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
.jpg)
.jpg)
