretary Conejos and DFA’s response to these criticisms is discussed in the
third section of this chapter.
41 | D A Q U I S
B. Hong Kong
Rampant cases of abuse in the past, exploitation, and poor working conditions have not
deterred Filipinos from working in Hong Kong. The relative ease of getting a working permit once in
HK is being used by many Filipinos to their advantage. Leaving the country as tourists, many are able
to work in HK after securing a permit and finding an employer. In 2010, total number of Filipino
workers in HK reached 101 340, accounting for largest OFW deployment figure in Asia.
OFW Deployment in Asia
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
Hong Kong
Rest of Asia
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Deployment (in thousands)
Figure 7. OFW deployment in Hong Kong as a substantial portion of total deployment in Asia. Computed
from the statistics from POEA, OWWA, and NSCB.
Majority of Filipino migrant workers in HK are Foreign Domestic Workers (FDWs) or who
are commonly known as domestic helpers. As per DFA data for the first half of 2011, nearly 86% of
the total population of Filipino workers in HK is classified as FDWs.
Table 8. OFWs in HK classified by skills13
Breakdown by Skills
Professionals (as categorized by Hong Kong’s
General Employment policy)
FDWs
As of June 30 2011
5 000
138 933
Under HK’s General Employment Policy, professionals are “foreign employees who have good educational qualifications
and possess special skills, knowledge or experience of value to and not readily available in HK.”
13
42 | D A Q U I S
FDWs can work and stay in HK as long as they have legitimate contracts. The contract is
commonly for two years; however, in reality, it can be noted that it is “month-per-month”, “as the
employer can terminate the contract with just a month’s notice.” In terms of the working permit,
FDWs are covered by the 2-Week Rule, as stipulated in the New Conditions of Stay (1987). This
means that if the FDW is terminated before the contract duration, she is only allowed to stay in HK
for only 2 weeks. FDWs are excluded from many of the laws and policies of the HK government with
regard to labor. For instance, the Statutory Minimum Wage does not apply to FDW; instead, they are
covered by the Minimum Allowable Wage which is currently set at HK$374014.
Due to these aforementioned reasons and the very nature of their work, FDWs are often
regarded as the most vulnerable group of Filipino migrant workers. In the survey conducted, of the
10 respondents from HK, 6 out of the 8 domestic workers have encountered a problem on-site. Of
these 6, 5 have experienced wage-related problems (see Table 3).
Table 9. Frequency OFW Respondents Having Encountered an On-site Problem per Work Sector
Work
Office /
Recode by Region
not yet
Total
HK
EncProb yes
not yet
Total
Construction
Household
Administrative Sector and Engineering
Middle EncProb yes
East
Health
Service
Sales /
Services Manufacturing
IT
Total
7
0
5
1
3
0
1
17
7
4
12
0
5
2
3
33
14
4
17
1
8
2
4
50
0
6
0
6
1
2
1
4
1
8
1
10
Amount is already inclusive of the HK$160 increase in the Minimum Allowable Wage for FDWs announced by the HK
government in June 2011.
14
43 | D A Q U I S
Assessment of State Mechanisms
1. Provision of Legal Assistance
Conciliation and mediation services to the advantage of offending party
The primary representation of the Philippine government in HK is the Consulate General
(PCG). The Office of the Labor Attaché handles interpretation and legal counseling for distressed
Filipino migrant workers whose cases are pending at the Labor Relations Service, Minor Employment
Claims Adjudication Board, and the Labor Tribunal. For cases before the regular courts, the Police,
and the Immigration Commission, jurisdiction is with the Assistance to Nationals (ATN) section of
the Consulate.
Conciliation and mediation services are also extended by the Consulate. However, it is worth
noting that these services are only for those pre-terminated workers deployed by an agency. With
the goal of arriving at an agreeable settlement, these services are facilitated by the Consulate to
respond to OFW complaints against their placement agency, be it in Hong Kong or back in the
Philippines. After a complaint is filed, a conciliation meeting before the Conciliator-Mediator of
POLO-HK will be held. If the two parties, the migrant worker complainant and the agency, arrive at a
settlement, an agreement shall be executed. However, in such case where the conciliation fails, POLOHK will forward the complaint to POEA for action.
Table 10. Number of Filipinos in jails, detention centers, under house arrest or with pending
cases in Hong Kong
Jan – June 2010
July – Dec 2010
Jan – June 2011
Male
23
30
39
Female
89
81
76
Total
112
111
115
Source: PCG reports to DFA and DFA RTC for the periods indicated
However, based on the data gathered from published reports and the interview with MFMW,
the following are the observed questionable practices of the PCG in Hong Kong in terms of legal
assistance.
44 | D A Q U I S
Complaints of OFWs with ongoing contracts are not entertained by the PCG unless insisted
upon or through the intervention of NGOs. This can be verified as indicated in its website
(see figure 8 below), stating that they provide shelter only to those whose contracts are preterminated. It is also noted that the conciliation process is extended only to these preterminated cases.
According to MFMW records, OFWs were told that no conciliation process is conducted
during Sundays but only from Mondays – Thursdays.
The conciliation process is scheduled by the PCG a few days before or even on the day the
OFW complainant needs to go back home. A situation like this is more favorable to the
agency as basically conciliation includes negotiation.
Terminated complainants and those with labor claims are also told that the conciliation
process can only be conducted “once their labor claims have been addressed by HK labor
authorities.” This should not be the case as a labor claim is filed against the employer and not
against the placement agency.
If the concerned OFW does not want to settle with the agency during the conciliation process,
the PCG staff informs the OFW that he or she cannot get an endorsement letter from them
(addressed to the anti-illegal recruitment branch of the POEA) unless it is near the date of
their departure back to the Philippines. The implication is that, if you have an ongoing
contract, you cannot get an endorsement letter from them. MFMW says that this is not true
because they have assisted OFWs who have successfully filed complaints against their
45 | D A Q U I S
recruitment agencies in the POEA by making a Special Power of Attorney (SPA) to someone
who can represent them in their case back in the Philippines.
There are also instances when certain staff of the consulate who are from OWWA would take
the side of the agency or would dissuade the OFW to continue the case in the Philippines
because they say this will take a long time to take or say that the OFW should pay for the
alleged loan that they were forced to avail of by the placement agency.
In essence, from these observations it appears that the conciliation and mediation services
are applicable only to cases of distressed workers who have already been pre-terminated. This raises
the question of why the Philippine team would not attend to distressed Filipino workers who still
have ongoing contracts. If such is the case, then these distressed OFWs who should be given
assistance might be continually suffering injustices under their employers. It also appears that, based
on how the conciliation process is conducted, these processes that were supposed to seek justice for
the distressed workers were being used as a mechanism for the easy disposition of cases. The
problem with this is that the case may merit more than what was given to the aggrieved migrant
worker in the conciliation process, thus possibly letting employers and agencies off bigger
responsibilities or punishment.
This use of conciliation process to address cases that should be attended to through other
legal process can be cited in the handling of cases related to the payment of placement fees. In Hong
Kong, MFMW notes that the most common complaints of Filipino domestic workers is the illegal
imposition on them of placement fees, often either in cash or in the guise of a loan15. POEA’s 2007
Guidelines on Household Service Workers particularly states that all HSWs need not pay any
placement fee. Furthermore, under the revised MWA, imposition of such fees is a criminal offense
In a survey conducted by MFMW in 2007, it was found that Filipino HSWs deployed after the implementation of the POEA
Guidelines even paid higher placement fees compared to when the policy has not been in effect.
15
46 | D A Q U I S
and corresponds to a charge of illegal recruitment. However, when a domestic worker files a
complaint against the recruiter or agency at the PCG, a conciliation process will be instead
undergone. In consequence, there will be no prosecution when both parties agree to the process. In
the event that the complainant accepts the terms of the conciliation, he or she will be made to sign a
waiver and a quitclaim16 that lays down an agreement that a case against the recruiter or agency
cannot be pursued anymore in any Hong Kong government body or in the POEA or NLRC back in the
Philippines.
2. Welfare services
Selective accommodation at Kowloon FWRC
For welfare and social services, the POLO-HK operates a FWRC in Kowloon. However, based
on the interview with MFMW, the said FWRC is known to not accept male distressed workers and
there have also been complaints that it does not accommodate undocumented and overstaying
OFWs. This is similar to the situation in the Middle East, as discussed above. The non-accommodation
of male distressed OFWs can be verified as FWRC policy posted in the Philippine Consulate General’s
official website.
Also part of the said quitclaim is a stipulation that the complaint filed was due to the “misunderstanding or
misapprehension” of the OFW. Furthermore, the refund of the placement fee or the waiver of the “loan” that the complainant
OFW will get is often described as financial assistance and not as agency or recruiter penalty for the violation of illegal
recruitment.
16
47 | D A Q U I S
Figure 8. Website screenshot of the PhilConGen-HK FWRC Custodial Services
http://www.philcongen-hk.com/labor/main.htm
“FWRC is basically a 24 hour residential quarter managed and operated by the
Philippine Overseas Labor Office, providing temporary shelter only to FEMALE
distressed Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) such as those whose contracts have
been prematurely terminated and have pending cases at the Labor or Police, or
Immigration Departments. Other OFWs who are in need of emergency shelter may be
allowed/considered but on a case-to-case basis only.”
MFMW also notes that as far as FWRC in Kowloon is concerned, it does not conduct
counseling services, a reason why a number of those temporarily residing in the FWRC seek support
from NGO service providers.
Table 11. Number of distressed Filipinos in shelter
Jan – June 2010
July – Dec 2010
Jan – June 2011
FWRC
5
7
53
Non-government shelters
30
50
50
Source: Data tabulated from the statistics from DFA RTC in 2010 and 2011
Because of the “conditions” set by the PCG before accommodating distressed OFWs at the
FWRC, it is unsurprising that these workers often end up attended to by NGOs and other non-state
migrant institutions and service providers. At look at the number of distressed workers handled by
the FWRC as against those sheltered at other facilities reveals such trend.
48 | D A Q U I S
II. NGO Interventions
A. NGO Service Delivery and Advocacy
Migrante ME
Provision of Services and Assistance
Essentially, Migrante-ME is a grassroots organization that caters to the needs of distressed
overseas Filipinos in the Middle East through the provision of direct assistance such as counseling,
case follow-ups, shelter and other welfare services. Aside from service delivery, the organization is
actively engaged in welfare campaign and policy advocacy, pushing for reforms both at its respective
country chapters through dialogues with their respective Philippine posts and at home through the
Migrante International Office in Manila.
In recent years, the cases that the organization handles climbed to 7 to 10 new cases daily.
These cases range from contract violations, unpaid salaries, abusive working conditions, verbal,
physical, and sexual assaults, to those charged with possession of liquor and other petty crimes. In
the past years, as its regional coordinator notes, distressed Filipino workers, particularly in KSA,
come to Migrante for assistance after their requests for services such as legal assistance at their
respective embassies have been largely ignored. But more recently, as the organization began
receiving the reported 7 to 10 cases daily, it has been observed that these distressed OFWs were
coming to Migrante firsthand for assistance instead of going directly to the embassy to report their
cases.
In such situation, it is Migrante which endorses the case to the concerned Philippine
embassies for appropriate action, and follows the case until it gets resolved. Resolution normally
comes fast with labor-related cases such as non-payment of or delayed salaries as these are coursed
through conciliation services, in which Migrante sometimes also helps in by calling the attention of
49 | D A Q U I S
the concerned employment agency in the Philippines. However, with cases such as OFWs facing
charges in court, only the Philippine Embassy has the legal entitlement to represent Filipino migrant
workers. As such, what Migrante can do as an NGO is to just refer and follow up the cases with the
Embassy.
The organization also provides shelter; however, this is only in discreet, particularly in cases
when the distressed OFW is a runaway or undocumented. As discussed before in the previous
section, laws in Middle East countries, particularly in KSA, deems the reception of an undocumented
or runaway migrant worker in one’s custody as a violation of the immigration law.
Advocacy
Based in a region with a completely different culture and social system, the advocacy of
Migrante is centered on rights and welfare of the migrant workers. On a proactive stand, Migrante is
actively engaged in campaigns for workers protection through dialogues with the government and
media statements, particularly on critical policy issues. Just at the start of the year, the organization
launched an online signature drive meant to stop the impeding hikes in PhilHealth premium fees, a
proposal that has been strongly criticized by OFWS.
Inputs from the regional chapters are then forwarded and handled by the home office in
Manila, which voices the issues and concerns of the Filipino migrant workers to the Philippine
government. The home office is also concerned with reaching to the families and dependents left
behind by OFWs, assisting them with their concerns and updating them in cases of OFWs facing
charges abroad.
50 | D A Q U I S
Mission for Filipino Migrant Workers
Provision of Services and Assistance
A look at MFMW’s statistics report for 2010 shows how the organization works and to what
extent its services contribute to the welfare of Filipino migrants in distress in HK.
98.3% of those who came to MFMW for assistance in 2010 were female. 97.5% were Filipino
and 2.5% Indonesian. While the organization was established for Filipino migrant workers, it is also
beginning to extend services to other nationalities, particularly to Indonesian workers who comprise
a major migrant population in HK. In 2010, 1245 migrant workers were assisted by the organization
with their various labor and other concerns.
Loan
Problem
4%
Police
9%
Family
Problem
3%
Other
4%
Laborrelated
37%
Agency Fees/
Claims
43%
Figure 9. Breakdown of Cases Handled in 2010 by Type
Source: MFMW 2010 Collection of Data and Statistics on Mission Clients
Core service extended by the organization is individual counseling. Migrant workers either
go to the organization’s office for personal counseling or through phone inquiries which they termed
51 | D A Q U I S
as ‘mobile counseling’. Other cases were referred to the organization for assistance by migrant
networks.
Table 12. Breakdown of cases handled and inquiries received by MFMW in 2010
MONTH
Jan
Feb
March
Apr
May
Jun
July
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Total
Cases by
Type
Clients with
Ongoing
Cases
Inquiries
Telephone
Total
Cases per
month
44
46
57
31
56
27
49
57
54
65
67
61
25
13
29
28
14
22
31
40
23
34
27
17
39
31
29
24
29
26
25
18
30
21
28
28
108
90
115
83
99
75
105
115
107
120
122
106
614
303
328
1245
Source: MFMW 2010 Collection of Data and Statistics on Mission Clients
Most inquiries at the office, as well as those coursed through the organization’s mobile
counseling system, were labor-related. Inquiries on the computation of claims and benefits and
contract-related problems are most common. For those migrant workers who personally visit the
office for their inquiries, the MFMW staff evaluates their case and directs them to the PCG, assisting
them as they go through bureaucratic process. In terms of labor cases such as terminated contracts
and other contract-related problems, MFMW assists them in calculating the claims that their
employers must render to them. The organization also follows up the cases and extends such
assistance as coaching for labor conciliation tribunals or meetings and even accompanying the
distressed migrant workers to hearings.
52 | D A Q U I S
Wants to terminate
contract, 16%
Confiscated
Documents, 2%
Computation of
claims, 30%
Medical Problem, 3%
Loan Problem, 3%
Immigration, 2%
Contract violation,
16%
Agency fees, 16%
Misc., 16%
Terminated, 16%
Figure 10. Breakdown of Inquiries per Topic
Source: MFMW 2010 Collection of Data and Statistics on Mission Clients
MFMW has set up a mobile counseling system for those who cannot personally visit the
organization’s office for their inquiries. The organization notes that such system is particularly an
important component of its service provision as it greatly benefits those migrant workers with
problems but do not have the ability or the time to travel to their office, especially those domestic
workers who are not given days off by their employers. Counseling over the phone is given by the
MFMW staff, extending such assistance as would have been given in personal counseling. Through
this, the distressed migrant workers are given adequate information about their rights.
The organization also provides shelter to those workers who need temporary refuge. The
Bethune House, started in 1986 and located in central Hong Kong, is funded through donations.
Three fulltime staffers, also engaged in counseling, oversee the daily operations of the shelter. The
53 | D A Q U I S
shelter has a capacity of 20 residents; however, more often not the house shelters a larger number of
distressed migrant workers. In 2010, the shelter housed a total of 315 distressed migrant workers in
HK, 60% of them are Indonesian and 40% Filipino.
Empowerment and Advocacy
Apart from service provision, MFMW is also engaged in migrant welfare education and
advocacy campaigns. Anchored on their CIPME approach, the organization has developed its migrant
empowerment arm called the Education, Training, Organizing and Campaign (ETOC) Program.
Taking into consideration the mounting incidence of abuse and maltreatment against female
domestic helpers in HK, the program’s aim is to maintain an organized network of migrant groups
and movements with a “strong women’s orientation” to defend migrants. This is in line with the
MFMW’s belief that by encouraging and supporting grassroots organizations, the migrant workers
themselves are empowered to defend and advance their rights. Moreover, the MFMW has its
advocacy campaigns at various levels – national, regional, and international – which address
concerns with the actual policies and laws on labor migration and migrant welfare and protection.
International Migrants Alliance
Provision of Services and Assistance
Similar to Filipino-run NGOs engaged in migrant affairs, IMA’s undertaking is two-fold:
service provision and campaign and advocacy. In terms of service provision, the different member
organizations provide various forms of assistance and support to distressed migrant workers as well
as to refugees. In practice, most of the service provision is the done by member organizations; as an
alliance at the global level, IMA’s work is more focused on advocacy, serving as the international
campaign center of its member organizations.
54 | D A Q U I S
Advocacy
With labor migration becoming a global phenomenon, the perceived attacks on the rights and
welfare of migrant workers across the world is alarming. IMA has strongly criticized the structured
labor export scheme that has been institutionalized by sending governments like the Philippines and
Indonesia. As its chairperson remarks, the “continued and intensifying attacks on the rights of
migrants” has become the most significant threat to migrant welfare at this point in the globalization
of the labor market.
To ensure an efficient working relation among IMA members, country chapters were
established. Through this set-up, the issues and demands of different migrant groups are
consolidated and raised at the global level. Through various forms of communication like websites,
social networks, and online support groups, IMA is able to link the various initiatives and campaigns
of the different member organizations. Such networking and collective action has resulted in positive
action of international labor bodies such as ILO’s recognition of domestic work as work and the
subsequent ILO adoption of the Convention on Decent Work for Domestic Workers in 2011.
Since the establishment of IMA, it has been a vocal critic of the Global Forum on Migration
and Development (GFMD), a conference centered on migration as development strategy attended by
government agencies engaged in labor migration affairs. From their standpoint, GFMD’s focus is less
on rights and welfare, ignoring the real conditions of the migrant workers, and more on the policy of
labor export and its perceived positive impact on development. As a counter-conference, the IMA
holds the International Assembly of Migrants and Refugees, which serves as a venue for the
discussion of migration realities, particularly of the plight of migrant workers. This is attended by
various organizations and grassroots movements of migrants and institutions advocating migrants’
rights and protection.
55 | D A Q U I S
B. Trends in, Limitations and Constraints of NGO intervention
In reality, the total number of Filipino migrant workers needing legal assistance is greater
than most recorded statistics. There are Filipino workers who, despite encountering on-site
problems, choose not to seek assistance or unable to seek for help. Reasons range from their fear of
losing their jobs to their doubts of whether the PH post would attend to their concerns. While the
former might be economically reasonable, the latter is in part a consequence of the known negative
experiences of Filipino distressed workers who asked for assistance at the embassy but were badly
treated by our very own officials. In Hong Kong, the case of Agnes Tenorio17 crystallized the concern
over how DFA officials and personnel are reportedly indifferent to OFWs. In many cases, other
distressed Filipino workers choose to go to NGOs and other migrant-serving institutions or even to
friends or coworkers for support because of these negative experiences with the embassy or
consulate or due to accessibility concerns. Apparently, this has been the case in the Middle East as
shown by the experience of Migrante who directly receives 7 -10 OFW complaints daily.
Results of the migrant survey also hint at this trend. Respondents who have not yet
encountered a problem on-site were asked where or whom would they ask first for assistance in case
they encounter a labor-related or any work problem. 56 % of the respondents chose options other
than the PH embassy or consulate (see Figure 11). While the difference between this statistic and the
percentage of those who would consult the embassy or counsulate first is not that significant, the fact
the such number of OFWs would not consider the PH embassy or consulate as their first choice
reflects, to an extent, the “trust” that these OFWs have in the government mechanism for protection.
Agnes Tenorio is a domestic worker who, just 4 days upon arrival in HK, was terminated. Not knowing her rights, when she
approached the PCG for assistance, the only thing she asked was a return airfare. Later on, after being advised and informed
by MFMW and other NGOs in HK of her rights, she went back to the PCG to ask for other contractual obligations. Instead of
helping her and responding to her request, then HK Labor Attaché Romulo Salud verbally mistreated and scolded her for just
rightfully claiming what she deserves. Tenorio was able to record the audio of the said abuse. Upon upload online, the
recording generated a host of negative reactions from the Filipino community. DOLE dismissed the administrative case filed
against Salud and the Labatt was just “admonished and sternly warned” by the department to be “more respectful in dealing
with people.” The recording can still be accessed at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MR6JMWNncM.
17
56 | D A Q U I S
Table 13. Choice of Institution to Seek Assistance from in Case of On-site Problem
EncProb
not yet
InCaseEC
PH embassy / consulate
NGO / migrant group
Friends or relatives
others
Total
Total
16
16
5
5
14
14
1
1
36
36
Figure 11. Responses in Table 13 as summarized by state and non-state categories.
Furthermore, the apparent negative perception of the PH posts is also reflected in the results
of the survey on the section on assessment of DFA personnel and embassy service. The OFWs were
asked to convey their agreement or disagreement on the statements concerning the personnel and
service at PH posts in their respective locations.
57 | D A Q U I S
Table 14. Descriptive Statistics
AQ.1
AQ.2
AQ.3
AQ.4
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
57
57
57
57
0
0
0
0
4
4
4
4
1.95
1.54
1.65
1.44
Note: Four cases did not respond to this part of the survey (n=61). Rating scale assigned values from 0 to 4.
0 = can’t assess; 1=strongly disagrees; 4 = strongly agrees.
The following were the statements evaluated:
AQ.1 Ang mga empleyado at opisyal ng Philippine Embassy o Consulate dito ay nagpapakita
ng kagustuhang matulungan sa kanilang mga problema ang mga OFW.
AQ.2 Kaaya-aya at may respeto ang pakikitungo ng mga empleyado at opisyal ng Philippine
Embassy o Consulate dito sa mga OFW na dumudulog at nangangailangan ng tulong.
AQ.3 Mabilis, maayos, at sapat ang mga serbisyong pang-OFW sa Philippine Embassy o
Consulate sa aking bansang kinalalagyan.
AQ. 4 Ang mga empleyado at opisyal ng Philippine Embassy o Consulate dito ay nagpapakita
ng kahandaan at sapat na kaalaman upang magbigay serbisyo sa mga OFW.
Mean values of the responses convey disagreement with the positive statements
characterizing government personnel and service in PH posts. For AQs.1, 2, 3, disagreement is
evident in the closer-to-2 (“disagrees”) mean values obtained. Strong disagreement of respondents to
the knowledge and readiness of post personnel when it comes to service provision is shown by the
closer-to-1 (“strongly disagrees”) mean value obtained. To an extent, these results reflect the already
recognized problem of the orientation of diplomats and other DFA personnel when it comes to
servicing Filipino migrant workers.
In both Hong Kong and the Middle East, the importance of NGO intervention in the provision
of services and support to distressed Filipino migrant workers can be clearly seen from the case
58 | D A Q U I S
studies of Migrante ME and MFMW. Furthermore, this trend is also illustrated by the findings of the
conducted migrant workers survey, which cites NGOs and other migrant group as alternative service
providers (see Figure 12). In theory, this is on the supply side and is the more traditional NGO role
vis-à-vis the systemic failure model. As manifested in recent literature, in recent years, however, NGO
intervention in migrant affairs has been increasingly centered on the demand side, as they move
towards campaign and advocacy as main mechanisms for intervention. The importance of advocacy
in migrant welfare and protection at the international level is evident in the work of IMA. This clearly
illustrates the consolidation of NGO work at an international scale.
Figure 12. Alternative service providers for migrant concerns.
Note: SuppAsst1 = NGOs and other migrant groups; SuppAsst2 = Church and other religion-based
organization; SuppAsst3 = International organizations
Furthermore, a significant number of overseas Filipino workers are signing in as members of
migrant groups. In the survey conducted, 43% of respondents claimed that they are members of local
migrant workers groups in their destination countries.
59 | D A Q U I S
Table 15. Number of Respondents who are members of migrant workers groups or organization
Recode by Region
Middle East
OrgMembership
yes
Count
% of Total
no
Count
% of Total
Total
Count
% of Total
Hong Kong
Total
22
4
26
36.7%
6.7%
43.3%
28
6
34
46.7%
10.0%
56.7%
50
10
60
83.3%
16.7%
100.0%
Limitations and Constraints
However, while these NGOs are extending assistance and filling in the gaps of the state
mechanisms, certain limitations hinder their capability to fully ensure the protection of distressed
migrant workers. The most common factors affecting the extent of NGO intervention are, as related
by the NGOs included in the study, are resource constraints and the nature of migrant work itself.
1. Resource constraints
As non-profit groups, these migrant organizations do not have the ease of having resources
at their disposal. In terms of financial resources, these NGOs shoulder administrative and other
operational costs. The organizations’ operations are largely financed by donations and even out-ofpocket contributions from the migrants themselves. According to MFMW, they primarily draw
financial resource mostly from church donations and other civic group contributions. The Migrante
chapter in the Middle East, on the other hand, finances its services through membership dues
(butaw) and personal contributions. Projects, especially on campaigns for migrant empowerment,
are mostly financed through tie-ups with individuals, migrant advocates, and other institutions with
OFW programs.
60 | D A Q U I S
Other resource concerns faced by these NGOs are limitations in physical space and
manpower. As consequences of financial instability, NGOs have to do with limited physical space for
operations as well as for the temporary shelter, which hinders its capability to address all cases that
come to them. In terms of manpower, staff is primarily composed of volunteers and migrants
themselves who take time for advocacy and servicing fellow Filipino workers in between their own
work schedules.
2. Nature of work in migrant affairs
Like most non-state institutions, NGO work in migrant affairs has to deal with political
considerations. Migrant-serving institutions, particularly those who are critical of the government,
face state repression, intimidation, and harassment. Crackdown on migrant leaders is common and
many are threatened because of their criticism of government policies on migration (Asis, 2011).
Many experience verbal assault by embassy officials and ATN staff, as is the case with Migrante
officers who are religiously pressing the post for follow-ups on cases of distressed OFWS in the
Middle East.
It is also worth noting that these organizations work within the confines of countries that
recognize only governments as official representatives. In legal cases and other official concerns, only
government representation is acknowledged. For instance, NGOs cannot do jail visitations to check
on the conditions of Filipino prisoners as only official government representatives are allowed to
interact with jail authorities. While some countries recognize the presence of registered NGOs and
other migrant groups, they are given limited opportunities for intervention. This is the primary
limitation of NGO intervention in migrant affairs.
Nevertheless, as aforementioned, whatever limitations in service delivery and assistance that
these NGOs face, they make up for and supplement with advocacy and campaigns. Recognizing and
facing the realities of working in a foreign and international environment, NGOs move into a more
61 | D A Q U I S
proactive stance by serving as pressure groups. There are three ways in which these NGOs push for
greater state accountability to its migrant workers.
1. Influencing policy
NGO intervention in migrant affairs manifests as early as at the policy development stage. At
the onset of policy proposals by the government, NGOs consolidate opinions and feedback from
migrant workers and releases statements to support or counter such policy proposal. The NGO
perspective at this stage of policy development is an important factor as it draws from the most
important stakeholder and that is the migrants themselves. Also, in the absence of labor unions and
other organized labor groups, NGOs serve as negotiators in behalf of the OFWS by voicing out their
concerns.
The most recent case that would illustrate this would be the campaigns staged by different
NGOs and migrant workers group against the proposed premium hike in PhilHealth contributions of
OFWs18. As far as the recent events are concerned, NGO lobbying has been successful as temporary
suspension of the circular has been issued.
2. Bridging the gap between the OFW and the government
Given the primary limitation of NGOs in migrant affairs as previously discussed, the most
basic action that they can do is to serve as bridge between the distressed OFW and the government in
cases where the concerned migrant worker runs to the NGOs for assistance. Both seen in the cases of
the Middle East countries and in Hong Kong, NGOs refer cases, follow up on the progress, and assist
distressed Filipino workers until the post addresses and resolves their concerns. NGOs push
Philippine posts for immediate assistance to emergency cases and, by experience, such move has
been particularly effective as cases referred by these NGOs are given attention to by the posts.
18
Philhealth Board Circular No.022 details the plan of imposing a 160% hike on OFWs premium, raising the fees from the
current P900 to P2400. The circular has been temporarily suspended; however, the plan has been amended, lowering the
increase to be made to P1200 due to be implemented in 2013.
62 | D A Q U I S
Particularly in the Middle East, Migrante ME notes that, as a pressure group, they are able to
push embassies to immediately act on the cases and such assistance greatly helps to speed up case
resolution. There has been a positive improvement lately, with cases referred by Migrant ME
attended to by Philippine posts in Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, KSA, Kuwait, and UAE within 24
hours.
3. Empowering Filipino migrant workers through education
NGO advocacy is centered on migrant welfare and rights and, as such, they argue that the
most effective way to prevent the exploitation of migrants is to educate them about their rights. The
challenge politically is how to reach out to them and help migrants mobilize to fight for their rights
and welfare. While continuously working on the goal of enjoining them in migrant movements, NGOs
launch awareness campaigns that aim to educate migrants on their rights and empower them to
voice out their concerns on issues that concern labor migration.
63 | D A Q U I S
III. Government Response to Criticisms
When asked for his take on the criticism that the Philippine government’s response to the onsite issues and concerns of Filipino migrant workers is inefficient and inept, DFA’s Undersecretary
for Migrant Workers Affairs Esteban Conejos, Jr. remarked that such criticism is “a very unfair
accusation.” For one, he notes that across the globe, the Philippine model for the protection of its
migrant workers is considered as “one of the best and most comprehensive.” Just this December last
year at the GFMD held in Geneva, UN Secretary General for International Migration and Development
Peter Sutherland commended the Philippine’s migration infrastructure for the protection of its
migrant workers. Emerging labor-sending countries have even patterned their policies after the
Philippine model, with officials of other labor-sending countries asking the Philippine government
for pointers in managing overseas employment programs (CMA & FES, 2009).
Second, the DFA regards that majority of the Filipinos working overseas have a positive
migration experience. To their defense, DFA-OUMWA contends that the negative portrayal of
Philippine labor migration is largely because of the projection and focus on the problems of domestic
helpers and undocumented workers, who are problematic from the start because of how they
entered the destination country. The rationale is that if protecting a regular Filipino migrant worker
is already a costly and hard task for the government, how much more it is difficult to protect the
undocumented. The situation thus renders the government to go through a tedious and often costly
process to “protect” these irregular workers. On the other hand, it is worth noting that majority of
those with on-site concerns are Filipino domestic workers; however, these workers also comprise a
substantial portion of the Filipino migrant workers population, take the case of Hong Kong as an
example, and, as such, should not be blamed for painting a negative picture of labor migration. For a
country that has been a major labor exporter for decades, the responsibility to protect its migrant
workers rests primarily on the government.
64 | D A Q U I S
1. On the bureaucratic and inefficient on-site legal assistance system
The DFA has offered several explanations to the criticisms of the current state system for the
provision of legal assistance on-site. First, the case-to-case basis of approving the request for legal
assistance and hiring of foreign lawyers is a strategy for maximizing the use of LAF. The process of
forwarding first the request for assistance to DFA-OUMWA in Manila for the approval of the
undersecretary thus serves the purpose of prioritizing cases that need the most attention. DFA
contends that because these are government funds and are limited, it is imperative to allocate the
funds to significant cases. It turns out that the guidelines for approval of the request for legal
assistance that NGOs say they do not have particular knowledge of are premised on the significance
and nature of the case. The priorities, according to DFA, are cases such as abuse and maltreatment
and other labor-related cases; other cases which concern the common crimes in the Middle East such
as illegal possession of alcohol, gambling, and adultery cases, and other cases involving both Filipinos
as complainants and accused are not their priorities for legal assistance.
There are two critical points that can be drawn up against DFA’s justification of such policy.
First, while this guideline may be in accordance to OUMWA’s prioritization strategy and LAF
utilization, the law specifically provides that legal assistance be extended to all Filipinos overseas
who may need such aid and no such distinction as to the nature of the case was mentioned. Thus,
there should not be what appears as “selective protection”; it should not make a difference whether
the complainant is a foreigner or a fellow Filipino, as long the as the accused is a Filipino with a need
for legal aid, particularly in a country whose laws and practices can be overwhelmingly different.
Second, LAF utilization in the past years has not been 100 percent, which can mean in part that not
all of the P100-million was utilized entirely. If such is the case, the question is why OUMWA has to
draw up such prioritization policy when there are still funds available.
65 | D A Q U I S
2. On the non-accommodation of male Filipino distressed workers at FWRCs
To the criticism of FWRCs not accepting male distressed workers, the DFA offers two
separate reasons for the implementation of such policy in the Middle East and HK. The nonadmission of male distressed Filipino workers in FWRCs in the Middle East is in compliance of the
government to the Shari’ah law. Because non-related males and females are not allowed to mingle
and stay under one roof, the DFA contends that they cannot accommodate both sexes under one
FWRC or else they will be violating the law. Instead, they opted to adopt the policy of accommodating
only female distressed workers, as they are the “most susceptible to abuse,” especially the domestic
helpers. Currently there is no separate state shelter facility for distressed male Filipino workers in
the Middle East, but some posts have already discerned the need for such facility because of the
growing number of male workers seeking assistance.
In Hong Kong, however, where the FWRC also does not accommodate male distressed
workers, the DFA cites another reason, as obviously the Shari’ah law is not a valid excuse. The DFA’s
explanation is that they are prioritizing because of constraints in physical space and due in part also
to the vulnerability of female workers. While it may be reasonable to infer that majority of the
Filipino workers in HK are female because of the huge percentage of domestic helpers in the total
Filipino migrant population, there are still male migrant workers who may need assistance. In
essence, DFA’s explanation does not reasonably answer the question of why the FWRC in Kowloon
cannot accept male distressed workers.
66 | D A Q U I S
3. On the slow response to emergency situations
In the recent political crises that swept across countries in the Middle East and North Africa
(MENA)19, government efforts have been particularly criticized as slow, which put the lives of tens of
thousands of Filipino migrant workers at risk. When it comes to repatriating Filipino workers,
whether in an emergency situation or not, it must be noted that the government is working within
the jurisdiction of the host country and thus its law, policies, and terms concerning such matter must
be observed and complied to. The reason why the repatriation process may take time, according to
the DFA, is because it has to follow the process of securing exit clearances (exit visa) for the OFWs
from their employers before they can leave the host country. In most cases, this includes a long line
of negotiations that the Philippine government has to do with employers and as well as their
counterpart officials. In emergency situations such as in the event of war or political crisis such as the
MENA crisis in the past years, evacuating and repatriating Filipino migrant workers proves to be an
arduous task for the government. The more difficult task, however, is to protect those undocumented
Filipinos, majority of whom the Philippine government has no records of. It is a challenge to locate
them because of the lack of their whereabouts and other pertinent details and to secure their exit
clearances because in some cases they first have to answer their charges under the host country’s
immigration law. The costs of repatriating the distressed OFWs are also a concern as the government
has to shoulder a huge amount which includes payment to the employer for those with unfinished
contracts, immigration fees and dues, and airfare back to the Philippines.
Migrante M.E. Regional Coordinator John Monterola recounts that during the crisis in Libya last year, the Filipino workers
were among the last batch of migrant workers pulled out of the country and that was through the help of the International
Organization for Migration (IOM) who rescued Filipinos along with other nationalities in evacuation centers and rented
barges to take them out of Libya. According to Migrante, the situation just showed that the Philippine government is not
adept to responding to such emergency situations, and even in subsequent crises in other Arab countries and recently in
Syria, has shown unprepared response.
19
67 | D A Q U I S
IV. Migrant Workers Protection in the Context of Labor Export and the Globalization of
the Labor Market
In 2010, R.A. 10022 amended the provisions for the deployment of Filipino migrant workers
and, as previously discussed, established the basis for the “legality” of allowing Filipino labor outflow
to a particular destination country. With this mandate, the DFA was tasked to carry out a certification
process for all destination countries, evaluating its suitability for OFW deployment based on the
guarantees set by the law. As of January 2012, no such certification has been issued to countries in
the Middle East. According to DFA-OUMWA, the process is ongoing and the deadline is April this year.
It is government policy that overseas deployment should be “based on the assurance that they
[OFWs] will be protected abroad” (Conejos, 2012). The intent of the certification process is to ensure
the security and safeguard the rights of Filipino migrant workers; however, considering that labor
migration is an economic phenomenon, this policy may create an economic dilemma for the
Philippine government. In development studies, the debate has centered on what is called the
migration-development nexus, which looks at the economic link between migration and
development. The emerging debate on migration, however, with the increasing concern for human
rights, is now focusing on what is dubbed as the deployment-protection (or promotion-protection)
conundrum, which highlights the consequences of the state’s role in the migration process. The main
dilemma is whether the state can fully shoulder the task of protecting its migrant workers while
apparently playing an increasingly aggressive role in overseas employment promotion. While the
case where the state has the capability to pursue both is not being ruled out, the more probable
scenario is that, to a certain extent, one could be compromised. The Philippine government has
continually denied the adoption of a labor export policy despite the decades-long run of its overseas
employment program. The DFA contends, however, that the labor migration phenomenon is just a
response to the reality that there are not enough job opportunities in the country. What the
68 | D A Q U I S
Philippine government does, it argues, is acting accordingly given this reality. The department
reiterates that the Philippine government is not promoting overseas employment, but rather
“try(ing) to manage as best as they can the deployment abroad so that it can result to a benefit to the
worker” (Conejos, 2012).
However, the government’s action has been nothing but pointing to overseas employment as
an economic “development” strategy. Several policy directives can attest to this. For one, the POLO,
aside from providing assistance and support services on-site, has another task – that of finding labor
market opportunities. During the 2008 global financial crisis, government response to the potential
negative effect of the shrinking of affected labor markets on the Philippines has been still geared
toward labor migration as a strategy. In December of that year, two administrative orders have been
signed by former president Arroyo. A.O. 247 directed the POEA to put together “aggressive
employment strategies that defy the trend of a constricting job market.” In essence, this is a directive
for market development, as what can be deduced from the opening section of the order:
Section 1. The Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) shall
execute a paradigm shift by refocusing its functions from regulation to fullblast markets development efforts, the exploration of frontier, fertile job
markets for Filipino expatriates.20
A.O. 248, while establishing a government “payback” program through livelihood assistance to
Filipino migrant workers who had been hit by the economic crisis, ends with a section for market
development as well. In the context of this directive and by the very wording of the text, it is apparent
that the government views labor as commodity that can be sold in the market.
Office of the President, 2008. Administrative Order No.247. Available at http://www.ops.gov.ph/records/issuancesao/AO247.pdf
20
69 | D A Q U I S
Section 9. For returning expatriate Filipino workers who want to cross over to
other countries that are in need of their skill and talent, the Philipppine
Overseas Employment Administration shall carry out a marketing blitz to
expand the market for expatriate Filipino workers.21
The case of the Middle East countries, to which no certification has yet been released, proves
to be a testament to the economic implications of the deployment-protection conundrum. Take for
instance, the case of Saudi Arabia, which, as the Commision on Overseas Workers Affairs (COWA)
report22 notes, is “hard to see how… can be certified as a destination for Filipino domestic workers.”
R.A. 10022 requires that the destination country has to have existing labor laws that cover foreign
workers. Saudi Arabia’s labor laws cover only professionals and skilled workers and exclude
domestic helpers. Such condition has already prompted Indonesia and India to stop the deployment
of domestic helpers to Saudi Arabia. In October 2010, the Sri Lankan government backed off from an
agreement with the Saudi National Recruitment Agency because the Sri Lankan labor federation
found the terms of the said agreement unfavorable to their workers. The Philippines, however,
appears to have seen the situation in a different light. In economic terms, the demand for Filipino
domestic workers has soared following the deployment ban imposed by other labor-sending
countries. During this time, the only measure taken by the Philippine government to “protect” our
domestic workers from exploitation was to increase the minimum income required for the issuance
of employer permits23. To a certain extent, this addresses the often-reported cases of non-payment or
delayed payment of wages to domestic helpers, as the logic could be that, because these employers
have higher incomes, they may be able to pay better wages. There are two points that can be argued
against this government response. For one, it still can’t be confidently inferred that income status of
21
A.O. 248. Retrieved from http://www.pinoy-abroad.net/img_upload/9bed2e6b0cc5701e4cef28a6ce64be3d/AO248.pdf
In January 2011, a five-person investigative mission of the Committee on Overseas Workers’ Affairs (COWA) of the House
of Representatives visited Saudi Arabia to conduct a firsthand assessment of the conditions of Filipino workers there. The
mission was headed by Rep. Walden Bello, chair of COWA. The full final report of the mission on the conditions of Filipino
overseas workers in Saudi Arabia can be accessed at http://www.scribd.com/doc/49819988/The-Conditions-of-OverseasFilipino-Workers-in-Saudi-Arabia
23 Minimum income required for Saudi applicants for employer’s permit was increased from 15 000 to 20 000 riyals, which is
about P233 000. This resulted to a barrage of complaints from Saudi nationals who argued that the Saudi government’s
requirement for such is only pegged at 5000 riyals. COWA’s report notes that such conflict subsequently led to heated
confrontations between the applicants and POLO personnel.
22
70 | D A Q U I S
the employer is a safeguard against labor-related or even other concerns. Second, this income
requirement does not address the more problematic concern with regard to the safety of our migrant
workers and that is the sexual and physical abuse and maltreatment commonly suffered by domestic
workers in Saudi households.
Table 16. Number of Domestic Household Workers in Selected Middle East destinations
as of June 201124
Male
Female
Total
Amman
18 000
18 000
Beirut
4 259
38 336
42 595
Doha
280
27 720
28 000
Dubai
2 074
3 110
5 184
Kuwait
/
/
71 884
Muscat
70
1 000
1 070
Riyadh
19 610
105 300
124 910
Source: Posts’ report to the DFA for the period Jan – June 2011
The COWA, in its final report on the mission, recommended that Saudi Arabia be “decertified”
as a destination suitable for the deployment of domestic workers. This option could be the ultimate
response to address the exploitation of Filipino domestic workers, as the Saudi government is also
not a signatory to the 1990 UN International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of Migrant
Workers and the Philippine government has encountered difficulties negotiating labor agreements
with it25. However, this will render a substantial economic impact that may as well be the reason why
the government is particularly hesitant to implement deployment bans, except for emergency
purposes. Freezing deployment may mean that tens of thousands of Filipino migrant domestic
helpers will be left jobless. With current local economic conditions and government economic
policies, a deployment ban, particularly to a country that is major destination for Filipino labor
outflow, will exacerbate the country’s already dismal unemployment rate.
Destination countries not included in the table either do not have segregated data available or do not have household
workers in the migrant population. The figure for Kuwait is based on the number of OFWs issued Filipino Visa 20, the
assigned code for domestic workers. No breakdown by sex is available.
25 As previously discussed, apart from existing labor laws covering migrant workers, these are two other options which can
satisfy the first requirement of the certification. As for the second requirement, it is safe to infer that if the country cannot
promptly comply with the aforementioned requirements on paper, how much more in concrete and positive measures.
24
71 | D A Q U I S
In terms of bilateral labor agreements as a mechanism for protection, contending views from
the government and the NGO sector and migrant rights advocates clash. Recall that the revised MWA
takes the existence of a binding bilateral labor agreement between the Philippines and a destination
country as a guarantee to the protection of Filipino workers. However, negotiating such agreements
has been a particularly difficult and unsuccessful task for the Philippine government. The DFA cites
two reasons why government efforts have rarely resulted in bilateral agreements. First, these
destination countries are also “trying to protect their labor market” (Conejos, 2012). A bilateral labor
agreement can of course be a detriment to the local citizens if migrant workers enter their labor
market and displace local workers. Second, these countries have their own employment systems that
are different from and thus difficult to reconcile with the Philippine system. In the Middle East, there
is the sponsorship system wherein the foreign migrant worker, employed by a certain employer,
cannot seek employment from any other employer than his or her sponsor should circumstances
regarding his or her employment status with the original employer changes. The DFA notes that the
system is engrained in the Saudi employment system and such arrangement is especially difficult for
the Philippine government when it comes to migrant welfare protection as the worker is bound to
one employer26. These reasons, along with a host of other legal requirements and social or cultural
considerations, are factors that affect the negotiation for labor agreements. As such, it really takes
time to negotiate an agreement that has terms acceptable to both countries.
The view of the NGO sector on this issue of bilateral labor agreement, however, is different.
In the context of the government’s overseas employment policy, NGOs criticize the overarching
framework of labor export policy in the MWA. While bilateral labor agreements are viewed by the
state as a guarantee for migrant welfare and protection, NGOs see such agreements as structured and
systematic mechanisms for the commoditization of migrant labor. NGOs remain firm in their stand
that migration should not be forced.
Another legal constraint associated with the sponsorship system, as related by labor attachés, is with regard to exit
clearances. The cancellation of visas and the release of exit permits for household service workers at the Saudi Immigration
Office are subject to the approval of their employer.
26
72 | D A Q U I S
“A sustainable migration policy can only stem from a policy by which
governments uphold the rights and welfare of its people over the need to make
profit through anti-migrant multilateral or trade agreements where migrant
workers are seen and treated more as commodities or export products rather
than people or workers with rights” (Lestari, 2011).
Such are the dilemma, which are economic in nature and concerns international relations,
central to the issue of the certification process. In the case of other Middle Eastern countries, the
certification is also as difficult to imagine. Even if the host countries begin to comply with the
agreements on paper –as of the June 2011 report of the DFA, the UAE and Lebanon27 have recently
adopted the ILO Convention Concerning Decent Work for Domestic Workers – it is another question
as to whether these countries are taking “concrete and positive measures” to ensure migrant welfare
protection, which constitute the second requirement for the certification.
While the intent of this certification process is certainly a laudable effort on part of the
government, there still remains an uncertainty with the effectiveness of such approach to migrant
welfare protection. The Philippine experience with the deployment bans imposed on Jordan and
Lebanon has shown that these policies are not a guarantee to limiting the entry of Filipino workers to
prohibited countries; in turn, the deployment ban, to a certain extent have created another problem
for the Philippine posts in the concerned countries. The Philippine Embassy in Amman reports that
around 8000 Filipinos have nonetheless entered Jordan since the imposition of the deployment ban
in 2007, all of which, of course, have not gone through the usual legal procedures in the Philippines.
The post further notes that these illegally deployed workers, most of them domestic workers, are
more vulnerable to abuse and more likely to encounter labor problems. The weakness of the
deployment ban as a policy and its consequences are very well pointed out by the post’s report for
the first half of 2011:
Lebanon, however, is still not a signatory to the 1990 UN International Convention on the Protection of Migrant
Workers and Members of their Families.
27
73 | D A Q U I S
“…the suspension of the deployment of the HSWs in Jordan, with the
continuous issuance of work visas to HSWs by Jordan, in effect, neither
improved the working conditions of HSWs, nor stopped the deployment of
HSWs in Jordan. The said suspension only complicated the cases of the HSWs
and increased the number of the undocumented HSWs in the Kingdom.”28
If there’s anything that the experience of the Philippine government with regard to the
certification process and, in general, to selective deployment reveals, it is that protecting and
ensuring migrant rights and welfare at this time of the globalization of the labor market is a very
difficult and complicated task. For one, Philippine labor migration shows no signs of abating and, as
what DFA has been reiterating, the reality is that the labor outflow cannot be stopped even if the
government wanted it to. Second, it is evident that the regulatory framework for the protection of
Filipino migrant workers cannot fully address and guarantee the protection of migrant workers
rights and welfare at their destination countries, which, as the study has shown, has considerable
repercussions to the on-site conditions of the OFWs. Given these migration realities, it is imperative
that the gaps in the implementation of the state mechanisms for on-site protection be the given
ample attention.
From the Philippine Embassy’s report to the DFA for the period Jan – June 2011. Also included in the DFA’s
compiled Report to Congress (RTC) for the same period.
28
74 | D A Q U I S
CHAPTER IV
Conclusion
Mandating it in the law is one thing, implementation, however, particularly in this era of the
globalization of the labor market, is another story. The study concludes that while there exists a legal
framework for the extension of government support and provision of welfare assistance to Filipino
migrant workers in their destination countries, there are gaps that need to be addressed, particularly
in enforcement and monitoring. The Migrant Workers Act has the best intentions in terms of on-site
protection; however, the implementation of these provisions remains poor despite after a decade of
its existence, as evident in the cases of the Middle East and Hong Kong.
The incoherence of the law with actual government practices on managing labor migration is
evident in the experience of the Middle East and Hong Kong. While the legal framework for Filipino
migrant protection specifically provides for the extension of government assistance to all Filipinos
overseas regardless of their migrant status, the experience of Filipino migrant workers in the Middle
East and Hong Kong tell otherwise. Both in the extension of legal assistance and social and welfare
services, PH posts in the Middle East and Hong Kong appear to be exercising selective protection as
cases that are attended to by the concerned government posts are continuously subjected to
screening or “prioritization” processes.
NGOs engaged in migrant affairs, on the other hand, have actively provided services in lieu of
these gaps in state delivery of services. However, these organizations face obstacles that hinder its
capacity to fully serve the migrant population. Resource constraints and the very nature of migrant
affairs primarily affect the extent of NGO intervention in migrant welfare and protection.
Nevertheless, NGOs continue to play a significant role in managing Philippine labor migration as they
move into the advocacy and campaign sphere where their intervention has seen positive influence
over policies and other issues that concern Filipino migrant workers. In essence, the very existence of
75 | D A Q U I S
NGOs and similar organizations engaged in migrant affairs reveal the reality of the state’s failure to
adequately protect and ensure the welfare of its overseas workers.
Recent trends in government migration policies also hint at the reality of a protectiondepolyment conundrum. The role of the government in managing labor migration appears to be
shifting from reactive to proactive in the aggressive promotion of overseas employment. NGOs are
quick to point out that, in reality, this affects the state’s capacity to pursue migrant welfare. At this
time of the continuos globalization of labor markets, with migration infrastructures shifting
orientation to facilitate deployment, migrant welfare is at most at risk of being compromised.
With this dismal picture of on-site migrant welfare and protection, social costs of overseas
employment as a national economic development strategy far outweigh its economic gains. In the
end, the process of development is as important as the outcome. While an image of a “strong”
economy can be created through remittances, the process of how this is to be achieved, that is,
through the daily struggles of millions of Filipinos overseas and their families back home should
matter more.
76 | D A Q U I S
Recommendations
It is apparent that the government’s overseas employment program will continue
nonetheless, given the current domestic labor conditions and the seeming culture of migration that
has developed. Considering these realities and based on findings and insights from this research, the
following are key recommendations of the study:
To fully pinpoint other potential gaps, a more in-depth evaluation of the government’s
mechanisms for migrant protection should be carried out.
Efficiency of the legal assistance system should be improved to be able to extend the service
to all distressed Filipinos overseas.
State capacity to effectively deliver services must be further developed by improving the
coordination between the DFA, DOLE, and other concerned agencies.
For the Department of Foreign Affairs, the challenge is to be able to upgrade embassy
services to respond to the growing Filipino migrant workers population. Should improvements and
reforms be made, it should focus on the provision of core services and greater access to government
assistance. Personnel complement to PH posts overseas should be improved by establishing a
standard ratio that is responsive to the number of Filipino workers in its jurisdiction.
Pre-deployment orientation seminar for migrant workers to be deployed in the Middle East
should be intensified, focusing on adequately informing and making the OFWs understand the
destination countries’ culture and social practices, particularly the Shari’ah law.
Most important of all, government extension of on-site services to Filipino migrant workers
anywhere across the globe should be rooted on its mandate to provide unconditional service.
77 | D A Q U I S
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Agunias, D. R. (2008). Managing Temporary Migration: Lessons from the Philippine Model. In Insight.
Washington DC: Migration Policy Institute.
Agunias, D. R., & Ruiz, N. G. (2007). Protecting Overseas Workers: Lessons and Cautions from the
Philippines. In Insight. Washington DC: Migration Policy Institute.
Ball, R., & Piper, N. (2002). Globalization and regulation of citizenship - Filipino migrnat workers in Japan.
Political Geography , 1013-1034.
Battistella, G. (1995). Philippine Overseas Labour: From Export to Management. ASEAN Economic Bulletin .
Battistella, G., & Asis, M. M. (2011). Protecting Filipino Transnational Domestic Workers: Government
Regulations and Their Outcomes.
Bello, W., Zamora-Apsay, M. C., Aglipay, E., & Paez, C. (2009). The Condition of Overseas Filipino Workers in
Saudi Arabia: Final Report of the Investigating Mission of the Committee on Overseas Workers’ Affairs
(COWA) to Saudi Arabia, January 9-13, 2011.
Bicocchi, L., & LeVoy, M. (2007). Undocumented Migrants Have Rights! An Overview of the International
Human Rights Framework. Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants. Brussels:
Network of European Foundations.
Cerny, P. G. (1997). Paradoxes of the Competition State: The Dynamics of Political Globalization.
Government and Opposition , 32, 251–274.
Clark, J. (1993). The Relationship Between the State and the Voluntary Sector. The World Bank.
CMA, & FES. (2009). The Philippines: A Global Model on Labor Migration? (2nd Edition ed.). Center for
Migrant Advocacy and Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.
Commission on Audit. (2007). Government's Overseas Workers' Welfare Program Sectoral Performance
Audit .
Diaz, C. (1993). The role of NGOs in the protection and promotion of human rights in Asia. Asian and
Pacific Migration Journal , 2 (2), 199-222.
DFA. (June 2010). Report to Congress.
DFA. (December 2010). Report to Congress.
DFA. (June 2011). Report to Congress.
DOLE. (2010). Matrix of Audit Observations, Recommendations and Management Comments.
Ellao, J. (2011). DOLE Absolves Official in YouTube Video Verbally Abusing OFW in Hongkong. Retrieved
from
Bulatlat.com:
http://bulatlat.com/main/2011/02/05/dole-absolves-official-in-youtube-videoverbally-abusing-ofw-in-hongkong/
Ellao,
J.
(2011).
OFW
dies
while
at
shelter.
http://bulatlat.com/main/2011/06/06/ofw-dies-while-at-shelter/
Retrieved
from
Bulatlat.com:
78 | D A Q U I S
Ellao, J. (2011). Rights violations still possible despite deployment ban in 41 countries. Retrieved from
Bulatlat.com.
Esteban Conejos, J. (2011). Philippine Labor Migration Policy and Programs. 4th Asia-Pacific Regional
Conference Hague Conference on Private International Law Aspects of (Economic) Migration. Manila.
Esteban Conejos, J. (2010). Protecting the Rights of OFWs as a Pillar of Philippine Foreign Policy. Vision
2020: Responding to the Challenges of Migration and Development. Manila.
Huguet, J. W. (2007, April). Transnational Migration and Work in Asia. Journal of Social Issues in Southeast
Asia .
Kamat, S. (2004). The Privatization of Public Interest: Theorizing NGO Discourse in a Neoliberal Era.
Review of International Political Economy , 11 (1).
Lewis, D. (2003). Theorizing the Organization and Management of Non-Governmental Development
Organizations: Towards a Composite Approach. Public Management Review , 5 (3), 325-344.
Lewis, D., & Opoku-Mensah, P. (2006). Moving Forward Research Agendas on International NGOs: Theory,
Agency and Context. Journal of International Development , 18, 665-675.
Martin, P., Abella, M., & Christiane, K. (2006). Managing Labor Migration in the Twenty-first Century. Yale
University Press.
Medina, C. (1995). OCWs in Crisis: Protecting Filipino Migrant Workers. Makati: Ateneo Human Rights
Center.
MFMW. (2010). Collection of Data and Statistics on Mission Clients. MFMW Society Ltd.
MFMW. (2010). Survey Report on Recruitment Fees, Wages and Remittances of Filipino Migrant Workers in
Hong Kong. MFMW Society Ltd.
Morales, H. (1990). Government-NGO relations in the Philippines : an update. In A Call for People's
Development.
NSCB. (2007). Philippine Statistical Yearbook.
Orbeta, A., & Abrigo, M. (2009). Philippine International Labour Migration in the Past 30 Years: Trends and
Prospects. Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
Orbeta, A., Abrigo, M., & Cabalfin, M. (2009). Institutions Serving Philippine International Labor Migrants.
POEA. (2009). Annual Report.
POEA. (2011). Compedium of OFW Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.poea.gov.ph/html/statistics.html
Salamon, L. (1987). Of Market Failure, Voluntary Failure, and Third-Party Government:Toward a Theory
of Government-Nonprofit Relations in the Modern Welfare State. Journal of Voluntary Action Research , 16
(1-2), 22-49.
Sama, T. B. (2009). Conceptualizing Non-Governmental Organizations: Still Searching for a Theory. Paper
presented at EGPA 2009 Conference, Permanent Study Group on Third Sector.
79 | D A Q U I S
Silverio, I. (2011). Aquino allocates one percent of 2012 budget for migrant workers. Retrieved from
Bulatlat.com: http://bulatlat.com/main/2011/08/18/aquino-allocates-one-percent-of-2012-budget-formigrant-workers/
Sim, A. (2003). Organizing Discontent: NGOs for Southeast Asian Workers in Hong Kong. Asian Journal of
Social Science , 31 (3), 478 - 510.
Simmons, P. J. (1998). Learning to Live with NGOs. Foreign Policy , 112, 83.
Sto. Tomas, P. (2009). Protecting Migrant Workers from the Philippines. ILO Asian Regional Programme on
Governance of Labour Migration .
Tenorio, A. (2010, October). Statement of Filipino migrant worker Agnes Tenorio on the verbal abuse
committed. Retrieved from http://www.arkibongbayan.org/2010/2010-10Oct26-HKlabor/doc/PS%20%20Agnes%20Tenorio%2026-OCT-2010%20(English).pdf
Tigno, J. V. (1998). New Issues and Old Struggles: The Evolving Rights of Filipino Overseas Migrants.
Tvedt, T. (1998). Angels of Mercy or Development Diplomats: NGOs and Foreign Aid. Africa World Press.
Wickramasekara, P. (2002). Asian Labour Migration: Issues and Challenges in an Era of Globalization.
International Migration Papers (57).
80 | D A Q U I S
INTERVIEWS
Mr. Rey Asis
Secretariat – International Migrants Alliance
Hong Kong
Conducted via email: Interview question sent 03 December 2011. Reply received 19 December 2011.
Mr. Norman Uy Carnay
Program officer for Research and Documentation - Mission for Filipino Migrant Workers
Hong Kong
Conducted via email: Interview questions sent 23 Nov 2011. Reply received 08 December 2011
Undersecretary Esteban B. Conejos, Jr.
Office for Migrant Workers Affairs (OUMWA)
Department of Foreign Affairs
Manila, Philippines
Personal interview conducted 19 January 2012 | 10:30 – 11:30 am | DFA, Manila
Assistant Labor Attaché Alex Inza Cruz
Philippine Overseas Labor Office
Jeddah, KSA
Conducted via email: Interview questions sent 27 December 2011. Reply received 16 January 2012.
His Excellency Ambassador Joselito A. Jimeno
Embassy of the Philippines
Muscat, Oman
c/o Vice Consul Jose Garcia III
Conducted via email: Interview questions sent 21 December 2011. Reply received 2 January 2012.
Ms. Eni Lestari
Chairperson – International Migrants Alliance (IMA)
Hong Kong
Conducted via email: Interview question sent 03 December 2011. Reply received 16 December 2011
Mr. John Leonard C. Monterona
Regional coordinator – Migrante Middle East (Migrante ME)
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Personal interview conducted 04 January 2012 | 1:00 – 3:00 pm
Migrante International Office, Cubao, Quezon City
81 | D A Q U I S
APPENDICES
82 | D A Q U I S
| APPENDIX A
Interview Questions and Transcripts of Interview
83 | D A Q U I S
1. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
Interview Questions for Undersecretary Esteban B. Conejos, Jr.
Office for Migrant Workers Affairs (OUMWA)
Department of Foreign Affairs
Manila, Philippines
Personal interview conducted 19 January 2012
10:30 – 11:30 am
DFA, Manila
(1) Considering the extent of the Filipino diaspora, how has the DFA adapted to the growing challenges of
protecting our migrant workers in their destination countries?
(2) To what extent, do you think, has selective deployment help decrease the incidence of on-site problems of
Filipino migrant workers?
(3) What are the common problems, issues or concerns regarding the on-site welfare of our migrant workers
there? What cases are the most prevalent?
(4) How does your office, as the state’s primary agency concerned with migrant affairs, respond to these issues?
What on-site mechanisms are in place to address these concerns?
(5) Government response to the in situ problems of Filipino migrant workers has been particularly criticized as
inefficient. What is your take on this? Are there gaps in the state mechanism that need to be addressed?
(6) Recognizing that several factors affect the performance of overseas missions, what constraints or limitations
(e.g. organizational, political, financial etc.) does the Office (including the foreign posts) face when dealing with
migrant affairs?
(7) The 100-million Legal Assistance Fund (LAF) is coursed through DFA – OUMWA. How is the process of
appropriation of these funds to foreign posts?
- Do you find this strategy efficient or do you think an alternative strategy is needed? If there is, what
constrains the Office from doing so?
(8) One of the most common concerns among migrant workers is the lack of welfare officials and personnel to
attend to their on-site needs. Is there a problem with the deployment of welfare officers and other personnel?
(9) What factors hinder the Philippine government from pursuing bilateral labor agreements with host
governments? What are the difficulties of negotiating such agreements? Do you think PH relations with these
host countries affect the Philippine government’s bargaining power?
(10) Non-governmental organizations, both international and Filipino-run, are actively engaged in migrant
affairs. How do see the role of NGOs in managing labor migration, particularly in responding to on-site concerns
of migrant workers? Is their work supplementary, complementary, or an alternative to existing government
mechanisms for protection?
(11) As Philippine labor migration shows no signs of abating, what is the challenge for the Philippine
government?
84 | D A Q U I S
Transcript of Interview
Q1
Usec. Conejos: The DFA is just following the policy that Congress has indicated in terms of providing protection
to the rights of migrant workers. The law is basically RA 8042, enacted in 1995 and was recently amended in
2010 (RA 10022), essentially established the structures that will enable DFA to provide, strengthen, and further
assistance to our nationals abroad. This consists of two things. One is the Assistance to Nationals Fund. This is
about P300M every year that Congress allocates for us and we use this to repatriate distressed Filipino workers
abroad. The other fund that is given to the DFA to carry out its mandate is the Legal Assistance Fund, P100
million. We are utilizing all of these financial resources to try to reach out and assist Filipinos in distress abroad.
Of course, there is the growing number; we estimate there are about 8 million Filipinos abroad. What we have
done really is intensify further our ability to reach out and provide assistance using the resources government
has given to us.
Qs 2, 4
Usec. Conejos: When you say selective deployment, I think you are referring to those countries where we have
imposed a ban on deployment of OFWs, for example as what happened in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan. The
purpose of this ban is principally to address the security concerns that we have about the safety of our nationals
there. Ang problema sa ating mga OFWs, despite of the ban, pumupunta pa rin doon. Kasi pumupunta sila doon
without government authority, hindi dumadaan sa POEA. So, basically they are undocumented in these places.
Ang sinasabi ko nga palagi sa kanila, mahirap na nga mag-protect ng isang OFW na legal, na dokumentado, how
much more difficult it is for us. While, in a way, na-reduce rin, kumokonti rin yung mga pumupunta sa mga
countries na meron tayong ban, meron pa rin na mga pumupunta.
Under RA 10022, yung bagong amendment, sinabi doon ng batas na puede lang mag-deploy ang gobyerno ng
OFW to these countries na mayroong tinatawag na guarantees to protect the rights of migrant workers.
Dalawang klaseng guarantee ito. Unang guarantee, sinasabi na dapat yung bansang iyon is a signatory to a
multilateral convention protecting the rights of migrant workers or (2) that host country has existing labor laws
protecting migrant workers or pag wala iyon, (3) that country has entered into a bilateral agreement with the
Philippines to protect migrant workers. And in addition to 1, 2, and 3 above, meron pang pangalawang
requirement, that that host country is taking concrete and positive measures to protect the rights of migrant
workers. So hindi lamang in paper, but actual protection. Ang ginagawa natin ngayon diyan, kasi inatasan ang
DFA to certify that all these countries in the world, about 193 countries, have all of those guarantees to protect
the rights of migrant workers. We have already certified, I don't know the numbers, mga 121 countries ata. We
are still reviewing the certification for the rest of these countries.
Sa Middle East wala pa, kasi ang deadline namin ay mga April 20 pa this year. Kasi yan ang pinakamarami
nating deployment. Alam mo wala tayong problema doon sa mga skilled workers kasi protektado naman talaga
sila. Ang karamihan [kailangan] ng proteksyon ay domestic household service workers at unskilled workers.
Q9
Usec. Conejos: Sa experience namin, yung mga bansa na yan, mga host countries, are also trying to protect their
labor market. Pag pumayag sila, pag nag-enter sila ng bilateral sa atin, ibig sabihin pumapayag sila na
pumapasok ang ating mga workers doon, medyo may implication din yan sa domestic labor market nila. So
that's one. Number 2, kung minsan binibigay nila na rason, may mga sistema kasi sila sa Middle East, for
example, yung tinatawag na sponsorship system. You can only be employed sa employer mo na nagsponsor sa
inyo. Hindi ka puede lumipat doon, engrained na yun sa sistema nila. Para sa atin, mahirap na sistema na 'yun
kasi parang nakatali ka sa isang employer. Kaya pag inabuso ka dun, mahihirapan kami. Matagal na protracted
na negosasyon yan. Ang reason ko nga, embedded na ito sa sistema sa kanila, kung minsan mga cultural
85 | D A Q U I S
differences, mga legal requirements doon. Kaya it takes time to negotiate an agreement na acceptable sa
dalawang panig at saka will comply to the legal, cultural, ethnic considerations.
Q3
Usec. Conejos: Palaging problema sa onsite, especially sa Hong Kong, yung mga labor conditions nila. For
example, may delay or withholding of salaries, withholding of benefits, mga working conditions hindi nakocomply, unsanitary o unsafe living conditions. ‘Yan especially sa Hong Kong Area. Doon sa Middle East, ganoon
din ang mga reklamo. But in addition to that, merong mga cultural elements. Like for example, maraming mga
kaso tinatawag naming love case. Sa Middle East kasi, especially sa Saudi Arabia, very strict yung application ng
Shari'ah law, hindi puede magsama ang babae at lalaki ‘pag hindi sila kasal. Syempre ang ating mga Pilipino,
meron mga party, mga mixed gathering ‘yan. Hindi puede yun doon kaya nahuhuli sila. Kaya importante itong
mga pre-departure orientation seminar para malaman nila kung anong dapat pag-ingatan pag nandoon sila sa
labas. So these are unique cases also as a result of... Sa Middle East din marami rin death penalty cases, minsan
mga kapwa Pilipino nagpapatayan, Pilipino kalaban employer nila, ang hatol death penalty, syempre sa tensyon
at stress na din yan. Meron din mga Pilipino, embezzlement, sila mismo nag-aalitan. The usual cases, first, of
course labor-related tsaka yung police cases involving the commission of common crimes.
Q5
Usec. Conejos: That is a very unfair accusation. Let me start by saying that in the whole world, the Philippine
protection model has been portrayed as one of the best and most comprehensive. Number two, ang ating
proteksyon, hindi lamang sa mga emergency situation. For example I cite the emergency cases sa giyera sa
Libya. It was only the Philippine government that was able to get all its nationals using government resources
within a matter of 10 days. Sa Lebanon dati, lahat yan nakaalis, walang nasaktan na Pilipino in all of these
emergencies. Maski sa natural calamaities, yung nangyari sa Japan nandoon din tayo, mabilis ang ating
reaksyon. Doon naman sa mga repatriation, nakikita natin dito araw-araw may darating, napapauwi dito. Kung
minsan ang reason for delay is because nakakaso pa, naka-pending pa yan. Ang hindi alam ng ating mga
kababayan, madali magsabi na "ang bagal ang DFA", from the very beginning, illegal sila doon, pumasok sila
walang legal standing, meron na silang kaso. Nakikipagnegotiate pa tayo diyan. The cost of repatriating one
Filipino undocumented worker, ang hirap niyan. Una babayaran mo ang deployment cost ng employer kasi
pinapauwi mo na 'yan sasabihin ng employer bayaran muna, di sila makakaalis pag walang exit visa. Number 2,
babayaran mo ang immigration fees and charges kasi overstaying sila or from the beginning wala silang
karapatan nandoon, babayaran mo yan bago sila makauwi. Number 3, airline ticket. So malaking negosasyon
yan bago sila makaalis. Saka doon, tayo lamang ang bansa na may tinatawag na Filipino resource center. Lahat
ng ating mga embassies, especially sa Middle East na maraming OFWs, meron tayong mine-maintain na facility.
Kung may problema ang OFW, meron silang pupuntahan. Doon mismo bibigyan sila ng assistance ng ating
kawani at ng DOLE, depende kung ang kaso niyan ay labor or police cases. Ang sistema kumpleto yan, meron
tayong ATN (assistance to nationals) officers, meron tayong mga welfare officers. Tayo lang ang bansa na may
mga ganyan. Kung minsan kasi, ang napo-project yung problema ng ating mga domestic workers, karamihan
mga undocumented workers. But the majority of Filipinos working there are actually doing well. Maganda
naman ang migration experience nila. Pero ang naha-highlight kasi palagi, itong mga mga problematic, dahil sa
umpisa pa lang problematic na sila dahil pumasok sila doon na undocumented.
C.Daquis: There have been complaints that FWRCs are not accommodating male distressed Filipino
workers. Why is this so?
Usec. Conejos: I think you are referring to the Middle East, especially sa Saudi Arabia. Kasi sa Saudi Arabia,
hindi puede magsama ang babae at lalaki. {Kahit within the jurisdiction of the Philippine embassy?} Yes, dapat
separate facilities talaga yan. That's how strict it is. Cultural yan. Sa ibang mga bansa wala naman. So, ang sa
amin talaga binibigyan namin ng priority yung mga women domestic workers, because of gender, because of
86 | D A Q U I S
the nature of work, they are more susceptible to abuse, vulnerable sila talaga. Yung mga men naman, alam mo
yang mga men diyan kung minsan overstaying na yan mga 10, 15 years; finally gusto na nila umuwi. Ano
ginagawa nila, pumupunta sila, ipe-presenta, isu-surrender sarili nila sa embassy. Sinasabi namin, sure,
tutulungan namin kayo, pero kausapin nyo muna ang immigration because hindi rin sila makakaalis pag walang
exit clearance from employer nila. Ang problema ng immig sa kanila, kung minsan, pumunta sila ng Saudi fifteen
years ago, siguro wala na kaming address doon sa employer na kumuha sa kanila. Nag-overstay ng overstay.
Ang tagal talaga ng proseso na yan. Pero yung sinasabi na hina-house namin lang mga babae, hindi totoo yan.
Priority ang mga babae at hindi puedeng magsama [ang babae at lalaki].
C.Daquis: Is there a separate facility for male distressed workers?
Usec. Conejos: No, walang separate facility. {In Hong Kong?} Female talaga. Hindi naman natin puede lahat
mabigyan ng proteksyon, 8 million, i-house lahat yan. So we have to prioritize. Ano ang pinaka-vulnerable
sector? Nakita namin ang may problema talaga female household service workers. So ito ang priority diyan.
Q7
Usec. Conejos: We have been very prudent in the disbursement of the two funds, yung Assistance to Nationals
Fund at tsaka Legal Assistance Fund. Di naman totoo yung sinasabi nila na kinukulang ang pera ng gobyerno. In
fact, nandyan yan, meron naman mga rules how we apply. Di naman lahat ng kaso, for example, bibigyan mo ng
abogado. Dapat i-prioritize mo rin ang critical cases na bibigyan mo ng abogado. Yung iba naman, when you say
legal assistance, hindi naman nagsasabi na meron sila dapat abogado lahat; otherwise, we will be hiring 8
million lawyers for all of these potential OFW 8 million cases. Meron naman tayong nagbibigay ng advice sa
kanila, and most of these cases for example, minor infractions, traffic accidents, hindi na kailangan yan mag-hire
pa tayo ng lawyers. So we try, again, to maximize use of our limited resources, so it could be applied to cases
which deserve the most attention.
C.Daquis: NGOs have voiced out their concern over the case-to-case system of hiring foreign lawyers to
represent Filipinos facing charges. Particularly, they contend that this system is inefficient in the Middle
East where the number of Filipinos needing legal aid remains high. Has your office considered their
recommendation of adopting a retention-based system?
Usec. Conejos: In fact, in four countries in the Middle East we have what we call a retainer agreement with a
lawyer. In some cases we do hire lawyers… Sa guidelines kasi namin, for example magha-hire ka lang ng lawyer,
pag number 1, walang tinatawag na counsel de officio, public defender. In some countries meron ding ganun.
Kung meron silang public defender, let the public defender handle the case. Papasok lang kami dito pag talagang
nakita namin na pinabayaan yung kaso. But if they have a legal representation from the beginning, they will
have to go with a public defender. As I said, not all cases, mga gambling cases, alcohol cases, adultery cases,
itong mga kaso na ito may element of voluntariness ng tao. Kokonti lang pera ng gobyerno, so anong ginagawa
ko? Nire-reserve ko ito, pina-prioritize ko yung pera doon talaga sa nangangailangan. Sino talaga ang
nangangailangan? Especially household service workers. Ito yung ating mga workers na nagtrabaho ng mabuti,
ng mahusay ngunit binubugbog, inaabuso, ito ang priority ko. Hindi yung umiinom, yung naglasing, hindi yung
mga adultery cases. Yun ang ibig kong sabihin na we prioritize.
Q7
Usec. Conejos: Nagrerecommend ang post namin kung ano assessment nila. For example, talagang meritorious
ang case for legal assistance, then I will ask them to canvass three lawyers, quotations. Hindi automatic yan.
Why? Because these are government funds and we have to very careful in disbursing these funds and it will only
be disbursed for the real meritorious cases.
87 | D A Q U I S
Ang procedure dito is, pag merong kaso ang post, magrecommend sila sa amin na pondohan ito. We will
evaluate the request. Kapag we agree with the recommnedation of the post, then we authorize the
disbursement of funds. Our finance office dito will now remit the money to them.
C.Daquis: Considering that the Middle East is the destination region for a huge percentage of Philippine
labor outflow and by experience has rendered numerous cases, isn’t a per-region basis appropriation of
the funds better in terms of efficiency, as what NGOs suggest?
Usec. Conejos: I can tell you the Middle East has the highest allocation, but we approve it not on a regional
basis, but on per case basis. Hindi naman lahat, we utilize a big portion of that. The reason for that is because as
I said we prioritize meritorious cases. Pag mga gambling na ganyan, theft, mga swindling, especially pag sila sila
mismo, hindi na namin yan binibigyan ng sarili pang abogado. We provide them with legal assistance during the
trial, yung aming mga officers doon will attend the hearings. So we reserve that. Meron kami always buffer
because sometimes may mga cases na malaki, like for example drug cases sa China, death penalty cases. It's in
how we manage the funds, the rule is we prioritize. If there are counsel de officios sa labas, then sila na mismo
maghahawak noon.
C. Daquis: There is a rising concern over the deployment-protection conundrum in managing labor
migration. Do you think there is a conflict that ensues between the government’s role in the labor
migration process and its responsibility to protection Filipino migrant workers?
Usec. Conejos: Sa batas naman maliwanag, that the government does not promote overseas employment as a
means to national growth. Deployment abroad is only based on the assurance that they will be protected
abroad. Yun talaga ang policy natin. The ideal situation is dapat wala tayong foreign deployment. Dapat we
generate enough work for our people domestically so there is no need for us to go abroad. Ang problema, yun
ang ideal. Pero ano ang reality? Wala tayong sapat na mga local employment opportunities. Dumadami ang
ating populasyon, wala silang choice kung hindi lumabas. Ngayon, ang tanong diyan ganito. Given this reality,
anong gawin natin diyan? Pabayaan natin, bahala kayo diyan, dahil we cling to the idea na dapat dito kayo? Or
we look at the reality on the ground, we face the reality na talagang ganyan, meron talagang lumalabas. So what
do we do? We face the reality and try to manage as best as we can the deployment abroad so that it can result to
a benefit to the worker. Yun ang ginagawa ng gobyerno. We are not promoting overseas employment; we are
only facing the reality of the fact that whatever we do meron pa ring umaalis. Tsaka sinasabi ko, even if marami
tayong trabaho dito sa atin, even if siguro ideal situation marating natin yan, na ang Pilipinas talagang mayaman
na, hindi na kailangan lumabas, pero because of this IT revolution, bumaba communication costs. The nature of
people to move, nandiyan talaga yan. That's human nature. So this is a reality. Either believe in a paradise, in
dreams, or we face the reality and act accordingly. And that's what the government is doing. Given the reality of
overseas employment, our action should be how to manage the situation so that it will benefit our workers.
Q8
Usec. Conejos: Ang ating embassies all over the world, there is always what we call an Assistance-to-Nationals
unit. That's part of consular functions ng every foreign post abroad. We always have officers dedicated to
provide..., depende yan kung how many are there. Siguro yung ratio between our officer and the people we are
serving ay mataas. We dont have embassies all over the world, so one embassy will have to handle some other
countries as part of its jurisdiction. But we always have a consular officer and an assistance-to-nationals officer
to provide assistance abroad.
Now, in addition to that, especially in the Middle East countries na maraming mga OFWs, yung OWWA
nagpapadala din ng welfare officers in these critical areas. Not only OWWA, pati DOLE, meron din silang labor
attache, nandoon din sila. Ito tulong-tulong lahat ito sa post to provide assistance. We have this system doon sa
Middle East.
88 | D A Q U I S
Q10
Usec. Conejos: Meron tayong tinatawag namin na consultative council on OFW concerns, which is a regular
meeting with the DFA, DOLE, POEA and OWWA with all NGOs. We meet with them regularly and try to dialogue
kung ano ba mga problema ng OFWs, kung ano puede namin magawa para sa kanila. In fact, maliwanag ang
batas na nagsasabi na NGOs are the partners of government in providing asssistance and should treat each
other with mutual respect and confidence.
In that sense, yes. They complement our work. There are many things that they can do; we support them. But
there are also things that they cannot do, for example, making representation with the host government kasi
ang kinakailangan doon sa labas ay ang gobyerno natin. That is where we help them also.
Q11
Usec. Conejos: Number 1 is we cannot really prevent labor migration because, first of all, it is in the nature of
man to seek greener pastures. Number 2, with the revolution in technology and transportation, costs have gone
down, travel is much much easier now than before. These are the contibutory factors that continue to attract
workers. Of course, the economic conditions in the country. Ideally, we should continue trying to generate local
employment. Maski hindi namin ma-prevent na aalis ang ating mga kababayan sa labas, at least we can
minimize them and we give them a choice. Kasi kung mayroon tayong mga trabaho sa bansa, ngayon bahala sila,
mayroon silang trabaho dito, pero sa tingin nila mas aasenso pa sila pag umalis. At least hindi na by necessity.
Iyon ang ating hope palagi, that deployment abroad will only be an option, not a survival strategy for our
people. So we should continue and focus on generating local employment for our people in the country.
89 | D A Q U I S
Interview questions for
His Excellency Ambassador Joselito A. Jimeno
Embassy of the Philippines
Muscat, Oman
Conducted via email:
Interview questions sent 21 December 2011. Reply received 2 January 2012.
(1) What is the current Filipino migrant situation in Oman?
(2) What are the common problems, issues or concerns regarding the onsite welfare of our migrant workers
there? What cases are the most prevalent?
(3) How does the Philippine Embassy, as the state’s primary agency concerned with migrant affairs, respond to
these issues? What onsite mechanisms are in place to address these concerns and to ensure the welfare of our
migrant workers?
(4) The Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995 provides the legal framework for the protection of
our migrant workers. In terms of support services, does the Embassy abide by the provisions of the Act (i.e.
counseling services, legal and welfare assistance, Filipino Resource Center, shelter for distressed workers, etc.)?
(5) Government response to the in situ problems of Filipino migrant workers has been particularly criticized as
inefficient. What is your take on this? Are there gaps in the state mechanism, e.g. in the provision of onsite
support service, that need to be addressed?
(6) Recognizing that several factors affect the performance of overseas missions, what constraints or limitations
(e.g. organizational, political, financial, human resource, etc.) does the Embassy face when dealing with migrant
affairs?
(7) How do you think the service provision could be improved? What policies or programs do you think are
needed to better serve the migrant workers community?
(8) Non-governmental organizations, both international and Filipino-run, have been actively engaged in
migrant affairs. How do see the role of NGOs in managing labor migration, particularly in responding to onsite
concerns of migrant workers? Is their work supplementary, complementary, or an alternative to existing
government mechanisms for protection?
90 | D A Q U I S
91 | D A Q U I S
92 | D A Q U I S
93 | D A Q U I S
Interview Questions for POLO
c/o Assistant Labor Attaché Alex Inza Cruz
Philippine Overseas Labor Office – Jeddah, KSA
Conducted via email:
Interview questions sent 27 December 2011. Reply received 16 January 2012.
(1)
What is the current Filipino migrant situation in KSA?
Per available data from the Commission on Filipinos Overseas, stock estimate of OFWs as of
December 2009 reached 1,158,649 of which about 20,000 are irregular/undocumented workers.
Based on the estimates of the Philippine Consulate General in Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia, an estimated 280,000 OFWs are working in the Western Region including Jeddah, Kingdom of
Saudi Arabia.
General working and living conditions of migrant workers:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
(2)
Working conditions are relatively acceptable as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is one of the
countries with huge number of Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs)
OFWs are met at the airport by their sponsors or employers and representatives of the
foreign based agency of the deploying Philippine recruitment agencies;
No tax deductions on salaries with food, accommodation and transportation being
provided by the employer. Salaries are usually being paid on a monthly basis at the end
of each month.
Likewise, health insurance and end-of-service benefits (retirement pay) are provided by
companies for skilled and semi-skilled workers;
Cost of living is relatively moderate and reasonable;
Female workers are not allowed to live by themselves
What are the common problems, issues or concerns regarding the onsite welfare of our migrant
workers there? What cases are the most prevalent?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
Salary/wage
Unpaid, delayed, reduced or illegal deductions
Below the minimum wage of US$ 400.00/month set for household service workers (HSWs)
Iqamas or resident permits/IDs
Overstaying because of the sponsor’s failure to renew the iqamas (expired)
OFWs being forced to pay the processing fees and/or fines and other penalties
Non-issuance, delayed or being withheld by their employer
Illegal employment
Working with employers who are not their sponsors/legitimate employers
Working with “bought visas” to be able to work as “freelancers”
Working without the valid/required Iqama or working permits
Other contractual violations
Contract substitution
Non-payment of overtime pay
Long hours of work
No food and/or accommodation in lieu of allowances
Non-payment of vacation leave, plane ticket, end of service benefits and other entitlements upon
completion of the employment contract;
Abuse and maltreatment
Sub-human living conditions in company-provided accommodation
Verbal abuse and/or physical maltreatment at the workplace
Rape or sexual harassment
Delayed and/or non-processing of exit visa upon completion of the employment contract
94 | D A Q U I S
f.
g.
(3)
Forced to work even after completion of the employment contract
False accusations of theft, wrong doings and absconding from work
Legal constraints
Long and tedious process in resolving cases at the Saudi labor office
Cancellation of visa and issuance of exit permit for HSWs at the Immigration Office subject to the
approval of the employer
An absconding or run-away report of employer will render the worker at fault or in violation of
Immigration Law instead of victim of employer’s contractual violations which are considered
valid causes of termination or stopping work
Personal problems
Homesickness
Illicit personal relationships
Culture shock
Lack of skills/qualifications for the job/position
Medically unfit
Lack of preparedness
How does your office, as one of the state’s primary agencies that deal with migrant affairs and
labor-related concerns, respond to these issues? What onsite mechanisms are in place to address
these concerns and to ensure the welfare of our migrant workers?
Available POLO services and mechanisms:
-
-
-
-
(4)
Conducts conciliation and mediation proceedings between employee and employer arising from
disputes filed either by employee or employer through personal negotiations, telephone and
issuance of appropriate letters for possible immediate settlement of issues being raised. If no
compromise/settlement is reached, the complainant is advised and assisted to file his/her
complaint/claim with the Saudi Labor Office.
Provide OFW-complainant assistance in the hearing of his/her case at the Saudi Labor Office
and/or the Primary and Higher Commissions.
Assist and accompany OFW in going to the Police, OUMDA or Barangay to deliver subpoena to
employer.
Assist OFWs in collecting unpaid salaries and benefits from employer.
Assist OFWs with employment-related cases/complaints in far flung areas within the Western
Region including filing of cases with appropriate government agencies;
Secure permit from Immigration Office (Jawazat) for OFWs without Iqama to travel outside the
jurisdiction of Jeddah to return to his/her employer or to attend the hearing of his/her case.
Coordinates with the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) and Overseas
Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA) on assistance required relative to the repatriation of
OFWs to the Philippines from the deploying agency;
Provide assistance to female OFWs in distress by giving them temporary shelter inside the
POLO-Filipino Workers Resource Center (FWRC) and providing them food and medicine while
their cases are being attended to by their assigned case officers. Other basic necessities are also
provided to them including recreational and sports facilities.
Conducts various post arrival orientation seminars and advocacy on various programs and
services available for OFWs and their dependents as part of the workers’ education program.
Provides welfare assistance through conduct of hospital, jail/detention visits, counseling and
other welfare programs including assistance provided to walk-in clients and phoned-in queries.
Conducts various skills and other capacity building programs for OFWs as part of the
reintegration program for OFWs
Verification of employment documents that would ensure reasonable terms and conditions of
employment, thus protecting the interest and welfare of OFWs
The Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995 provides the legal framework for the
protection of our migrant workers. In terms of support services, has the Philippine team there
been able to extend the services as provided for by the law (i.e. counseling services, legal and
welfare assistance, Filipino Resource Center, shelter for distressed workers, etc.)?
95 | D A Q U I S
ACCOMPLISHMENT REPORT
For CY 2008, 2009, 2010 & 2011
Services to Safeguard Fair and Just Terms and Conditions of Employment
Verified a total of 4,188 job orders and 18,796 employment contracts involving about 77,460 workers
PARTICULARS
No. Job Orders Verified
No. of Workers Covered
No. of Contracts Verified
2008
627
12,108
2,527
2009
815
16,288
3,581
2010
1,007
23,011
7,544
2011
1,739
26,053
5,324
TOTAL
4,188
77,460
18,796
Issued a total of 15,829 Overseas Employment Certificates (OECs) to returning OFWs
PARTICULARS
No. OEC issued
2008
3,510
2009
3,301
2010
4,150
2011
4,868
TOTAL
15,829
Assisted some 11,856 OFWs with labor and welfare cases through mediation and conciliation
interventions as well as assistance in filing of cases with other concerned agencies.
PARTICULARS
No. of Cases Handled
No. of workers involved
2008
3,702
3,702
2009
2,170
2,170
2010
3,921
3,921
2011
1,828
2,063
TOTAL
11,621
11,856
Social Protection and Welfare Services
Enrollment of some 11,044 OFWs in the OWWA Voluntary Membership Program
PARTICULARS
OFW Members enrolled
2008
2,775
2009
2,400
2010
2,277
2011
3,592
TOTAL
11,044
Provided welfare assistance to some 134,038 OFWs through conduct of hospital, jail/detention visits,
counseling and other welfare programs including assistance provided to walk-in clients and phoned-in
queries.
PARTICULARS
No. of OFW assisted
2008
5,402
2009
45,960
2010
55,957
2011
26,719
TOTAL
134,038
Facilitated the repatriation of some 5,603 Filipino nationals in coordination with the Philippine
Consulate General - Assistance to Nationals Section.
PARTICULARS
No. of FNs repatriated
2008
201
2009
707
2010
2,389
2011
2,306
TOTAL
5,603
Provided temporary shelter to some 1,146 distressed OFWs at the Migrant Workers and other
Filipinos Resource Center (MWOFRC).
PARTICULARS
No. of distressed OFWs assisted
2008
241
2009
369
2010
290
2011
TOTAL
246
1,146
96 | D A Q U I S
Capacity Building Services
Conducted 44 various skills trainings and seminars benefiting some 1,583 OFWs as part of the
reintegration preparedness program.
PARTICULARS
No. of trainings/seminars
No. of OFW beneficiaries
2008
8
400
2009
14
550
2010
9
337
2011
13
296
TOTAL
44
1,583
Participated in various community outreach programs, socio-cultural activities and other programs in
coordination with various organizations.
(5)
Government response to the in situ problems of Filipino migrant workers has been particularly
criticized as inefficient. What is your take on this? Are there gaps in the state mechanism, e.g. in
the delivery of onsite support services that need to be addressed?
Legal constraints
Existing long and tedious process in resolving cases at the Saudi labor office
Cancellation of visa and issuance of exit permit for HSWs at the Immigration Office subject to the
approval of the employer
An absconding or run-away report of employer will render the worker at fault or in violation of
Immigration Law instead of victim of employer’s contractual violations which are considered
valid causes of termination or stopping work
Others
Budget limitations and lack of sufficient manpower complement
(6)
One of the most common concerns among migrant workers is the lack of welfare officials and
personnel to attend to their onsite needs. Is there a problem with the deployment of welfare
officers?
(7) Recognizing that several factors affect the performance of overseas missions, what constraints or
limitations (e.g. organizational, political, financial, human resource, etc.) does the POLO face when
dealing with migrant affairs?
(8) How do you think the service provision could be improved? What policies or programs do you think
are needed to better serve the migrant workers community?
-
-
-
Intensive pre-departure orientation on Shari'ah law
Departing OFWs must be provided by the recruitment agency with copies of passport, visa page and
mission’s contact numbers prior to their departure
Report to MFA all cases of absconding OFWs for assistance in their immediate repatriation or early
case resolution with appropriate Saudi government office
To coordinate/partner with Consulates of other labor-sending countries to present a unified front in
recommending policies/regulations to the host country to better protect the interest and welfare of
expatriate workers especially the HSWs
Additional budget and manpower complement with Arabic speaking personnel with both reading and
writing skills to address the growing number of OFWs requiring/requesting immediate assistance
and intervention
Tapping the local government units and other people’s organization on intensifying advocacy
programs related to migration
(9) Non-governmental organizations, both international and Filipino-run, have been actively engaged in
migrant affairs. How do see the role of NGOs in managing labor migration, particularly in responding to
onsite concerns of migrant workers? Is their work supplementary, complementary, or an alternative to
existing government mechanisms for protection?
97 | D A Q U I S
-
2. NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS
Interview questions for Mr. John Leonard C. Monterona
Regional coordinator – Migrante Middle East (Migrante ME)
Personal interview conducted 04 January 2012
1:00 – 3:00 pm
Migrante International Office, Cubao, Quezon City
A. On the government’s mechanism for on-site protection (as per the situation in the Middle East)
(1) The Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995, amended by RA 10022 in 2010, provides legal
basis for the extension of government assistance to Filipino migrant workers in their destination countries.
Included in the support and services provided for by law are free access to legal assistance, counseling,
establishment of OFW resource centers, and procurement of medical and other welfare services. Assessing the
implementation of these mandated services in the Middle East, how do you think the government has fared in
adhering to the law and delivering these services during the past years?
(2) Sec 19 (h) of the Migrant Workers Act mandates a designated OFW resource center to carry out the
responsibility of “monitoring daily situations, circumstances and activities affecting migrant workers and other
overseas Filipinos. Do you think the resource centers in the Middle East are adequately serving their purpose?
(3) a. Based on your observations, do you think the DFA’s capacity to adequately respond to migrant welfare
issues is limited? If yes, in what ways?
b. Has the department’s services been able to adapt to the growing migrant population?
(4) Recent social and political crises that swept the Middle have put the safety of Filipino migrant workers at
risk. How will you assess the response of the Philippine government to these situations in terms of on-site
protection?
(5) a. Are the Foreign Service personnel and resource centers deployed competent to serve our migrant
workers? How is their treatment of OFWs asking for support?
b. Is the government’s country team approach to responding to migrant welfare issues an effective strategy?
(6) In terms of budget allocated for welfare services for Filipino migrant workers, has the government adhered
to the terms provided for by Sec 25 of the Migrant Workers Act? And is the amount currently allocated still
enough to cover services?
(7) Previous assessments of the government’s response to the welfare issues of migrant workers on the job site
reveal an apparent failure of the government to provide relevant on-site protection. What do you think is the
reason behind government’s failure to deliver services and provide adequate protection?
B. On legal structures as protective mechanism
(1) There have been criticisms that the Migrant Workers Act is an inadequate response to the issues and
concerns that our migrant workers face on the job site. What is your take on the criticism that the Act is against
the interests of our OFWs?
(2) Where do you think the problem arises, in the legal structure itself or in the implementation of the
mechanisms?
C. On your organization’s work in migrant welfare and protection
(1) What is the motivation behind the Migrante’s work as an organization?
98 | D A Q U I S
(2) What is the nature of the organization’s work in migrant welfare and protection? Does it take a proactive or
reactive role?
(3) Provided that there are lapses in the delivery of services to our OFWs, to what extent has Migrante been able
to respond and fill in the gap? What are the core services of the organization?
(4) What limitations does Migrante face when dealing with migrant workers’ issues? Are there constraints that
hinder the organization from fully carrying out its services?
D. On NGO-Gov’t relations
(1) What has been your organizations’ experience in dealing with Philippine government agencies both in the
Middle East and at home? And how would you describe Migrante’s relationship with these government
agencies, particularly in the Middle East? How has been the reception of Migrante’s work by both the Philippine
government and the receiving countries in the Middle East?
(2) How do you see the organization’s work in migrant welfare and protection in relation to the government’s
mechanism? Is it supplementary, complementary, or alternative to existing state mechanisms for protection?
Other criticisms of government mechanism for on-site protection
(1) Are there particular concerns those OFWs in the Middle East face that the government has still not been able
to address?
99 | D A Q U I S
Transcript of Interview
QA.1
Monterola: As far as we are concerned we will rate primarily the Department of Foreign Affairs' performance
as very poor. The mere fact na tumatanggap kami ng about 7-10 cases of OFWs daily. Napakalaki ng rate na yun
(7-10 daily), sa Migrante chapters lang yun sa Middle East. So I would expect na aside from those cases na
lumalapit sa amin, meron pang ibang lumalapit din sa Embassy. Lahat sila nagcocomplain that there is no
proper assistance given to them by the Department of Foreign Affairs and concerned officials of the Philippine
Embassy doon. Cases range from abuses and maltreatment, katulad ng sexual harrasment, verbal and physical
assault and unpaid salaries. From abuses to labor malpractices hanggang sa mysterious deaths, nirerecord
namin yan. Kapansin-pansin nga, yung families mismo of these distressed OFWs are coming to us kapag wala
silang nakukuhang aksyon o tulong from the DFA. These OFW families are looking for assistance, kaya lang
pagdating doon na pinapangakuan lang sila, after a month or two or three weeks, lumalapit sila sa amin dahil
nga wala silang nakikitang reply na maayos coming from the DFA. Palagi lang promises na hinihintay pa nila ang
reply ng posts (embassy) tungkol sa kasong nirefer nila sa embassy. So wala namang nangyayari.
The law itself, as far as the law is concerned, maraming mga provisions na maganda diyan, katulad nga ng legal
assistance provision. The problem is kung paano iniimplement, honest to goodness, yung pagbibigay ng legal
assistance doon sa OFWs. Kaya marami pa rin sa mga OFWs natin, kahit walang mga kasalanan, sila pa din
nakukulong. Marami pa rin talaga ang nangangailangan ng legal assistance doon.
Halimbawa yung mga illegal possession of liquor, sentence of 6 months to 1 year imprisonment. Karamihan pa
din jan, based sa records namin, there are OFWs na tapos na ang sentencya pero nakakulong pa din sila. Ibig
sabihin overstaying na sila doon, despite na they have already served their sentence and lashes. Ang tinatanong
namin doon, bakit hindi sila kayang i-deport agad sa Pilipinas so that they could start a brand new life.
Di lang legal assistance, counseling, welfare. Ang welfare sa OWWA na yan, mayroon din silang OWWA
representatives o officer dinedeploy doon. In terms of Assistance To Nationals ( legal assistance, consular
services), Philippine embassy ang may task noon. Ang system nila, one-team. Basically under the leadership or
the direction of the Philippine Ambassador designated to that post.
Not all POLOs have shelters. Filipino Workers Resource Centers (FWRCs) or Bahay Kalinga. But these are only
for women distressed workers. For male OFWs na distressed, wala talaga. {Wla naman gender provision?} Yun
nga ang sinasabi namin, marami rin naman talagang male OFWs na distressed and undocumented, nagtatago
lang, wala talaga silang mahahanap na shelter, kung hindi doon lang sa kanilang mga kakilala, sa mga kaibigan
at tsaka sa mga Filipino organizations na nagbibigay ng temporary shelter sa kanila. Pero bawal sa ano mang
Middle East country na magkanlong ng mga takas o runaways, ang tawag doon absconding. Absconding is a
violation of the immigration law in Saudi Arabia as well as in other Middle East countries.
In the first place, they cannot put up a shelter without a permission coming from the host government. The
mere fact na itinayo ang FWRC o Bahay Kalinga is basically to cater or to provide temporary shelter to
distressed, runaway OFWs seeking assitance.
By the spirit ok, pero implementation, may problema. Sa provision sa 100-million legal assistance fund, last year
hindi sinunod. Ngayong 2012, doon sa General Appropriations Act passed by Congress and signed by the
President, ibinalik yung 100-million legal asssitance fund. Yung pondo na yan ay coursed through sa Office of
Undersecreatry for Migrant Workers Affairs ng DFA. Nandudoon yung pera at sila dapat ang gagastos nun. The
problem is yung process ng pagrerelease ng legal assistance o halimbawa yung paghhire ng local lawyer. Ang
process, halimbawa, nakulong ako. I requested legal assistance sa embassy. Embassy will review my case, kung
qualified ba akong mabigyan ng legal assistance. Kung ano yung qualifications, DFA lang ang nakakaalam noon.
100 | D A Q U I S
Kung qualified ako, gagawan nila ako ng recommendation after asking three sets of quotations from local law
firms. So iaatached nila yung quotations from the local law firms kasama yung recommendation nila, itatransmit sa OUMWA-DFA. Office ni Undersecretary Esteban Conejos ang magrereview at mag-aaprove if the
request for legal assistance merits. Sa Manila pa yun manggagaling, kaya very bureaucratic ang process, tapos
case-to-case basis lang ang hiring ng lawyer. Ang sinsasabi namin, since may pondo naman, bakit hindi gawing
retention basis. Halimbawa, yung Shari’ah lawyer ng isang law firm, i-hire per contract basis, halimbawa for 2
years, then siya lahat mag-hahandle ng cases ng embassy na kinakailangan ng representation in court, para
hindi magastos and basically, puede siya matawag on time kasi nga may kontrata. Ang problema, pag-high
profile ang kaso, ayaw tumanggap ng mga lawyers ng mababang professional fee. So nahihirapan din, even the
DFA ang sinasabi walang tumatanggap na lawyer. So why not engage in the services of a lawyer on a per
contract basis, let's say one year, renewable after a year or two years, pero on call kapag kailangan ng
representation ng OFW during hearing in court. They agreed to that, in principle, but Philippine Embassy in
Riyadh says it's up to the OUMWA-DFA.
Yung 78 or 87 million noong 2010, ang nautilized doon ay 67 million something. Saudi Arabia ang may most
number of OFWs na nangangailangan ng legal assistance, why not put the bulk (of the fund) in them. China, also,
marami din. Sa Europe, kakaunti lang ang OFW doon. Percentage-wise, sa 100-million, precentageappropriation na lang. Wala pang transparency in utilizing the 100-million LAF.
In fact yung mga kaso sa Saudi Arabia, karamihan huli na sila nagbibigay ng assistance, only after conviction sa
lower court. Lower court hearing, walang legal assistance. Kapag nagkaroon ng conviction, automatic appeal
yan, especially high-profile case, meaning death sentence, hanging, execution by sword. Sa appeal na lang sila
nagbibigay ng abogado, but what's the use kung appeal na lang yan. Kaya yung rate ng conviction malaki kasi
nga hindi nabibigyan ng proper representation o defense in court yung mga kababayan nating akusado, kahit sa
mga petty crimes. Sa petty crimes, abrupt ang Shari’ ah court, two, three weeks, one month, conviction kaagad.
Kaya dapat may representation sa korte para sa side ng OFW. Kung translator lang, hindi maintindihan ng OFW
yung pinag-uusapan in Arabic, oo lang siya ng oo. Ang dilemma kapag may mga dokumento in Arabic, ittranslate
kunwari sa kanya ng provided translator by the court, hindi natin alam kung totoo yung pinagsasasabi. Just to
settle the case, pipirma yung OFW. Yun pala iniincrimate na yung OFW sa pinirmahan nya kasi di nya naman
nga alam dahil Arabic yun.
QA.3
Monterola: New hires umabot ng 350000 to 400000 last year in Saudi Arabia. Pero ang personnel ganun pa
din. Halimbawa sa ATN section, may isang Vice Consul na head, 1 case officer sa lalake, isa sa babae, may
translator na 2 or 3. Yun lang. Buong Central region yan, na mayroong more or less 500000 to 600000 OFWs,
for example in Riyadh. Sa Consulate ganun din ang set-up, iilan lang din ang case officer at translator. Ang case
officer naman hindi allowed to attend hearings, only lawyer lang. Ang translator cannot object, present
evidence, cannot do anything but translate. So dapat may lawyer talaga for representation or to present
counteraffidavits.
QA.4
Monterola: Maraming OFWs naapektuhan. Una sa Egypt, Alert Level 4, compulsary repatriation although may
ibang hindi umuwi. Then next, Libya, marami talaga narepatriate. Na-reveal talaga dito ang unpreparedness ng
Philippine Embassies at ng DFA in its evacuation and repatriation efforts. In fact sa Libya, kung walang tulong
ng International Organization for Migration, hindi marerepatriate yung mga OFWs na matagal na, among the
workers na nandoon, ang mga Filipinos ang huling narepatriate out of Libya, dahil na din sa tulong ng IOM na
nagrenta ng mga barge. Pinipoint nila ang mga evacuation centres ng IOM staffers pinuntahan OFWs, pinull-out
sila dun dinala sa safe na lugar. More than 2, 3 weeks walang ginagawa ang Philippine government. Yun pala
101 | D A Q U I S
hinihintay lang nila kumilos ang IOM dahil walang capacity ang Philippine government to have their own
evacuation efforts. IOM ang nagrenta ng sasakyan, sila ang naglikas sa mga OFWs. Even in Syria now, hanggang
sa ngayon, wala pa din nangyayari.
They are not prepared. Ang sinasabi nila may blueprint daw, every embassy daw may blueprint standby in case
of emergency repartriation at evacuation. Pero sa tingin ko wala eh, kasi nasurprise sila sa Egypt, sa Libya,
ngayon sa Syria they are not even prepared. They are just saying na mahirap dahil undocumented ang OFWs
doon. But hey, January (last year) pa pumutok ang sa Syria, January na naman ngayon. Ngayon lang sila kumilos
nang pinupuna na sila sa media, saying na dapat magcreate na sila ng high level task force to seek the help of
Syrian government to waive na yung exit clearances, formalities para mailabas na yung OFWs, I think andun ang
constraint. Ngayon pumunta na si Sec. Del Rosario, diumano kinakausap yung counterpart Syrian official.
Sa Middle East marami talagang undocumented. In case na magkaroon ng emergency situation katulad ng
MENA crisis, problema talaga. Buti na lang sa Saudi hindi nagkakagulo. Once Saudi ang nagkagulo, ang dami ng
OFW doon, 1.2 million, pano nila irerepatriate yun. Di nga nila kaya irepatriate yung 14000 - 15000 sa Syria,
how much more the at least 1.2 million in Saudi Arabia?
QA.5
Monterola: Unang-una, orientation ng DFA personnel, mga diplomats yan, more on economic, political, cultural,
but they are not trained on services. Kahit sa code of ethics nila, paano tumulong sa mga distressed OFWs. Isa na
yan sa pillars, at dapat priority na paano tumulong sa OFWs in terms of providing protection, securing their
rights and welfare. The political, cultural, and economic aspect ng trabaho nila bilang diplomat must be
secondary to OFW services. Ang problema yung thrust nila is not really designed to help distress OFWs. Besides,
they don't want trouble. May mga cases kami documented, rape victim sa Saudi Arabia, lumapit sa embassy. So
dapat magfile ng kaso. Ang sasabihin ng embassy wag na lang kasi yung amo mo malakas, maimpuwensya, etc.
kapag nag-file ng kaso tatagal. I-settle na lang natin,tatanggap ka ng pera, ticket, uwi ka na lang ng Pilipinas.
Instead of pursuing justice for OFW victim, nangyayari nga they would rather compromise the situation and not
seek justice for OFW victims. Kahit yung simpleng inakusahan ng employer na nagnakaw, sasabihin ng embassy
aminin mo na lang, tanggapin mo na lang, one year lang naman sentencya mo, para maauwi ka na kaagad. Kung
wala naman talagang kasalanan, kawawa. We are trying to correct (these type of cases) by pressing embassy
officials and ipaalam sa kanila yung responsibility nila sa OFWs. Dapat nga protection ng well-being ng OFWs, in
fact, should be the main thrust. Nagbabago panahon, before yun ang concern nila (economic, political aspect),
ngayon ang dami na ng OFWs so it must be the priority.
QC.1
Monterola: Migrante International is an alliance, by nature, made up of different chapters of Migrante and
other OFW organizations. Halimbawa, yung Kapatiran sa Gitnang Silangan, is not a chapter of Migrante ME but
is a member of Migrante International. Migrante Middle East ay sub-alliance na pumapayong sa chapter ng
Migrante at OFW organizations sa Middle East. Migrante International is a founding member of the
International Migrants Alliance.
Advocacy is centered on rights and welfare. Dumaraming cases ng abuses, maltreatment, human trafficking,
illegal recruitment. Yung insincerity and lipservice ng Philippine government in providing assistance is also a
motivation to us, that is secondary. But of course, primary is the need really to provide protection, advance the
rights and welfare and well-being of OFWs and also their families here. Kaya ang Migante International
homefront, ang concern nila is to abutin ang families and dependents of OFWs.
Of course, kung wala namang OFW phenomenon or OFW exodus, Migrante would not exist. But precisely
because of the crisis in the Philippines at maraming sinasabi nating biktima ng forced migration. The need
102 | D A Q U I S
really is nandyan, kailangan. Hanggang may lumalapit, hanggang may pang-aabuso, hanggang may forced
migration, hanggang di maayos ang economic conditions sa Pilipinas, mageexist ang Migrante.
QC.2
Monterola: Of course, we are on a proactive stand. Policy-wise, involved kami, direct assistance to OFWs,
welfare cases man yan, economic, edcuational, campaigns, it will always be from a proactive standpoint. Of
course, kapag may policy proposal pa lang ng government, naglalabas na kaagad kami ng stand or position on
that particular policy statement. We want to be proactive talaga.
QC.4
Monterola: Grassroots OFW organization kami, limited ang aming resources, especially funds for our day to
day operations. Kami mismo sa Middle East, OFWs din kami, so in-between our work, sinisingit talaga namin
yung advocacy at trabaho sa Migrante. For free ito, walang any compensation man lang. Limitation nga time,
resources, funds. Kumukuha kami ng operations for day to day from our own pockets and contributions,
membership dues (butaws). Gumagawa din kami ng project proposal to individuals, advocates ng migrants,
government agencies, or politicians who have their own migrant or OFW programs, dun kami nag-tatie up.
Peronnel, sa homefront may full timers dito and administrative staff. Sa labas ng bansa, especially sa Middle
East, lahat ng chapters nag-eexist on a voluntary basis, parttime status, OFW din naman kasi sila.
QC.3
Monterola: Direct asssistance mismo sa OFW. Counseling, paghawak ng kaso nila, follow-up, update sa
Philippine embassy. Ang Philippine Embassy kasi has the legal entity to represent OFWs sa mga concerned
authorities sa host government. Isa pa sa mga limitation yan, kami kasi as an NGO, although to some extent
nirerecognize kami ng host government, walang blanket recognition. Recognition is through the Embassy pa
din kasi Filipino organization kami. Ang role namin is to bridge the OFW mismo and the Philippine embassy, to
press, push the embassy to immediately provide assistance, to act on OFWs' issues and cases, and kausapin
yung mga host government agencies para naman to facilitate, mapabilis yung kaso. Yun yung pinakabasic na
magagawa namin doon. Bukod sa, of course, counseling, documentation ng mga kaso nila. We believe na kapag
ang Migrante nandyan, we are a pressure group, we pressure the embassy para kumilos, nakakatulong kami ng
malaki kaya napapabilis ang kaso.
Nagpprovide kami ng shelter, pero discreet lang yan, sa mga individual OFWs, halimbawa buntis,
undocumented, pinapakiusapan namin yung ibang members. Although risky. Kinakausap pa rin namin ang
embassy, kung puedeng ilagay sa Bahay Kalinga. Pag umayaw sila, hinahanapan namin ng paraan. Pero hindi
ibig sabihin nun na kokonsentihin namin pag-ayaw nila, we file formal complaints.
QsD.1, D.2
Monterola: Kami naman we cannot be adversarial to both host and Philippine governments. If there are some
policies or measures implemented by the Saudi government for example, we cannot directly interfere or attack
them, OFW lang kami, considered as temporary alien, temporary worker. But we course through our
sentiments or opinions sa Philippine embassy. We urge the Philippine embassy, for instance, to go against or
lobby with the Saudi gov't not to implement halimbawa yung issue ng pagbibigay ng limitation sa OFW
remittances amount, kasi may plano ang Saudi government na lagyan ng cap ang OFW remittance, under study
yan. Di namin puede atakihin yun, kasi baka malagay kami sa alanganin, security-wise. Pero we urge the
Philippine embassy through the ambassador na kausapin diplomatically yung couterpart niya na pakiusapan to
consider the position of Filipino migrant workers.
103 | D A Q U I S
Of course, parang adversarial, especially sa embassy officials. I personally have the experience na minumura ako
ng embassy officials or ATN staff dahil sa pangungulit ko sa pagffollow-up ng kaso. Tapos kasi nga pag wala
silang nagagawa, gumagawa ako ng statement sa media, binabatikos ko sila. Then kapag namemedia, they
would come back to me and mumurahin ka. But later on, as I did na pinapaliwanagan sila na trabaho nila
magbigay ng serbisyo sa OFWs. Kami nga na OFW mismo nandidito tumutulong, sila pa na duty-bound to
provide assistance distressed OFWs, bakit nyo aayawan. Isa sa mga ginawa namin para di maging adversial ang
relationship, we seek case dialogue sa kanila. Pupuntahin namin, dadalin namin ang kaso. Kasi minsan di na
namin kaya kausapin ang jail authorities, kasi only embassy officials ang may legal authority and allowed to
visit prisons. Ang sabi lang namin sa kanila advocacy ito, magtulungan na lang tayo. Pero di maiwasan talaga,
ang bottomline lang naman talaga pag may kaso kami, umaksyon kayo. Pag di kayo umaksyon, we will push you
through media. Lately may magandang improvement, dahil nga pag kami ang nag-rerefer, di lang sa Saudi, sa
Bahrain, Lebanon, Jordan, Kuwait, UAE , kapag kami gumagawa ng case referral, within 24 hours or a day
nagrereply na sila. Kung wala mang update, at least inaacknowledge nila yung case referral. Kung after 5
working days walang reply, gagawa kami ng follow-up letter, or tatawagan para sa update. So ineengage mo
talaga sila, kasi importante yun para napupush sila at alam nila na may nagmomonitor sa kanila para ituloy nila
yung trabaho nila. Malaking bagay yun.
Normally, nung first phase, nanggagaling muna sila sa embassy, tapos walang aksyon pumupunta sa amin.
Nung nagiging known na to the public, to the OFW families in the Philipines and tapos through media
statements, nakilala na ang Migrante na very much active in providing asssistance in the Middle East directly na
sila sa amin pumupunta. Around 2008 until now, umabot na kami ng 7-10 cases daily, kasi directly na sila sa
amin pumupunta. Nagrereply, ibig sabihin nagiging effective.
If we are organized, alam nila na we have the voice to pressure them, batikusin sila.Tsaka lang sila kikilos. Very
reactive, very negligent, inept and ineffective. I hope na yung contribution ng Migrante sa Middle East especially
mabago yung kultura ng services ng embassy officials towards OFWs through our advocacy and pressure.
104 | D A Q U I S
Interview questions for the Mission for Filipino Migrant Workers – Hong Kong
c/o Mr. Norman Uy Carnay (program officer for Research and Documentation)
Conducted via email:
Interview questions sent 23 November 2011. Reply received 08 December 2011
On the government’s mechanism for on-site protection
(1) What is the current Filipino migrant situation in Hong Kong?
(2) The Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995, amended by RA 10022 in 2010, provides legal
basis for the extension of government assistance to Filipino migrant workers in their destination countries.
Included in the support and services provided for by law are free access to legal assistance, counseling,
establishment of OFW resource centers, and procurement of medical and other welfare services. Assessing the
implementation of these mandated services in Hong Kong, how do you think the government has fared in
adhering to the law and delivering these services during the past years?
(3) Sec 19 (h) of the Migrant Workers Act mandates a designated OFW resource center to carry out the
responsibility of “monitoring daily situations, circumstances and activities affecting migrant workers and other
overseas Filipinos. Do you think the resource centers in Hong Kong are adequately serving their purpose? In
what ways?
(4) a. Based on your observations of the Filipino migrant situation in Hong Kong, do you think the DFA’s
capacity to adequately respond to migrant welfare issues is limited? If yes, in what ways?
b. Has the department’s services been able to adapt to the growing migrant population?
(5) a. Issues regarding DFA personnel servicing Filipino migrants workers have also been a concern. Are the
Foreign Service personnel and resource centers team deployed in Hong Kong competent to serve our migrant
workers? How is their treatment of OFWs asking for support?
b. Is the government’s country team approach to responding to migrant welfare issues an effective strategy?
(6) OFW remittances have kept the national economy afloat for decades. In terms of budget allocated for
welfare services for Filipino migrant workers, has the government adhered to the terms provided for by Sec 25
of the Migrant Workers Act?
(7) Previous assessments of the government’s response to the welfare issues of migrant workers on the job site
reveal an apparent failure of the government to provide relevant on-site protection. What do you think is the
reason behind government’s failure to deliver services and provide adequate protection?
(8) Do you think the Philippine government’s foreign relation with Hong Kong has implications on its
bargaining power in negotiating for the welfare of OFWs, for instance in the provisions and terms of bilateral
agreements?
On legal structures as protective mechanism
(1) There have been criticisms that the Migrant Workers Act is an inadequate response to the issues and
concerns that our migrant workers face on the job site. What is your organization’s take on the criticism that the
Migrant Workers Act is against the interests of our OFWs?
(2) Where do you think the problem arises, in the legal structure itself or in the implementation of the legal
mechanisms?
105 | D A Q U I S
On your organization’s work and response
(1) What is the motivation behind the MFMW’s work as an organization?
(2)Provided that there are lapses in the delivery of services to our OFWs, to what extent has MFMW and similar
non-governmental organizations been able to respond and fill in the gap? What services does the organization
offer?
(3) What limitation or constraints does MFMW face when dealing with OFW issues and responding to them?
On NGO-Gov’t relations
(1) Sec 2 (h) of the Migrant Workers Act states that NGOs, “duly recognized as legitimate, are partners of the
State in the protection of Filipino migrant workers and in the promotion of their welfare,” and that “the State
shall cooperate with them in a spirit of trust and mutual respect.” What has been your organizations’ experience
in dealing with Philippine government agencies both in Hong Kong and at home?
(2) How would you describe MFMW’s relationship with the Philippine government agencies in Hong Kong?
Other criticisms of government mechanism for on-site protection
(1) Are there particular concerns those OFWs in the Hong Kong face that the government has still not been able
to address?
(2) Any other concerns /issue / observations regarding Filipino migrant welfare that your organization might
want to share
106 | D A Q U I S
Reply from Mr. Norman Uy Carnay received via email on 08 December 2011
(1) ANS: Majority of OFW’s in HK are Foreign Domestic Workers (FDWs).
a. Like other FDWs, they can work and stay in HK with no limit as long as they have legitimate
employment contracts which are two years in duration. However, these contracts are essentially a
month-per-month contract as the employer can terminate the contract with just a month’s notice.
b. They are excluded from many laws and policies of the HK government. This includes the Statutory
Minimum Wage, the Right of Abode and the right to stay when one has still a visa when one’s work is
terminated.
c. FDW’s instead are covered by the Minimum Allowable Wage which is now pegged at HK$3740 and
which is reviewed every year by the Executive Council. With regards to the Right of Abode, the High
Court has recently decided that excluding FDW’s from this right even if they have stayed in HK for a
period of 7 years is against the Basic Law. The HK government however would appeal the case. As for
the working permit, FDW’s are covered by the New Conditions of Stay more popularly known as the 2
Week Rule because if one is terminated before the contract expires, she/he is only allowed to stay for 2
weeks. This was first implemented in 1987.
d. It is mandatory for FDWs to live in with their employers.
e. Although the HK government allows direct hiring, the Philippine government requires FDWs to pass
through recruitment agencies. This results to various problems like overcharging and illegal collection
of fees.
f. They are also required by the Philippine government to become members of OWWA, Philhealth and
Pagibig and to have an insurance policy from the Philippines even if HK regulations already make it
mandatory to insure their FDWs. OFW’s are also required to have an Overseas Employment Certificate
(OEC) if they decide to go home for a vacation.
*** You may also derive other information from the attached documents (our statistics for 2010 and various
narratives of results of migrant summits held by OFW organizations).
(2) ANS: It’s been a long-running anecdote among OFWs here that when you go and visit the Philippine
Consulate office, try to look from left to right, then determine if there is actually any counter there which an
OFW is NOT expected to shell out money. You will find none.
This concretely visualizes the unfortunate reality that services towards OFWs are paid for at a price.
The Consular office is more oriented to facilitate employment and recruitment (and in the process attends
mostly to fee collections – from passports to contract renewals), instead of equally attending to labor-related
and other problems of OFWs.
(3) ANS: They do have a Filipino Workers Resource Center (FWRC) but this function mainly as a shelter for very
few OFWs in distress. In fact, there have been reports in the past that they do not accommodate male OFWs and
those that are undocumented or overstayed their visa. These are actually the ones most in need of shelters but
have not been accommodated. As far as we know, they do not conduct any counseling to clients residing there.
Instead a number of those in the FWRC seek assistance from other non-governmental service-providers.
The FWRC also functions as an issuing place for Overseas Employment Certificates (OEC) during Fridays and
Saturdays from 9-12 am and 1-3 pm. On such days, the Philippine Consulate is closed. It has no other function
that we know of besides being a shelter and a collection center for OEC payments.
(4) a. ANS: From our experience in HK, the Philippine Consulate office (the DFA’s and DOLE’s persona here), is
good in collecting various fees from OFWs but unreliable when it comes to service delivery. They have been
much criticized by the OFW organizations for being neglectful.
Take for example this current issue regarding the indiscriminate offloading of passengers going to HK. A
number of Filipinos including OFWs have been offloaded by BI officials in airports for looking poor or do not
have proper documents including the AOS which comes from their family members/relatives in HK to sponsor
their stay in the territory even if the HK government does not require this. This pertains to the Affidavit of
Support (AOS) which is HK$212.50.
107 | D A Q U I S
When the Filipino community in HK protested this, the Philippine Consulate stated that this is a policy of the BI
as part of its anti-trafficking campaign.
One of the biggest complaints of OFWs in HK is the imposition of illegal placement fees on them by all placement
agencies either in cash or in the guise of a loan or both. The loan can either be in the Philippines or Hong Kong
or even both.
According to the POEA Guidelines on Household Service Workers (HSW’s) implemented in 2007, all HSW’s
wherever they are deployed need not pay any placement fee. But in a survey we made months after that, we
found out that those deployed to HK paid higher then when the Guidelines was not yet issued.
Under RA10022, which amended the Migrants Act, payment of such fees is equivalent to illegal recruitment and
is a criminal offense. But when OFWs file a complaint against their recruiter in the Philippine Consulate either
on their own or if we referred them to the latter, the Consulate will undergo a conciliation process.
In effect, there will be no prosecution if both parties agree to the conciliation process. Because when the OFW
accepts the terms of this process, he or she will be made to sign a quitclaim and waiver that stipulates that they
cannot pursue anymore the agency and its principal either in the POEA or the NLRC or in any HK government
body.
Other than this, it is stipulated in number 2 of said quitclaim that the complaint lodged by the OFW against the
placement agency was due to his/her misunderstanding and/or misapprehension. And if one gets some refund
of the money that she/he paid and/or a waiver of his/her alleged loan, this is described as financial assistance
of the agency and not a violation of illegal recruitment.
What are worse are the practices of the Consulate in undergoing the said process whose legality is questionable.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Even in their website, they state that they can only provide conciliation process to those whose
contracts are pre-terminated. That is why they do not want to entertain complaints of those with
ongoing contracts unless the victim insists on this and/or with our intervention. They say to our clients
that there is no conciliation process during Sundays but only from Mondays – Thursdays.
They also state to the victims who have been terminated and have labour claims against their
employers that they can only avail of the conciliation process once their labour claims have been
addressed by HK labour authorities. This should not be the case as a labour claim is filed against the
employer and not against the placement agency.
If the OFW does not want to settle with the agency during the conciliation process, the Consulate staff
informs the OFW that he/she cannot get an indorsement letter from them addressed to the anti-illegal
recruitment branch of the POEA unless it is near the date of their departure back to the Philippines.
The implication is that if you have an ongoing contract, you cannot get an indorsement letter from
them. This is not true because OFWs that we assisted and who are still not employed have successfully
filed complaints against their recruitment agencies in the POEA by making a Special Power of Attorney
(SPA) to someone who can represent them in their case back home and was assisted by our partner
there.
The Consulate schedules the conciliation process a few days before or even the day when the OFW
needs to go back home. In such a situation, this is more favorable to the agency as basically conciliation
includes negotiation.
There are also times when certain staff of the consulate who are from OWWA would take the side of
the agency or would dissuade the OFW to continue the case in the Philippines because they say this
will take a long time to take or say that the OFW should pay for the alleged loan that they were forced
to avail of by the placement agency.
(5) a. ANS: There is one case where an OFW had a debt to another OFW. And the one who loaned money got
hold of the other’s passport as collateral (which is illegal and shouldn’t be tolerated). When they approached the
Consulate for mediation, the Philippine Consulate staff even supported the one who confiscated the passport
from debtor. The said staff even acted as an instrument for debt collection and condoned the confiscation of the
passport. When we wrote the Consulate to get their attention, only then did they turned full circle regarding the
wrong practice of passport confiscation.
108 | D A Q U I S
As for other issues, a famous case is that of Agnes Tenorio. She is an OFW who was verbally abused and
mistreated by the top Labor official of the Philippine Consulate, then Labour Attaché Romulo Salud. Instead of
informing her of her rights and what she can rightfully claim from her employer, he only asked her what she
wanted. Since Agnes only stayed for 4 days in HK before she was terminated, she only requested for her airfare
back home.
But later when some organizations told her about her right to be paid by the other contractual obligations due
her by her employer, Labatt Salud even scolded her for this. If the top Labour official of the Philippine
government in HK can do that to you, what more those under him?
This issue generated a lot of reactions in the web as well as the international Filipino migrants community. You
may want to visit these to see:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MR6JMWNncM and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToC0cPiLlqI
Some of our clients have told us that consulate officials have advised them not to file labour claims against their
employers to prevent trouble or the employer might file a counter claim against them.
b. ANS: The country team approach is an effective strategy for the collection of a numerous fees on OFWs for
about almost anything that the government can think about. But when it comes to responding to migrant
welfare issues, that is another matter.
Kindly see website on consular fees
http://www.philcongen-hk.com/fees.htm
This does not include other fees such as the Overseas Employment Certificate (OEC), OWWA, Pagibig and
Philhealth membership. The OEC is only good for 60 days and is needed for OFWs on vacation in the
Philippines. In actuality, one does not need an OEC because he/she already has a work permit and employment
contract to prove that one is a bona-fide OFW.
OWWA and Philhealth are mandatory and is effective only when one has a contract. Pagibig is now also
mandatory. OFWs are even encouraged to become members of the SSS. And recently, the creation of the Pnoy
government is the mandatory insurance which is shouldered by the OFWs themselves. It is a useless regulation
as the HK government already requires employers of FDWs to provide insurance to their workers.
On another matter, the Consulate including the Con Gen was voiceless when former Labatt Salud was exposed
for his arrogant attitude towards Agnes Tenorio. It was the DOLE that investigated and later exonerated Salud
for what he did and was just given a reprimand by said Department. Essentially the DFA had a hands-off policy
in this incident.
(6) ANS: No, kindly see Migrante International’s paper on this website entitled Labanan ang pagkaltas sa badyet
para sa serbisyo sa mga OFW at mamamayan!
http://migranteinternational.org/?p=1970
Note that the government is almost not spending a single cent for migrant welfare and yet, more often than not,
OFWs in distress have to plead for the release of their own funds from OWWA.
(7) ANS: The basic paradigm of the government’s Labor Export Policy (LEP) defines the framework on how the
government addresses the Filipino diaspora and its resultant problems.
Our government does not resolve the problems confronting Filipino migrant workers. It has failed to generate
enough jobs in the country and aims, instead, to increase OFW deployments to millions every year as part of its
development model.
As long as the Philippine government systematically exports its own people just like commodities to be bought
and sold, the Philippine government will only be after the continuing, uninterrupted and expanding flow of
109 | D A Q U I S
remittances of migrants. Protection and services, under this framework, is not a priority, is rendered useless
and even a sham.
(8) The Philippine government hardly utters a word in support of its nationals here. The latest would be the
decision of the High Court which ruled that FDWs who are excluded from the Right of Abode even if they are
qualified is against the Basic Law. The response of our government was, they cannot comment yet on this
matter as this was not yet final as the HK government can appeal the decision.
On legal structures as protective mechanism
ANS: The Migrant Workers Act of 1995 and that which was amended into Republic Act 10022 pledges various
rights and welfare of OFWs and their families. Many groups have criticized this law as paying “lip service” to the
protection and welfare of overseas Filipinos. We, too, have raised our concerns on the overarching framework
of this law (the Labor Export Program), which neutralizes in day to day practice of government agencies some
of its relatively useful and beneficial provisions.
Calls for a genuine Magna Carta that is holding the government and profiteers accountable for their disservice
to OFWs and their dependents, as well as a government that will not rely on labor export but instead generate
domestic jobs, and a state that will firmly stand up for the protection of migrant Filipinos have been made since
this law was passed in 1995.
Principally, there are some serious flaws with the law itself (its dovetailing to the LEP framework) as well as the
record of service-delivery of the relevant government agencies. However, migrant groups and institutions have
been able to use some of the motherhood statements and clear positive provisions in the law to advocate for
specific issue-based reforms or concessions (e.g. repatriation issues, fee collections). But it remains to be seen
whether the incoherence of the law in actual practice of the government of its duties towards overseas labor
will be resolved.
On your organization’s work and response
(1) The MFMW is the pioneering migrant service-provider in Hong Kong and in Asia. We were established in
1981 to respond to the phenomenon of Filipino forced migration. We advance Crisis Intervention and
Prevention through Migrant Empowerment (CIPME). It has been the main form of service, making the migrant
worker clients less dependent on others and hopefully leading to individual transformation. Transformative
counseling and assistance makes the MFMW unique.
On top of service-delivery, we couple it with advocacy in various levels – national, regional and international
because we believe that at the core of the problems are actual policies and laws which affect the migrants. At
the center of these efforts is the mission to empower the migrants by aiding and strengthening their grassroots
movement.
(2) The Mission’s counseling, assistance and intervention for individual migrants have remained a key support
to the migrant workers and is the foundation for the Mission’s programs and services. The Mission has
achieved its objective to realize a proper balance of individual assistance and counseling with education,
training and organizing skills for migrant organizations. This has resulted in effective mobilization of migrant
organizations in various campaigns and advocacy activities.
(3) Being a non-profit, the lack of resources almost always affects our services and programs. We rely on
donations and grants from churches and other civic groups. The thing is, there is a misconception that Hong
Kong, being an affluent society, should not be a recipient of development aid.
Being outside the Philippines, our advocacy is limited to dialogues and submissions to the Philippine Consulate.
However, through our partners in the Philippines, we are able to overcome this limitation in terms of legislative
reforms.
110 | D A Q U I S
On NGO-Gov’t relations
(1) Relationship at least with individuals like the outgoing Con Gen and some consuls is relatively civil. With the
Labour section, it’s another matter. The referral letters of the Mission pertaining to illegal placement fees is
largely ignored and despised at and they badmouth us by saying that we only want to charge OFWs of our
services (which is a lie. Our services are free)
We have limited dealings with government agencies in the Philippines as we prefer to refer cases to our
partners especially to Migrante International.
(2) We collaborate with them on certain issues like the Overseas Absentee Voting (OAV), attend their
forums/dialogues and seek reforms in the Consulate’s and the national government’s policies and/or
regulations.
We also call their attention to the many lapses of their services to OFWs, refer cases that they should act on, and
advocate the concerns of OFWs and service providers alike.
Other criticisms of government mechanism for onsite protection
ANS: There are other concerns beyond labor-related cases such as loans and health related issues of migrants.
We are attaching the full report of the past Filipino Migrant Summits which have outlined the various issues and
concerns that OFWs in HK have registered and still awaiting action by the Philippine government. For example,
the Aquino government, after more than a year, has largely ignored the list of demands that more than 100 OFW
associations have compiled for urgent action.
111 | D A Q U I S
Interview questions for the International Migrants Alliance (IMA)
Ms. Eni Lestari, Chairperson
Conducted via email:
Interview question sent 03 December 2011. Reply received 16 December 2011
On the organization’s roots
(1) Organizational background: How did the organization start?
(2) What is the motivation behind IMA’s work?
(3) What is the nature of the organization’s work in migrant welfare and protection? Does it take a proactive or
reactive role?
On the organization’s work in migrant affairs
(1) What role does the IMA, and similar non-governmental organizations, take in the process of managing labor
migration?
(2) Provision of welfare services to migrant workers has been a common concern in managing labor migration.
Sending countries have been particularly criticized for the apparent failure of its governments to extend
assistance and on-site protection to its migrant workers. Provided that there are lapses in the delivery of
services to migrant workers, to what extent has IMA and similar non-governmental organizations been able to
respond and fill in the gap?
(a) What services does the organization offer?
(3) What limitations do international organizations like IMA face when dealing with migrant issues? Are there
constraints, e.g. structural, financial, political etc., that hinder the organization from fully carrying out its goals?
(4) Domestically organized groups often confront geographical constraints in extending their work. What
advantage/s do you think an international organization like IMA has in dealing with migrant affairs?
On NGO – state relations
(1) How would you describe IMA’s relation with governments? How has been the reception of IMA’s work by
receiving and sending countries?
(2) How do you see your work in migrant welfare and protection in relation to governments, both sending and
receiving? Is it supplementary, complementary, or alternative to existing government protection mechanisms?
On migration as national economic strategy
(1) Many Third World countries have been adapting migration as a means to aid national economic
development. While foreign remittances have been a positive “contributor” in national economies, the negative
repercussions of a state-sponsored labor migration policy seem to be evident on migrant welfare. Do you think
there could ever be such a thing as a sustainable migration policy?
On the current migrant welfare situation and the role of NGOs
(1) At this point in the globalization of labor markets, what is the most significant threat to migrant welfare?
(2) With the continuous growth of the migrant population and increasing vulnerability of migrants to many
forms of abuse, what challenges do you think the organization has to face? How does the organization adapt to
the changing circumstances of migrant affairs?
On the organization’s vision
(1) How do you see the organization’s future work? How do you think it will evolve (or will it not) as global
integration of labor markets continue?
112 | D A Q U I S
Ms. Lestari’s reply received via email (coursed through IMA’s Mr. Jun Tellez) on 16 December 2011
On the organization’s roots
(1) The International Migrants Alliance (IMA) was formed in 2008 during its First General Assembly in Hong
Kong SAR, China. Around 120 organizations and unions of grassroots migrants, migrant-serving institutions,
advocates and academics attended the said assembly and partook in the establishment of the first of its kind
global alliance of migrants, refugees and displaced peoples.
Several grassroots migrant organizations and institutions working with migrants from all over the world have
gathered some years before to hold the International Migrants Conference where the initiative to form the IMA
materialized and was initiated since then.
(2) For many years, many have spoken in our behalf. Now, we speak for ourselves.
This is the motivation behind the formation and the ongoing work of the IMA. In many countries where migrant
workers live and work, grassroots migrant organizations are formed. In these countries, they hold campaigns
and engage with target groups, i.e. host and sending governments, about their respective demands. Nonetheless,
at the international level, they are seldom or rarely heard. It is mostly NGOs that work on migrant concerns and
not the migrant workers themselves who engage and voice out such issues and concerns.
Forced labor migration has gradually become a global phenomenon. And as the world economic crisis worsens,
so is the maltreatment and attack on the rights and welfare of migrants. There is then a growing need for
grassroots migrants themselves to voice out their issues, demands and resistance at the global level. And such
need is recognized by migrant-serving institutions, advocates and allies. So thus, the formation of the IMA.
(3) The IMA has member organizations that provide welfare to migrant workers. They are not only migrantserving institutions like the Mission for Migrant Workers (Hong Kong) and Filipino Migrant Center (US) but
grassroots migrant organizations themselves. Aside from counseling and legal assistance, some IMA members
provide shelter services and varied forms of assistance to migrants.
The IMA takes a proactive role in encouraging both grassroots migrant organizations and migrant-serving
institutions to closely work with one another in ensuring welfare services to migrants and refugees. Through
the formation of country chapter of the IMA, this working relation among the members of the IMA is ensured.
On the organization’s work in migrant affairs
(1) The IMA and several non-governmental organizations and institutions study the process by which labor
migration is structured and developed into a system by governments like those of the Philippines and
Indonesia. Since its establishment, the IMA has actively criticized the Global Forum on Migration and
Development (GFMD), a high-level meeting of government agencies and other actors discussing about how
migration can assist in development. From the IMA’s standpoint, the GFMD never really took interest in the real
issues and conditions of migrants. With this, the IMA and other groups held the International Assembly of
Migrants and Refugees attended by various grassroots groups of migrants and refugees and migrants’ rights
advocates and institutions, as a counter-conference to the GFMD.
In addition to this, the IMA also involves in many campaigns, including the recognition of domestic work as
work. Through the efforts of its many members, the International Labor Conference finally came up with the
International Labor Convention on Decent Work for Domestic Workers.
(2) The IMA, through its members, respond to the lapses of sending governments in the delivery of services to
migrant workers in two ways: campaign and advocacy, and service provision. Some IMA member organizations
provide direct services, such as legal assistance, counseling, shelter and other forms of services to migrants in
need. In Hong Kong, for example, its members here formed the Coalition of Service Providers for Ethnic
Minorities (CSPEM), a network of migrant service providers. In addition, the IMA also engages with sending
governments through the latter’s consulates and embassies about providing better and more effective services
to migrant workers. At the national and local levels, they hold dialogues as well as mass actions and media
statements to highlight concerns of migrant workers regarding service provision from sending governments.
113 | D A Q U I S
(a) As an alliance, the IMA provides the platform for its members and other groups to discuss the conditions of
migrant workers and how to better provide services to migrant workers as well as engage governments of both
sending and receiving countries in the better and just treatment of migrants. Through its members, the IMA
provides comprehensive support and assistance to the migrant workers.
(3) The IMA is an alliance of grassroots migrant organizations and their allies and advocates. As an alliance of
grassroots migrant organizations, financial constraints are encountered almost daily as difficulties in sustaining
coordination among members, attending international conferences and management of the international
secretariat. Politically, there are countries where direct or grassroots organizing is prohibited, i.e. countries in
the Middle East, and hence open engagement with government agencies and other authorities is limited.
Members of IMA member organizations have even experienced harassment, intimidation and other forms of
violations especially in countries where state repression is high. Nonetheless, IMA tries to respond to these
limitations by having its member organizations and networks working together more closely.
(4) The IMA remains as the international campaign center of its member organizations. Through various forms,
i.e. egroup, website and other social networks, the IMA provides linkages among the various initiatives and
campaigns of its members and of other networks. It provides necessary information and spaces for cooperation
among them. Language is likewise a challenge that IMA aims to address as not all migrants can speak English.
On NGO – state relations
(1) The IMA has launched and attended international conferences where representatives of governments
attend. It is mostly through these activities that IMA and its members get to interact with government
institutions to relay the issues and demands of migrants. At some level, there is recognition on the part of
governments on the existence and relevance of IMA that they respond to issues raised by the IMA and its
members. At the national and local levels, IMA members are recognized in most countries and engagements
through dialogues, meetings and mass actions, among many other activities that both the IMA and government
institutions relate.
(2) The IMA members aim to provide welfare assistance and protection to as many migrant workers in the best
way possible. The existence and proliferation of service providers for migrant workers, whether run by local or
migrants themselves, present the reality that governments continue to provide very little, if not nil or dismal,
services to migrant workers. As we provide migrant workers with such assistance and services, we prod
governments through campaign, lobbying and advocacy to ensure that they provide effective and efficient
services to migrants regardless of their status and without fees involved.
On migration as national economic strategy
(1) A sustainable migration policy can be only be ensured if governments from countries of origin (where
migrant workers come from) primarily create sustainable, regular jobs with just or decent pay for their own
people back home. This way, migrants will not be forced to leave their families and their countries only to be
subjected to such harsh, vulnerable conditions in host countries and without support or attention from their
own governments.
A sustainable migration policy can only stem from a policy by which governments uphold the rights and welfare
of its own people over the need to make profit through anti-migrant multilateral or bilateral trade agreements
where migrant workers are seen and treated more as commodities or export products rather than people or
workers with rights.
On the current migrant welfare situation and the role of NGOs
(1) It is the continued and intensifying attacks on the rights of migrants as the global economic crisis worsens.
Migrant workers account for a significant portion of the populations of most labor-receiving countries and sadly
they are becoming the easy targets of these governments’ policies and actions to salvage their economies and
resolve the social unrest. Examples of these attacks are crackdowns on undocumented migrants, arrest,
detention and deportation of migrants, scapegoating of migrant workers for “stealing the jobs of local people”,
among many others. Racism, discrimination and social exclusion continue to become prevalent in these
countries. One huge threat is the Fortress Europe campaign where the European Union aims to actively dispel
migrants from the European countries, limit the migrants’ and refugees’ rights and privileges, and intensify
attacks on undocumented migrants. As this happens, sending governments do very little to assist or protect
114 | D A Q U I S
them unless they are pressured by migrant organizations like the IMA through press statements and mass
actions.
(2) With the continuous growth of the migrant population, we can expect that more migrants will be exposed to
or experience abuse and exploitation. The challenge politically is in mobilizing migrants to fight these attacks
and reaching out to local peoples and organizations for more support and solidarity. Organizationally, there is
an urgent to continually and aggressively organize migrants and enjoin them in organizations, educate and raise
their awareness on issues and empower them in further strengthening the movement.
The policies of the governments, both sending and receiving, on migrant workers never really changed. They
continue to worsen. Hence, that is how IMA addresses such a concern.
On the organization’s vision
(1) The IMA remains to be relevant as long as there are migrants, refugees and displaced peoples in the world.
In the 2nd General Assembly of the IMA held July this year in Manila, Philippines, several campaigns have been
identified, both to be launched and conducted internationally and nationally. Movement-building and solidarity
work remain strong points in the IMA’s current and future work.
With the continued commodification of migrant labor, the IMA further strengthens its alliance and contributes
to the growing international migrant movement to uphold and defend the rights, livelihood and dignity of
migrants and their families.
115 | D A Q U I S
Interview questions for International Migrants Alliance (IMA)
c/o Mr. Rey Asis (IMA Secretariat HK)
Conducted via email:
Interview question sent 03 December 2011. Reply received 19 December 2011.
On the organization’s service to Filipino migrant workers
(1) In your experience in assisting OFWs, what on-site concern / case is the most prevalent (considering also
those cases and concerns not reported through official mediums)?
(2) What on-site service appears to be the most needed by Filipino migrant workers?
(3) What constraints or limitations does the organization face in dealing with migrant affairs? Are there barriers
that obstruct the organization from further extending its work to Filipino migrant workers?
On Philippine government’s on-site protection mechanisms
(1) The Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995, amended by RA 10022 in 2010, provides legal
basis for the extension of government assistance to Filipino migrant workers in their destination countries.
Included in the support and services provided for by law are free access to legal assistance, counseling,
establishment of OFW resource centers, and procurement of medical and other welfare services. Assessing the
implementation of these mandated services in regions where there is a large concentration of Filipino migrant
workers (and where IMA’s work extends), how do you think the government has fared in adhering to the law
and delivering these services during the past years? How do you think the Philippine government is faring in
managing labor migration?
(2) Based on your organization’s experience in dealing with welfare concerns of Filipino migrant workers, how
would you assess the capacity of the Department of Foreign Affairs, its attached offices and personnel in
destination countries in responding to OFW on-site concerns?
(3) Do you think there is a problem with using legal frameworks such as national labor legislations as the state’s
main apparatus in addressing the welfare and on-site protection of migrant workers?
(a) In the experience of other countries, has the adaptation of such policy been successful? If yes, in
what ways?
(4) The following is quoted from former Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) secretary Patricia Sto
Tomas in her ILO paper on the protection of Filipino migrant workers in 2009.
“It is also important to demonstrate that when migration is regular, organized and
documented, workers’ protection is a responsibility that is easier to discharge. It must also be
stressed that workers’ protection is not just one person or one country’s look-out. All the
actors concerned --- the workers themselves, their employers, intermediators, source and
receiving governments, nongovernment organizations and international agencies --- should
be made more aware and better-positioned to assume their roles in protecting workers
outside their national territories.”
What is your take on this?
(5) Previous assessments of the government’s response to the welfare issues of migrant workers on the job site
reveal an apparent failure of the government to provide relevant on-site protection. What do you think is the
reason behind government’s failure to deliver services and provide adequate protection?
(6) Recent politico-economic and social crises in regions with a huge concentration of Filipino migrant workers
have posed threat to migrant welfare. Assessing the response of the Philippine government to these situations,
how do you think it fared in ensuring the safety of our migrant workers?
116 | D A Q U I S
On the role of the State in labor migration
(1) What is you organization’s stand on labor migration? What is your view of the Philippine government’s
overseas employment program?
(2) How do you perceive the current role of the Philippine government in labor migration?
(3) There has been the criticism that the Migrant Workers Act is against the interests of Filipino migrant
workers. What is your take on this?
On NGO – PH government relations
(1) What has been your organizations’ experience in dealing with Philippine government agencies in
destination countries? How would you describe your organization’s relation with Philippine government
agencies concerned with migrant welfare?
(2) Philippine government agencies have been often criticized as inefficient in responding to on-site concern of
OFWs. With your experience in dealing with these Philippine agencies concerned with migrant affairs, what
weakness or limitations have you noticed? What are the perceived strengths of these agencies?
117 | D A Q U I S
Reply received via email on 19 December 2011.
On the organization’s service to Filipino migrant workers
(1) The member organizations of the International Migrants Alliance work with various types of overseas
Filipino workers depending on their location and the nature of the work of the OFWs. It is hard to tell then
which case or concern is the most prevalent. As in any given country, OFWs remain vulnerable to a myriad
forms of exploitation and abuse, may it be debt bondage, illegal work, physical and sexual abuse, underpayment,
etc.
What may be common then would be the attention and services that the Philippine government provides to the
OFWs, or the lack there of. In many reported cases, whether it is in Dubai, the United States or Hong Kong,
services at Philippine consulates and embassies for OFWs are scarce or are being scrimped as OFWs experience
the neglect or inattention that consular officers provide to them.
(2) Generally, welfare services to OFWs are most needed – from counseling on specific cases, legal assistance,
and shelter or refuge to providing education on their rights and the laws in their respective countries of
destination, capacity building trainings, seminars, etal.
(3) Organizations working on migrant affairs face financial constraints (especially on shouldering
administrative costs), a limited number of manpower, and the possibility of state repression. In some cases,
migrant organizations and migrant-serving institutions have experienced harassment and intimidation (i.e.
wire-tapping, crackdown on migrant leaders, refusal to be a registered organization). In extending our work
with Filipino migrant workers, we do face the problems of a limited physical space for the office as well as
refuge for distressed migrant workers (i.e. Hong Kong), the sheer distance of migrant workers (in distress or
not) from the organization’s locale (i.e. Middle East), and not being allowed to work legally or be registered (i.e.
Singapore, Saudi Arabia).
On Philippine government’s onsite protection mechanisms
(1) Based on the statements released by members of the IMA, the RA 10022 has not been in favor of the OFWs.
For one, the lifetime membership of OFWs to OWWA has been watered down to simply a per contract basis.
While there are people/sections in certain consulates or embassies that provide attention and services, this
cannot be said generally of all. Government services to OFWs in countries of destinations have been dismal, if
not disappointing.
In the case of former president Gloria Arroyo, every start of the year is “celebrated” with new scheme to extract
money from OFWs in the name of government protection. Some gains won through campaigns and pressure
from the OFWs have been changed by the Philippine government – direct hiring is now banned or prohibited,
fee on contract authentication has been raised, the fee on the electronic passport is oppressively high, the
overseas employment certificate (OEC) remains albeit unnecessary and redundant.
The Philippine government has developed a well-structured system that facilitates labor migration but sadly
not to provide full, efficient and effective service and attention to the Filipino workers they export to other
countries.
(2) By experience, most IMA members working with OFWs had to call the attention of the DFA’s attaches and
personnel in destination countries to respond to OFWs’ onsite concerns. From actually calling them on the
phone to releasing media statements and even holding mass actions, the IMA members resort to various forms
of attention-calling while consciously attending to the needs of the OFWs in distress.
From the time the founding members of Migrante International (a member of the IMA) launched a campaign to
save the life of Flor Contemplacion in Singapore, the various groups belonging to IMA continue to engage the
Philippine government in providing full attention and service to OFWs.
(3) The Philippines has laws that are supposed to protect OFWs, i.e. the law against erring recruitment agencies.
Nonetheless, it is the strict implementation of these laws that frustrates many OFWs. More importantly, the
state subsidy on OFW services continues to be slashed.
118 | D A Q U I S
(a) In Hong Kong, for example, through the campaigns of the IMA members here, certain government policies
have been shelved or abrogated. As to the successful adaptation of such policy, we have yet to hear of one.
(4) It is ironic to say this, especially for a government official who is notorious anti-worker. Her record precedes
her.
In addition, it is a carefully worded excuse for the government to relinquish itself of the primary responsibility
to attend to the needs of the migrant workers. In the experience of OFWs, it is usually themselves who attend to
their own needs, especially in countries where there are no nongovernment organizations that can provide
attention or welfare. It is sad to note that OFWs, whether they are documented or not, face the neglect from the
Philippine government simply because they have not paid their dues as OWWA members. We have reported
cases of OFWs who have diligently paid their membership dues to the OWWA yet were neglected simply
because they were not “officially” OWWA members anymore (i.e. having lost a job in the country of destination
for three months is a criterion to lose the OWWA membership).
It remains a demand on the Philippine government to give unconditional attention and service to OFWs,
whether they are documented or not. In countries where many OFWs have become undocumented, all the more
should the Philippine government ensure the OFWs’ protection.
(5) One of the biggest contributors to the Philippine economy is the Filipino migrant workers. With this, they
have been given names – new economic heroes, international shared resources. However, it seems that there is
nothing in the Philippine government’s policy to ensure protection and deliver services to OFWs – from
allocation of government subsidy on OFW services, provision of manpower, etc.
The recent Aquino administration has not said or done anything so far on OFWs’ concerns despite many
attempts from OFW groups to deliver statements and demands.
(6) Miserably.
On the role of the State in labor migration
(1) The organization’s stand on labor migration is that it should not be forced. The reality in the Philippines as
well as in many countries of origin is that the massive unemployment and the abject poverty the people are
subjected to force many of them to find work and livelihood abroad.
And this is what for instance the Philippine government facilitates. Under the many government structures it
has built, the Philippine government has systematized labor migration. It has the Philippine Overseas
Employment Administration and the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration that facilitate mostly the work
on labor migration. Intricate as it is, the Philippine government’s overseas employment program only
smoothens the flow of the Filipinos leaving their families and the Philippines for work abroad. Sadly, attention
and protection of the OFWs is absent and clearly to many OFWs it is their remittance and the money they pay to
government-imposed charges that the Philippine government is particularly interested in.
As it is, this is the only way forward that the Philippine government sees in resolving the high unemployment
rate in the Philippines, instead of creating jobs back home.
(2) As previously mentioned, it only aims to facilitate the export of Filipino labor. Sadly, a memorandum of
understanding or a trade agreement is yet to be developed that ensures that the rights of OFWs are protected
and enshrined, their wages just, and services provided to them. This is on top of a strict implementation of laws
against erring officials and recruitment agencies.
(3) The Migrant Workers’ Act only aims to further deregulate labor migration by providing free rein to
recruitment agencies to take over and process overseas employment of Filipinos. As it is, migrant workers are
already beholden to recruitment agencies because of the many illegal fees that the latter collect from the
former. The law likewise regulates more state exactions to migrant workers.
On NGO – PH government relations
(1) The IMA, through its member organizations, gets to relate with the Philippine government agencies in
destination countries as well as those concerned with migrant welfare. Dialogues and meetings have been
119 | D A Q U I S
facilitated time and again to ensure the openness and transparency of the various posts in these agencies to
ensure that welfare and services to OFWs are being provided effectively. Aside from this, we hold media actions
and picket protests to ensure that our message lands on Philippine media to have the Philippine government (at
home) see and possibly react and take action on it.
(2) Philippine government agencies have been often criticized as inefficient in responding to onsite concern of
OFWThe bureaucracy and red tape further slows down the process of welfare and service provision on the part
of the Philippine agencies concerned with migrant affairs.
120 | D A Q U I S
| APPENDIX B
Migrant Workers Survey
121 | D A Q U I S
1. SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
122 | D A Q U I S
Page 2a– if answered yes to the last question of page 1 (encountered problem)
123 | D A Q U I S
Page 2b – if answered no to last question in page 1 (not encountered a problem yet)
124 | D A Q U I S
Page 3 – both pages 2a and b automatically directs to this page upon completion
125 | D A Q U I S
126 | D A Q U I S
2. PROFILE of RESPONDENTS
Recode by
Sex
N
Valid
Missing
Work
PlaceofWork
Region
61
60
61
61
0
1
0
0
Sex
Cumulative
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
Female
22
36.1
36.1
36.1
Male
39
63.9
63.9
100.0
Total
61
100.0
100.0
AgeRange
Cumulative
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
21-25
5
8.2
8.2
8.2
26-30
12
19.7
19.7
27.9
31-35
17
27.9
27.9
55.7
36-40
7
11.5
11.5
67.2
41-45
10
16.4
16.4
83.6
46-50
6
9.8
9.8
93.4
51-55
2
3.3
3.3
96.7
more than 55
2
3.3
3.3
100.0
61
100.0
100.0
Total
127 | D A Q U I S
Work
Cumulative
Frequency
Valid
Office / Administrative
Valid Percent
Percent
14
23.0
23.3
23.3
4
6.6
6.7
30.0
18
29.5
30.0
60.0
Household Service
9
14.8
15.0
75.0
Sales / Services
8
13.1
13.3
88.3
Manufacturing
2
3.3
3.3
91.7
IT
5
8.2
8.3
100.0
60
98.4
100.0
1
1.6
61
100.0
Health Sector
Construction and Engineering
Total
Missing
Percent
System
Total
PlaceofWork
Cumulative
Frequency
Valid
Bahrain
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
2
3.3
3.3
3.3
22
36.1
36.1
39.3
Kuwait
3
4.9
4.9
44.3
Oman
2
3.3
3.3
47.5
Qatar
5
8.2
8.2
55.7
UAE
17
27.9
27.9
83.6
HK
10
16.4
16.4
100.0
Total
61
100.0
100.0
KSA
128 | D A Q U I S
Region
Cumulative
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
Middle East
51
83.6
83.6
83.6
Hong Kong
10
16.4
16.4
100.0
Total
61
100.0
100.0
AgeRange
Cumulative
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
21-25
5
8.2
8.2
8.2
26-30
12
19.7
19.7
27.9
31-35
17
27.9
27.9
55.7
36-40
7
11.5
11.5
67.2
41-45
10
16.4
16.4
83.6
46-50
6
9.8
9.8
93.4
51-55
2
3.3
3.3
96.7
more than 55
2
3.3
3.3
100.0
61
100.0
100.0
Total
129 | D A Q U I S
CurrentContract
Cumulative
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
1
8
13.1
13.1
13.1
2
28
45.9
45.9
59.0
3
11
18.0
18.0
77.0
indefinite / open-ended
14
23.0
23.0
100.0
Total
61
100.0
100.0
RecodedRange
Cumulative
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
1-5
26
42.6
42.6
42.6
6-10
17
27.9
27.9
70.5
11-15
7
11.5
11.5
82.0
16-20
7
11.5
11.5
93.4
20+
4
6.6
6.6
100.0
Total
61
100.0
100.0
130 | D A Q U I S
|APPENDIX C
131 | D A Q U I S
132 | D A Q U I S