Saturday, April 26, 2014

OWWA and the question of transparency

Posted by Belarmino Dabalos Saguing
Rome, Italy, 27/04/2914



In a news item, OWWA is being questiomed by the COA on the missing P21M OFW funds.

Having an overt policy of exporting its human capital for more than three decades, the Philippine government has created institutions that manage almost every aspect of migration. These institutions’ functions and services range from deployment, the welfare of the worker and his/her family while working overseas, to his/her eventual return and reintegration. Thus, the Philippines has been considered globally as a model for managing its continuing influx of overseas workers.

Public policy on overseas labor employment formally started in 1974 when President Ferdinand Marcos issued a presidential decree creating three government institutions within the Ministry of Labor to facilitate the export of workers: the Overseas Employment Development Board (OEDB), the Bureau of Employment Services (BES), and the National Seamen Board (NSB). As overseas employment continue to increase significantly, the Philippine government was not able to manage the upsurge in demand for recruiting and deploying overseas workers. A 1977 White Paper by the Ministry (now Department) of Labor and Employment recommended that the government focus on protecting and promoting the rights and welfare of the rights of Overseas Filipino Workers rather than focus solely on recruiting and placing them.

On September 19, 2003, the OWWA Board of Trustees promulgated Board Resolution No. 38 (Omnibus Policies), providing the guidelines on matters concerning OWWA membership and coverage, collection of contributions, availment of benefits, and the policies on fund management, programs and services, administration , and corporate governance.

OWWA’s objectives include the following: the protection of the interest and promotion of the welfare of OFWs; implementation of the Labor Code that would promote the well-being of OFWs; provision of social and welfare services to OFWs; efficient collection and sustainability of the fund; enhancement of the well-being of OFWS through studies and research; and development and financing of specific projects to promote the welfare of OFWs.

The passage of RA 8042 or the “Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995” and RA 10022 which amended RA 8042 to further improve the standards of protection and promotion of the welfare of migrant workers and their families, clarified and enhanced the mandate of OWWA to include:

1. Repatriation of workers in cases of war, epidemic, natural or man-made disaster or calamities, and other similar events without prejudice to reimbursement by the employer or the recruitment agency. In cases where the employer or the recruitment agency cannot be identified OWWA shall bear all costs of repatriation. An Emergency Repatriation Fund is created under the administration, control and supervision of OWWA for this purpose. OWWA shall also pay for the repatriation-related expenses such as fines or penalties.

2. Establishment of a Replacement and Monitoring Center for returning migrant workers, wherein OWWA, together with the DOLE and the POEA, are tasked to formulate a program that will motivate migrant workers to plan for productive options, such as entry into highly technical jobs and investment of savings, among others.

3. Creation of a Migrant Workers Loan Guarantee Fund to prevent illegal recruiters from taking advantage of workers seeking employment abroad. The OWWA, in coordination with government financial institutions, is mandated to institute financial schemes expanding the grant of pre-departure and family assistance loans.
4. Formulation and implementation of programs for OFWs and their families while they are abroad and upon their return. It shall also ensure the awareness by the OFWs and their families of these programs and other related governmental programs.

Membership in OWWA, upon contribution of US$25.00, is mandatory for migrants going abroad through official channels by enrollment upon processing of a contract at POEA or by voluntary registration of a would-be member at a job site overseas. Membership is valid for a contract of two year duration. For voluntary members who register at a job site, membership does not exceed two years. Membership shall be renewed upon payment of contribution on contract renewal / issuance of new contract. In the case of voluntary membership, coverage shall be renewed upon payment of contribution. OWWA membership is tied to the OFW's work contract.

The cumulative contribution of US$25.00 automatically becomes the OWWA fund - a single trust fund pooled from the membership contributions of foreign employers, land-based and sea-based workers, investment and interest income, and income from other sources. Categorized as a quasi-governmental entity, it is entirely self-funded and receives no budget allocation from the national government.

OWWA’s mandate may be summarized into two: firstly, the delivery of welfare services and benefits to temporary migrant workers, and, secondly, ensuring sustainability and fund viability for the continuous protection of Filipino migrant workers. Consistent with its mandate focusing on the welfare of the OFWs and their families, the main programs of OWWA include (a) health care, disability and death benefits; (b) education and training programs; (c) on-site assistance and services; (d) repatriation; and (e) social services and family welfare assistance.



Is OWWA an insurance scheme, a protection agency, a loan bank, or social security?

If OWWA is an "insurance scheme," it makes sense for it to be a "membership organization." But alternatively, if OWWA is a protection agency, it must be for all OFWs, regardless of status.

What really is lacking are mechanism to ensure transparency.
OWWA must undertake measures to ensure transparency to its members by making available periodically OWWA’s finance statements, annual reports, programs and services

OWWA must create/ensure a mechanism to inform its members and the OFW community in all matters concerning OWWA’s operations

Despite Constitutional requirements for transparency, neither the OWWA funds nor the Board appointments are conducted with adequate transparency. The promulgation of the OWWA Omnibus Policies by the OWWA Board in 2003 without consultation whatsoever with the migrants and the migrant groups was a case in point of severe lack of transparency of OWWA. Certainly, one area that needs to be transparent is the process for policy and decision making of the Board. Minutes of the board meetings are not accessible to its members nor is it available in the website. Thus, there is always a cloud of doubt hanging over the Board’s decision. Whether there is substance to these allegations is difficult to determine due to the lack of transparency in the decision making process.

Under the current Omnibus Policies, an OWWA Board member can elect a proxy to fulfill his/her OWWA duties. This creates a system in which a Board member is neither accountable for attendance nor for Board decisions.

Except for those representing the various government agencies whose representation is automatic by virtue of their position, the President appoints all members of the Board of Trustees. This may seem to be the most practical arrangement given the complex process of consulting OWWA members spread in almost 200 countries. Yet, the question remains: are they accountable to the President who appointed them or will they truly represent the interests of the migrant worker

Source:  Center for Migrant Advocacy (CMA)
Migrants Rights Policy Monitor
September 2011



No comments:

Post a Comment