TINIG NG MIGRANTE

JUNE 2013 ISSUE

Published by:

Migrante International

Summing-Up of the State of Migrants under Aquino (SUMA): Mid-Term Assessment(2010-2013)

resident Benigno Aquino IIIs mid-term in ofce can only be characterized by the further intensication of a labor export policy that has become more sophisticated, more aggressive and more detrimental to the rights and welfare of Filipino migrants and their families.
Increased forced migration refutes economic growth Table. 1 Increasing deployment of OFWs

In its three years in ofce, the Aquinoadministration has recorded the biggest number of OFW (overseas Filipino worker) deployment since the labor export policy was implemented in the 1970s. From an additional 1.35 million OFWs in October 2011, a gure higher by 5.3 percent than the additional 1.281 million OFWs from January to October 2010, a total of 1,850,463 (Source: Philippine Overseas Employment Administration, POEA) OFWs have been deployed to work abroad by the end of 2011. Of this number, 1,384,094 are land-based while 466, 369 are sea-based. As of June 2012, 4,884 OFWs have been leaving the Philippines on a daily basis (Source: IBON Foundation). This is a far cry from the 2,500 OFWs per day record when Aquino assumed ofce in 2010 (Department of Labor and Employment, DOLE). These gures make the Aquino administrations claims of a reverse migration phenomenon exceedinglyincomprehensible. In May, DOLE Sec. Rosalinda Baldoz announced that OFWs are opting to return to the country because more industrial sectors are catching up in terms of labor package and training. The Aquino

Year 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Total No. of OFWs Deployed 866,590 891,908 867,969 933,588 988,615 1,062,567 1,077,623 1,376,823 1,422,586 1,470826 1,850,463

Land-based 661,648 682,315 651,938 740,586 740,632 788,070 811,070 974,399 1,092,162 1,123,676 1,384,094

Sea-based 204,951 209,593 216,031 229,002 247,983 274,497 266,553 261,614 330,424 347,150 466,369

government attributes a reverse migration in the ofng to the 7.8 percent GDP growth in the rst quarter of 2013 the highest in Aquinos term. However, independent think-tank IBON Foundation ascribes the growth to election-spending during the rst two quarters of 2012, and other factors that belie any claims of the Aquino government of sustainable, comprehensive and inclusive growth. The Aquino governments claim is further discredited by data showing that the Philippines still has the worst un-

employment rate in East Asia. Latest data from the National Statistics Ofce (NSO) showed the countrys unemployment rate rose to 7.5% this April, the highest under Aquino. According to the latest survey by the Social Weather Station (SWS), the Philippines has a 27.2 percent unemployment rate or more than 11.1 million Filipinos are jobless as of March 2013. This is a 3.7 percent increase from the 23.5 percent unemployment rate recorded in the last
CONTINUE NEXT J U TO LY 2 0 1 3 PAGE 1

TINIG NG MIGRANTE

from page 1

quarter of 2012 and a far cry from the unemployment gures of its Asian neighbors, namely, Singapore (1.7%), Malaysia (3%), Korea (3%), China (4.1%), Taiwan (4.3%), Vietnam (4.4%) and Indonesia (6.5%). For 2012, IBON estimated the number of unemployed Filipinos at 4.4 million (increase of 48,000 from 2011) while the number of underemployed has reached 7.5 million (increase of 349,000 from 2011), showing a signicant 20 percent increase in underemployment from the year before. In his past State of the Nation Addresses (SONA), Aquino attempted to downplay the jobs crisis by claiming lower unemployment rates (1.4 million jobs created in 2011 and 3.1 million jobs created in 2012). However, he failed to mention that the jobs created were either short-term, contractual or highly disproportional to the ever-growing laborforce. By 2012, the growing number of job loss in growing sectors belied any attempts to face-lift the gures. On the third quarter of 2012, wholesale and retail recorded 728,000 job losses, real estate 45,000 job losses, nancial and insurance 15,000 job losses and agriculture 694,200 job losses (IBON). To cover-up the record-high jobs crisis in the rst quarter of 2013, Malacanang placed a very unbelievable Labor Force Survey data of a mere 7.2 percent a very huge discrepancy from gures released by the NSO, SWS and other economic surveys. Presidential Spokesperson Edwin Lacierda even cited that the peak in unemployment in the rst quarter of 2013 was a result of an employment bonanza during the Christmas season when seasonal jobs were on the rise. On the other hand, those who do land domestic jobs still suffer very low wages. Since 2001, the gap between the mandated minimum wage and the family living wage (FLW) in the National Capital Region (NCR) had considerably widened. In 2001, the minimum wage was 52 percent of the FLW. By March 2013, the P456 NCR minimum wage is only 44 percent of the P1,034 FLW. In 2012, Aquino further widened the gap by implementing a twotiered wage scheme that essentially imposes a wage cut from a wage freeze policy. 2
JULY 2013

Table 2. NCR Mandated Minimum Wage vs. Family Living Wage (FLW)

Minimum wage 2001 P265 (52% w)

Family living Wage gap wage P509 P244

March 2013

P456 (44% w)

P1,034

P578

Source: IBON Foundation, estimates on data from NWPC Worsening joblessness feeds on already chronically low wages, with the current minimum wage grossly inadequate to sustain even the most humble of families. Family incomes are not keeping up with the ination. By the end of 2012, the average family in NCR lived on P22 to P37 a day (IBON data). Social service spending, moreover, has not improved under Aquino. The government has failed to allot enough resources to address shortages and insufciencies in education, health, housing and welfare services. Social services share in the GDP has continued to drop in light of annual budget cuts and privatization of public utilities (IBON). Aquino also claimed that his administrations Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) program reduced poverty, an exaggerated and unscientic boast, if anything. Being a beneciary of the CCT is not tantamount to a family emerging from below poverty line. It is not sustaining and offers merely band-aid solutions to the problems of joblessness and low wages. Aquino also failed to mention that the cash dole-out supposedly for 100,000 families would only hold for ve years, during and after which no prospective jobs, wages or livelihood are available to beneciaries. The present administration is also second place in terms of poor land distribution among post-Marcos regimes. Department of Agrarian Reform Sec. Gil de los Reyes already admitted that they would not be able to nish land distribution in time for the 25thanniversary of the Comprehensive Land Reform Program (CARP) on June 10 leaving some 500,000 hectares or almost half of DARs target for land distribution undistributed by 2014, affecting at least 1.1 million farmers. The most controversial land up for distribution is the Aquino-Cojuangco-owned Hacienda Luisita that remains undistributed to this day despite favourable ruling by the Supreme Court for farmers and farm workers. This comes as no surprise from a president who hails from a landed clam and family of hacienderos. In truth, the supposed economic growth is not translating to economic relief for the people but rather to more wealth for a privileged few. According to the National Statistical Coordinating Board (NSCB), poverty incidence in the country remained unchanged, recording a 27.9 percent poverty rate in the rst semester of 2012. Compared with the 2006 (28.8 percent) and 2009 (28.6 percent) rst semester gures, the poor quality of life that minimum wage earners can afford has not improved at all since Aquino took ofce. The NSCB reported that 22 out of 100 families were estimated to be poor in the rst semester of 2012 while 13 out of 100 Filipinos lived in extreme poverty during the same period. Based on the latest SWS survey last January, 54 percent of 10.9 million families now consider themselves poor, with perception of poverty rising nationwide. The gap between the rich and the poor has also further widened, with the income of the top one percent of families equivalent to that of the bottom 30 percent of households (IBON). According to Forbes, 11 of the richest Filipinos made it to its top billionaires of the world, enjoying a net worth of USD$13.2 billion as of March 2013. In search of jobs higher wages and livelihood, the number of OFWshasin-

TINIG NG MIGRANTE

creased signicantly since Aquino took ofce. In fact, the number of jobless Filipinos has risen to unprecedented heights from 2001 to 2010 and continues to reach record-high levels under Aquino. By 2012, at least one-fourth of the countrys labor force has gone abroad to nd work. According to the January 2012 Labor Force Survey (LFS), 64.3 percent of Filipinos are unemployed and actively looking for jobs. According to DOLE, there are now 12 million OFWs abroad. Migrante International pegs the number of overseas Filipinos between 12 to 15 million, to include undocumented OFWs. The International Organization for Migration

(IOM) still places the Philippines as the fourth leading migrant-sending country in the world, next only to China, Mexico and India. According to data from the POEA, 1.5 million Filipinos were deployed abroad on the start of Aquinos term in 2010. This gure is 50,000 or 3.4 percent higher than the deployment rate in 2009. Of present, overseas Filipinos are scattered in at least 239 countries situated in at least six continents, namely, Asia, Australia, North America, South America, Africa and Europe. The biggest population is located in the United States (3.5 million based on the 2010 US Census); next is Saudi Arabia (1.8 miliion based on POEA data); and Canada (639,686 based

on Commission on Filipinos Overseas data). There is also a big concentration of Filipinos in the United Arab Emirates, Australia, Qatar, Malaysia, Japan, United Kingdom, Hong Kong and Singapore. In the Philippines, about 30 to 40 percent of the total population is remittance-dependent. Majority of OFWs are still deployed in Saudi Arabia, UAE and Hong Kong. Most are in the service sector working as domestic workers, hotel and restaurant staff and caregivers, in manufacturing as factory workers, while a few tens of thousands are working abroad as professionals.

Table 3.Number of Deployed Overseas Filipino Workers by Type of Hiring (2008-2010) Source: POEA (2010)

Seafarers still constitute the biggest sub-sector of OFWs. The Philippines is still one of the biggest maritime countries, with Manila still in the list of the biggest most important ports in the world. According to the International Labor Organization (ILO), the Philippines is still the top source of seafarers. An estimated 8,000 to 10,000 seafarers are added to the total deployment every year.

Table 4. Number of seafarers in the world, 2003 = 1,250,000 or 67% of deployment

Philippines Russia Ukraine China India Indonesia Poland Greece Turkey Myanmar Source: POEA

28.1% 6.8% 6.3% 6.2% 5.0% 4.0% 3.5% 2.8% 2.5% 2.3%

A closer look into overseas deployment data would show that of the total number land-based OFWs deployed in 2010, 781,966 were re-hires while only 341,966 were new hires. The number of new hires decreased by 2.2 percent compared to 2009 (349,715) and 2008 (376,973) data. In the past three years, there was a slight decrease in the number of new hires deployed. In the rst quarter of 2011, for instance, according to POEA, only 380,188 new hires were deployed or 3.9 percent lower than the 395,189 deployed in 2010.

Table 5. Type of Worker and Hiring (Source: POEA, 2010)

JULY 2013

TINIG NG MIGRANTE

The POEA attributed the decrease in the number of new hires to the global economic crisis that erupted in 2008. The downtrend in deployment in the rst quarter of 2011, it said, was the result of the crisis in the Middle East-North Africa regions and the multiple disasters in Japan. The agency further said that the decrease in deployment of new hires should not be interpreted as a drop in demand for OFWs in the global market. By the end of 2012, the POEA was condent that it had reached its target job orders and deployment for the year. True enough, from January to May 2013 alone, the POEA reported that it had already processed a total of 367,738 job orders for OFWs. From the downtrend in 2011, OFW deployment has picked up considerably despite ongoing crises in host countries to date, policies such as the Nitaqat or Saudization, stricter immigration policies and criminalization and deportation

of millions of undocumented OFWs. If the government is attributing a so-called reverse migration due to these factors, then it is right on spot. Since 2010, thousands upon thousands of OFWs in distress have been deported or forcibly repatriated back to the country due to civil unrests, calamities, economic instabilities and other similar factors in migrant-receiving countries. Atpresent, some 120,000 OFWs are being affected by the Saudization policy. Of this number, about 28,000 are directly affected by the crackdowns being imposed by the Saudi government on undocumented migrant workers. The impact of these policies on the Philippine economy will be graver than the Aquino administration lets on as Saudi Arabia remains the top destination of OFWs. Meanwhile, similar immigration and labor policies are already being implemented elsewhere in the Middle East, particularly Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan and

Oman. Stricter immigration measures are also in effect in host countries in Europe, Canada and America. Combined with the continuous repatriation of distressed OFWs in Egypt, Syria and Libya, and the deportation of undocumented OFWs in Europe, Canada and the United States, then a reverse migration phenomenon could be expected in the coming months. But to attribute a reverse migration due to the recent GDP growth is outright deceitful and misleading. With the record-high unemployment rate and the lack of a comprehensive and sustainable reintegration program for returning OFWs, a so-called reverse migration will not be tantamount to the Aquino governments claims that OFWs are opting to come home for good. Filipinos will not be stopped from being forced to leave the country in search for greener pastures abroad. And so the cycle continues.

Remittances and intensication of labor export

Remittances from OFWs remain at record-high from 2001 up to the present despite the global economic crisis. Statistics from the BangkoSentralngPilipinas (BSP) show that it had reached a whopping USD$20 billion by end of 2011, from USD$18.8 billion in 2010. During the rst ve months of 2011, an estimated USD$7.9billions were remitted, 6.18 percent higher than remittances during the same period in 2010. Remittances reached another all-time high in the end of 2012 at

This can be attributed to the following factors: (a) OFWs compensate the dwindling dollar and peso exchange rates by sending more amounts to their families back home; (b) OFWs get double or triple jobs to offset effects of the crisis in both host countries and the Philippines; (c) OFWs resort to more borrowing/loaning to be able to send money back home, especially during holiday and enrolment According to the World Bank, the seasons; (d) OFWs are now sending savPhilippines is still the fourth biggest remit- ings they had acquired over the years, if any; and, (e) the number of unTable 5. Top 10 OFW Remittance-Sending Countries documented OFWs sending remittances through informal banking Country 2008 2009 2010 Jan-May 2011 and hand-carry transfers have considerably increased. 1)United States 7,825,607 7,323,661 7,862,207 3,232,073 In a study made by the ILO, 2)Canada 1,308, 692 1,900,963 2,022,611 830,863 more and more OFWs have been looking for additional sources of 3)Saudi Arabia 1,387,120 1,470,571 1,544,343 616,193 income on top of their regular jobs 4)United Kingdom 776,354 859,612 888,959 382,347 in order to survive the economic crisis. No matter, what is obscured 5)Japan 575,181 773,561 882,996 381,192 from the gures is the fact that in6)U.A.E. 621,232 644,822 775,237 307,964 creasing remittances means millions of Filipinos have to slave it 7)Singapore 523,951 649,943 734,131 317,786 out even harder in foreign shores 8)Italy 678,539 521,297 550,515 242,411 just to continue sending money to their similarly hard up families in 9)Germany 304,644 433,488 448,204 194,475 the Philippines. And the govern10)Hong Kong 406,134 339,552 362,524 148,873 ment cannot only but rejoice. Source: BSP (2010) However, the continuous increase does not necessarily transUSD$23.8 billion. tance-receiving country next to India, China late to economic growth, nor does it autoFor 2013, the BSP again recorded and Mexico. It is no secret that the Philip- matically translate to higher investments a faster growth rate of remittances in April pine economy relies mainly on remittances for families of OFWs factors that are after a supposed sluggish growth in March. to keep it aoat. By 2010, despite the global supposed to have contributed greatly to Money transfers coursed through formal economic crisis, remittances had already the GDP growth. banking grew at an annual rate of 6.1 per- made up 8.7 percent of the Gross National The latest survey of the BSPs cent to USD$1.8 billion in April, faster than Product (GNP), surpassing the share of tra- Consumer Expectations Survey conductthe three percent growth recorded in March ditional exports of agricultural products. ed on the second quarter of 2013 showed 4
JULY 2013

which was the slowest in three years. In the rst four months of 2013, OFW remittances reached USD$6.9 billion, or a 5.7 percent increase. The central bank data also showed that personal remittances those coursed through banks and hand-carry transfers and in kind reached a total of USD$2 billion in April, or an increase of seven percent from a year, totalling to USD$7.7 billion in the rst four months of 2013.

TINIG NG MIGRANTE

that the increase of households in the higher-income group with savings was overshadowed by the decline in savings among households in the low- and middle-income groups. Of the total number of 5,884 number of households, 525 respondents in the survey were remittance-dependent families. Of this number, 95.4 percent said that remittances from their relatives abroad were spent mainly for food, 67% for education, 54.9% for medical expenses, and 42.1% for debt payments. The percentage of remittance-dependent families that used remittances for savings fell signicantly, from 42.5% to 39.4% during the rst quarter of 2013. The latest BSP report also attested that OFW households that allotted part of their remittances for investments such as the purchase of real estate and other real properties suffered a steep drop compared to previous years. Savings, if any, were prioritized for emergency, education and hospitalization. With the impending price hikes of basic utilities, tuition fee increases and privatization of services and hospitals, this gure is expected to further decline in the coming years.

Table 6. Graph from BSP Consumer Expectations Report, 2013

Case study 1 (as of February 2011): A remittance-dependent family with four (4) family members based in Cubao, Quezon City spends an average of P14,500 per month: Food P6,000 (P200/day) Rent P1,500 (one room) LPG P400 (2 Superkalans/month) Electricity P600 Water P250 Toiletries (soap, shampoo, etc.) P900 Transportation costs of children to school P3,360 P14 x 2 daily fare of 4 children to and from school Case study 2 (as of February 2011): TOTAL: P14,510 Their breadwinner is a domestic worker in Saudi Arabia. She sends P21,000 every three (3) months, or P7,000 a month. Her remittance falls P7,500 short of her familys monthly expenses. With the impending fare hikes and electricity, water and LPG fee hikes, her monthly remittance will barely support her family. Further, although annual remittances increased amid the global economic crisis, its growth rate has been decreasing in recent years. From a 25 percent record growth in 2005, it dropped to a lowest 5.6 percent in 2009, a year after the global economic erupted.

For an OFW who has three (3) children attending private school (1 in high school and 2 in elementary) and their mother, a P20,000 monthly remittance is barely enough. With the impending fee increases (tuition and fare hikes), he has to maintain two or three jobs to sustain their daily needs and compensate for the decit in his monthly remittance: Water P1,600 (projected increased rate by July) Electricity P3,500 (projected increased rate) Internet P1,000

Tuition fee P4,500x 3 = P13,500 (monthly deposit, projected increased rate) Funds for high school projects P3,000 Funds for elementary projects P2,000 Allowance for school children per week P5,000 (projected increased rate) Groceries P3,000 (maintained, but will buy less) TOTAL: P32,600 (sum does not yet include expenses for utilities, rental, food and other basic needs)

Table 7. Trend in Remittance (Source: POEA, BSP)

JULY 2013

TINIG NG MIGRANTE

In the US where 50 percent of remittances originate, the growth rate had decreased from 7.8 percent in 2008 to 7.3 percent in 2009. It had a slight increase to 7.9 percent in 2010 but has been suffering a steady decline since the US debt crisis ensued. The continuing decrease in growth rate is a constant worry for the Aquino government. If the trend continues, the government will be in big trouble because it relies mainly on remittances for foreign exchange revenues.

Table 8. Relationship of Remittances to Other Philippine External Income (Source: BSP, ADB, WORLD BANK, DOT, INQ7)

This explains the Aquino administrations desperation to further seek job markets abroad and intensify its labor export program. Through remittances, the government earns exponentially without having to shell out much capital investment. Even funds for labor outmigration management through agencies such as the POEA and the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA) are directly sourced from OFWs or recruitment agencies and employers through various fees. (See section on State exactions) The Aquino administration, while mouthing local job generation as its core program to eliminate forced migration, continues to hail the remittance boom to further promote labor export in the attempt to offset the downtrend in the remittance growth rate. To do this, it has become more aggressive in implementing labor export, hence, the Aquino administrations active lobbying for job markets and signing of bilateral agreements with host countries in the past three years. Since 2010, Aquino had embarked on 26 state visits to different countries around the world and each time came home with promises of foreign investments and lucrative job markets. At the rate he is going, he is expected to surpass former President Gloria Arroyos infamous junkets abroad which reached 77 in her nine years in ofce. Ironically, most of Aquinos trips abroad wherein he met Filipino communities were always sprinkled with trivial anecdotes about OFWs but he has consistently remained mum on issues that beleaguered OFWs during his term despite his promises and posturing. Further, the Aquino administration contradicts itself on claims of supposed improved local job generation resulting in reverse migration when it has further tailored the public education system for a 6
JULY 2013

more aggressive labor export program. The K to 12 educational system would only mean more OFW deployment abroad and the Aquino administration is systematically targeting the countrys young labor force. It is aimed mainly to reinforce cheap semi-skilled youth labor for the global market. According to the Department of Education (DepEd), the K to 12 will improve chances of youth employment and that it will ensure that 18-year-old graduates will be employable even without a college degree. The DepEd plans to achieve this through a so-called specialized Senior High program that focuses on a curriculum that will enable students to acquire Certicates of Competency (COCs) and National Certications (NCs)in accordance with Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) Training Regulations.These certicates, without doubt, will be in compliance with requirements for overseas deployment, not much different, for example, with the Arroyo administrations TESDA-accredited Supermaids program. What the K to 12 system is doing is boosting cheap semi-skilled youth labor through a so-called professionalization of the young labor force mainly in labor markets abroad but unfortunately ignores the very causes of forced migration, namely, lack of local jobs, low wages, landlessness and poor social services. The K to 12 system sadly undermines the youths very signicant role in nation-building because it is geared towards providing cheap semiskilled youth labor to the global market instead of for domestic development. The youth suffer the highest unemployment incidence compared to other age groups. Almost half of the unemployed are 15 to 24 years old while almost a third are

25 to 34 years old. Young workers, mostly semi-skilled, make up approximately 10.7 percent of the total Filipino labor migration program. The K to 12 system would only mean more OFWs, younger and more trained to be docile, cheap laborers abroad in exchange for remittances. Aside from OFW remittances, labor export also provides a tempting alternative to the unemployed and underemployed. Because of this, the government is not obliged to create jobs that offer decent wages and instead it becomes convenient to evade responsibility of implementing policy reforms to turn the economy around. The countrys economic situation has not improved under Aquinos unreformed government policies. Development policies, including Aquinos Philippine Development Plan (2011-2016), continue to rely heavily on foreign investment, exportimport dependence, debt and the so-called free market principles from which a more intensied and aggressive labor export policy is entrenched. Aquinos essential economic thrust is clear-cut: stick to adherence to policies of neoliberal globalization, implement these more thoroughly and systematically through his Private-Public Partnership (PPP), and selectively implement social protection programs like the CCT. For OFWs, Aquino has employed the same impetus. The situation of OFWs has gone from worse to worst in Aquinos three years. Since Aquino took ofce, it had been especially more gruelling for OFWs and their families. Policy-wise, there are no indications that Aquino would instil muchneeded reforms to curb forced migration and deviate from a policy of labor export. If anything, the Philippine economys dependence on labor outmigration and remittances has become unparalleled under the

TINIG NG MIGRANTE

Worst anti-migrant policies: A look back on how Aquino addressed OFW concerns Aquino administration. Government neglect of OFWs in distress For the rst time in history, four Filipinos were executed abroad under one presidency. The number of Filipinos on death row has increased from 108 to at least 125 (Migrante database). At least 7,000 Filipinos are languishing in jails abroad without legal assistance and at least 25,000 are stranded and awaiting repatriation in the Middle East alone. In his three years, Aquino failed to address the immediate evacuation and repatriation of OFWs affected by conicts, calamities and crackdowns in the MENA region. The so-called one-country team approach of the DFA, DOLE and OWWA is non-functional, and is usually characterized by the said agencies blaming each other for lapses and inaction in the urgent repatriation of and assistance for OFWs in distress. The most recent sex-for-ight expos, for instance, is an exploitation borne out of the Aquino governments failure to address stranded OFWs demands for free, urgent and mass repatriation. Abuse of OFWs by erring embassy and consulate ofcials have long been rampant and usually intensify during crisis events, such as crackdowns on undocumented OFWs in the Middle East. Abusive embassy and consulate ofcials take advantage of the desperation of OFWs in distress. The sex-for-ight issueis not an isolated matter that has nothing to do with the overall condition of stranded OFWs seeking immediate repatriation from the Aquino government in light of the Middle East crackdowns. Of present, thousands of stranded OFWs in the Middle East continue to call for immediate repatriation from the Philippine government. Efforts, so far, have been slow and uncertain. Only some 250 stranded OFWs have been repatriated by the Aquino government since June. With only a few days remaining before the resumption of the Saudi crackdowns on July 3, the Aquino government might be facing a tremendous nightmare as at least 4,500 undocumented OFWs are still awaiting repatriation in Riyadh and Jeddah alone. Some 12,000 OFWs are undocumented and in danger of arrests in the whole of Saudi Arabia.Failure to repatriate the stranded OFWs in time will denitely
JULY 2013

result in more and graver human rights abuses against stranded OFWs. The Aquino government has also failed in curbing human and labor trafcking of OFWs. The Philippines remains as one of the top source/sending countries for human trafcking in different parts of the world. Filipinos, mostly women and children, are being trafcked for labor and/or sexual trade to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Malaysia, Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan, South Africa, North America and Europe. The Aquino government conservatively estimates the number of Filipino victims of trafcking from 300,000 to 400,000, with the number of children victims ranging from 60,000 to 100,000. Many of them migrate to work through legal and illegal means but are later coerced into exploitative conditions, drug trade or white slavery. The situation has become so alarming that the US government, for altruistic reasons, had warned the Philippine

government to get its act together lest it remains under Tier 2 of the US Department of States Trafcking in Persons Report. This year, the Aquino regime pursued cosmetic reforms, among them signing the Expanded Anti-Trafcking in Persons Act, which upgraded the Philippines to Tier 1, meaning that the country has complied with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafcking. The 2003 Anti-Trafcking in Persons Act, otherwise known as Republic Act 9208, denes trafcking of persons as the recruitment, transportation, transfer or harboring, or receipt of persons with or without the victims consent or knowledge, within or across national borders by means of threat or use of force, or other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or of position, taking advantage of the vulnerability of the person, or, the giving or receiving of payments or benets to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person for the purpose of exploitation which includes at a minimum, the exploitation or the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual ex-

TINIG NG MIGRANTE

ploitation, forced labor or services, slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of organs. This denition of trafcking in persons sets a very thin line between human trafcking and illegal recruitment, especially for our OFWs. Government efforts have hardly scratched the surface of the anti-trafcking campaign, however much it lauds itself in the media. For one, it only has 17 anti-trafcking prosecutors in the Department of Justice and 72 prosecutors in regional DOJ ofces.

the P1.8 trillion national budget. Direct services for OFWs from concerned agencies, namely specic items under the DFA, DOLE, POEA, Department of Justice (DOJ) as lead agency of the IACAT, Commission on Filipinos Overseas (CFO) and the Ofce of the President (OP), were decreased. Budget for OFW welfare and services in the said agencies suffered an 18 percent cut (P792 million) from 2011s sum of P3.8 million. This translated to a pitiful per capita spending of P261.83 for the 15 million overseas Filipinos. Moreover, while funds for welfare and services for OFWs decreased, increases were made on the DOLE and POEA budgets mainly for their marketing and job placement purposes despite declarations from Aquino from past SONAs that these agencies would focus on local job generation and more incentives for re-

OFWs by effectively calling on all government heads and agencies to rationalize the rates of their fees and charges, increase their rates and impose new fees and charges. Since 2010, the government had imposed numerous other fees from OFWs pre- and post-departure the increase in e-passport fees, mandatory Pag-Ibig contributions, Philhealth premium cost hike, mandatory medical insurance, Afdavit of Support fees, to name a few. A study by Migrante International estimates that since 2010 the Aquino government has been collecting an average of at least P26,267 from every overseas Filipino worker (OFW) processed by the POEA. This amount is higher than the average P18,000 the government collected before 2010. If 4,500 OFWs leave daily to work abroad, the government earns an av-

And though it has set up the Inter-Agency Council against Trafcking in Persons (IACAT), it has only received a total of 146 cases of human trafcking for investigation in 2010. Compare this, for example, with an average of 1,500 cases yearly that Migrante International receives, majority of which are related to human and sex trafcking, Table 9. Fees charged to OFWs (per contract) illegal recruitment and drugrelated cases. The ratio of resolution of cases of human trafcking/illegal recruitment in agencies such as the IACAT or POEA are close to nil, with most of perpetrators or recruitment agencies being given mere administrative sanctions only to be able to operate again.

76 signatures (for different types of document requirements) E-passport fee (minimum) POEA fee (for new hires) OWWA fee (USD$25) Pag-Ibig mandatory contribution Mandatory insurance coverage (minimum premium USD$144) Philhealth (minimum) TOTAL

P7,600 P1,200 P7,500 P1,075 P600 P6,192 P1,200 P25,367

Also, many victims, with the help of Migrante International and other concerned organizations, have led charges of violations of RA 9208. Unfortunately, the government lacks the political will to fully address the cases. There are also reports of immigration and police ofcers who are coddlers of trafcking syndicates but, so far, no public or government ofcial atany levelhas been prosecuted. Budget cuts Aquinos national budget is one concrete manifestation of the governments thrust to further intensify the governments labor export policy while prioritizing profits over people. During Aquinos term, funds for direct services for OFWs were slashed in the National Expenditure Program. For scal year 2012, budget for OFWs only got a less than one percent share(0.17 percent) in 8
JULY 2013

turned OFWs to address forced migration. One major consequence of budget cuts on OFWs direct services and welfare was the closure of ten embassies, consulates and posts in different countries around the world. As of July 31, 2012, embassies in Caracas in Venezuela; Koror, Palau; Dublin, Ireland and consulates general in Barcelona, Spain and Frankfurt, Germany have ceased to operate. Embassies in Stockholm, Sweden; Bucharest, Romania; Havana, Cuba; Helsinki, Finland; and consulate in Saipan in Northern Mariana Islands closed down on October 31, 2012. State exactions Under Aquinos term, state exactions from OFWs were further institutionalized and aggravated through the Aquinos signing of Administrative Order 31. AO 31 legalizes state exactions and taxation on

erage P124 million a day, or roughly P45.26 billion yearly, from processing fees and other costs shouldered by OFWs. Dismal rights and welfare program The Aquino government has highly praised itself for its supposed efforts to work with labor-receiving governments to formulate both formal and informal agreements meant to ensure that OFWs conditions are within nationally- and internationally-accepted standards. These, however, are more wishful thinking than reality. The truth is, OFWs are plagued with an assortment of issues and problems throughout the entire migration cycle yet the Aquino government has barely done any decisive action to support and protect OFWs and their families. The Aquino governments ability to uphold Filipinos migrants rights and promote their welfare has lagged behind its apparent success in

TINIG NG MIGRANTE

pursuing its policy of labor export. The efforts and outcomes are uneven. On one hand, efforts are systematic, sustained and deliberate on regulatory matters facilitating the departure of OFWs and receipt of remittances. These have resulted in record numbers of Filipinos overseas. On the other hand, efforts are spotty, partial and erratic on matters relating to giving migrants protection and support at home or abroad. There is even a lack of accurate, comprehensive and timely information about migrant workers themselves. During the height of repatriation efforts in Syria, for example, the OWWA and the DFA offered conicting information on the average deployment costs needed to negotiate with Syrian employers for the release of OFWs from their contracts. The OWWA said that it had set the average deployment costs at USD$2,500 per OFW while the DFA pegged it at USD$3,000 to USD$4,000. Even the gures for total population of OFWs in Syria did not match. The same case can be said in the ongoing repatriation of stranded OFWs in Saudi. Simply put, efforts will continue to be futile if concerned agencies cannot even agree on basic facts. All these highlight the steady rise of violations of migrants rights. Many OFWs and migrants organizations have gone so far as to characterize the government as criminally negligent in its repeated abdication of taking primary re-

sponsibility for protecting migrants and their families. Despite these, the Aquino government continues to promote labor export. While it is true that, compared to other labor-sending countries, the Philippines has a relatively sophisticated and well-developed legal framework to protect the rights and welfare of migrants and their families, this has largely been pushed by force of circumstance of the rapidly increasing numbers of OFWs that have been victimized by violations of rights and the resounding clamor of a growing number of OFWs, their families and advocates who have managed to organize among themselves. Even measures deemed signicant by government such as the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act (RA 10022, amended RA 8042),Anti-Trafcking in Persons Act (RA 9208) and the Overseas Absentee Voting Act (RA 9189) have not been implementedand fullled under the Aquino administration. Cosmetic reforms are certainly no match to gargantuan problems emanating from the labor export policy, rendering these laws inutile. Hence, no amount of legislation can offer full protection, much less deterrecurring problems of maltreatment, insufcient social and welfare services,government failures and violence against OFWs. The OWWA Omnibus Policies (OOP), for instance, which was passed under the presidency of Gloria MacapagalArroyo in2003, continues to be in force to this day. But the OOP limits the benets and welfare services entitled to OFWs among itsprovisions are the termination of OWWA membership upon expiration of employment contract; restriction of voluntarymembership to two years; selective repatriation of migrant workers in times of crises, epidemics and wars; and thegranting of the sole deciding authority to the OWWA Board of Trustees with regard the management of OWWA funds. Also under the OOP, only active members of OWWA could avail of the services

and benets consisting of a life insurancefor natural death, insurance for accidental death, disability benets, scholarship programs, repatriation andreintegration. Others, such as medical insurance and health benets, have either been privatized or taxed from OFWsand/or employers. Under the current OWWA policy, only active members of OWWA could avail of the services and benets that include aP100,000 life insurance (for natural death), and P200,000 insurance (for accidental death), disability benets,scholarship programs, repatriation and reintegration programs. There is also a lack of comprehensive and sustainable reintegration program for returned OFWs. What the Aquinogovernment offers are mere dole-outs and band-aid solutions that are not long-term solutions to unemployment, lowwages and lack of social services. Most of the governments reintegration programs for returned OFWs are made up of loans and one-time livelihood programs. Most recently, returned OFWs are complaining about the P2 billion OWWAreintegration program that Aquino inaugurated in 2011 because of its stringent requirements for collateral and onerousinterest rates. Aquino also failed to investigate allegations of misuse and corruption of the OWWA funds. The plunder case led againstformer president Arroyo for misuse and corruption of OWWA funds, for instance, was initiated by private citizens andorganizations and not the Aquino administration. Double standard foreign policies Throughout his presidency, Aquino has been criticized for his double standard foreign policies. More often than not, such policies have had direct effects on the welfare and well-being of OFWs in their host countries. In the case of the Sabah dispute, the Philippine governments passivity and lack of political will to protect national interest virtually emboldened and gave license to Malaysian forces to attack our fellowmen. Sabah is one of the most common destinations of trafcked Filipinos, mostly women. It is also one of the most common transit points of trafcked Filipinos on their way to other parts of Asia. As a reJULY 2013

TINIG NG MIGRANTE

sult of the Aquino governments refusal to acknowledge the legitimacy of the Sabah claim, crackdowns conducted by the Malaysian government against Filipinos became more rampant. In its handling of the Sabah conict, the Aquino government exposed its double standards and contrasting motivations and interests vis a vis the Spratlys and Panatag Shoal issues. It remains aggressive in the Spartlys issue to promote and justify increased US troops presence in the Asia-Pacic region while it is passive in the Sabah issue to appease Malaysia which plays a lead role in the ongoing peace negotiations between the MILF and the Philippine government. The same can be said on how the

Aquino government handled the conict with Taiwan with regard the alleged killing of a Taiwanese sherman by the Philippine Coast Guard. OFWs in Taiwan suffered the backlash of the Aquino governments callous, incompetent and undiplomatic handling of the issue. The Aquino government attempted to justify the killing by asserting that the Taiwanese sherman poached on Philippines seas. Only later did it conduct an investigation when OFWs in Taiwan were getting the brunt of attacks. On the other hand, the Aquino administration was lenient with the US Navy for damaging the Tubbataha reefs. Aquino said that the US Navy showed sensitivity by apologizing. He also refused to address questions on the US ships presence in Philippine seas and instead said that he saw no reason to involve the contentious Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) in the Tubbataha issue. While continuously harping on how the government is ready to defend sovereignty amid territorial disputes, Aquino nevertheless shows his puppetry and subservience to US economic and territorial interests. Conclusion In the past three years, the Aquino government had been aggressive in crafting programs and services aimed at facilitatingand encouraging migration. While acknowledging the many social costs, these were effectively downplayed. Rather, it has resolutely promoted labor export as unequivocally benecial for migrants and their families. This is particularly done by overstating supposed development

benets for the economy andthe income benets for households. The economic compulsion of the Aquino government to keep exporting Filipinos to maintain or, especially, to increaseremittances unfortunately overrides and precludes undertaking any measures that, directly or indirectly, constrict theow of migration even if such measures would immediately and, in the long-run, prevent the incidence of abuses andmigrant rights violations. Filipinos are being forced to migrate because of desperation. The economys lack of development resulting in job loss, low wages and lack of livelihood at home is the primary push factor. OFWs have borne witness to how insincere, insensitive and inept the Aquino government is in upholding and securing the protection and welfare of OFWs. Instead, it showcases a more blatant and unapologetic labor export policy that exploits OFWs cheap labor and foreign remittances. To genuinely address the problem of forced migration, economic policies should focus on developing the national economy by advancing local industries, agriculture and basic services. Migrante International fully supports the call and struggle for national industrialization and genuine land reform as the ultimate solution to the problem of forced migration and to end the labor export program.

10

JULY 2013