May
28
Filipino newspapers in Toronto went quiet about the contract changes that Philippine Labor Attache Frank Luna have added for the live-in caregiver program. And so is Mr. Labor Attache. He’s mum at the moment on this contentious issue.
Except for the May 16-31 issue of The Philippine Reporter (www.philreporter.com/home.html) which printed my comment and another bloggers’ in their Letter To The Editor nothing else is said more about it.
The Filipino newspapers, I could understand why they’re quiet about it. The Philippine Consulate and its arm, the Philippine Labor Attache is one of their biggest advertisers. They sometimes occupy several pages of the papers for their photo opportunities and press releases. If you are an ethnic newspaper in Canada which distributes your issues for free and depends on advertising to make a profit, it’ll be foolish to piss one of your biggest advertiser. Isn’t it?
Even most Filipinos here in Toronto, they have no say, though somehow some of them would be affected by it - maybe not now, but in the future when they sponsor their love ones to be a caregiver. Maybe most think that it’s just $38 more to pay for processing this document and for majority of kababayans here, it’s peanuts.
Yeah, that’s right. It’s peanuts if it’s only for 1 person - multiply that to a thousand and you’re looking at $38,000 in the the Philippine government’s piggy bank - which will only go to the pocket of corrupt Philippine government officials. And that’s only for a thousand incoming OFW’s.
What about the caregiver support group who were asking for the scrapping of the live-in caregiver program? Nada. Not even one of them spoke on it. Whether they find it good or not.
According to a consultant I called, the pending documents regarding this addendum is already mounting in the Philippine Overseas Labor Office (Toronto) and many live-in caregivers with visa in their hands cannot leave Manila because of it. A comment in my post about it confirmed that their recruitment office have stopped representing live-in caregivers coming direct from the Philippines and discourages employers from signing the contract. Who knows how many more have done the same?
The main contention in this controversial contract is the Repatriation In Case Of Work Related Death clause. Does Mr. Frank Luna even know how much it would cost to repatriate a dead body to the Philippines? Here in Canada it may cost upwards the same as a brand new car (over $10,000)! Who employer in her right mind would agree to that? That is a problem of the Philippine government, not of the employer.
The Philippine government should be grateful that a Canadian employer has provided a job to a Filipino which otherwise they cannot provide for them in their own country and not burden them (the employers) with additional cost which is their (Philippine governments) responsibility in the first place. Will Canada ask the Philippine government to pay for the repatriation of a deceased Canadian working for an NGO in Manila? I guess not!
I’m sure many Filipino-Canadians doesn’t know that this new contract was probably modeled after a similar controversial memorandum by the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) Memorandum Circular 04 (CF-04)(www.poea.gov.ph/mc/mc4_2007_namehire.pdf).
In this memo, the POEA is pushing for a bond of $5,000 from employers of direct-hired OFW’s in case of death of the worker. It also included additional provisions or pre-qualifications for employers before they could directly hire an OFW. If you read article III of the memo, the procedure is very similar to Mr. Frank Luna’s procedure for his addendum.
This memorandum was met with fierce resistance by different Filipino workers groups in Asia, the Middle East and other places as well. See:
naijapinoy.wordpress.com/ofw-news/ofw-policy-a-catch-22/
naijapinoy.wordpress.com/2008/02/13/petition-campaign-against-poea-mc-no-4-started/
naijapinoy.wordpress.com/2008/02/14/news-ofw-hiring-guidelines-migrant-groups-reject-new-rules/
naijapinoy.wordpress.com/2008/02/13/ofw-you-are-not-protected-the-effect-of-poeas-mc-no4/
www.gmanews.tv/story/79026/RP-diplomats-urged-to-defy-direct-hiring-rule
www.gmanews.tv/story/81454/Scrap-MC-4-or-quit—OFW-group-to-Brion-Baldoz
Eventually giving in to pressure from both workers and foreign employers, Secretary of Labor Arturo Brion suspended the implementation of this memorandum (www.poea.gov.ph/news/2008/PR_Feb2008_suspendMC4.pdf).
In Canada’s case, Mr. Frank Luna will not put a price on repatriation cost because he probably knows how much it cost here. His office as well as the Philippine consulate have been embroiled in repatrition issues regarding the death of some caregivers in the past.
The Philippines is not in a position to put pressure on Canadian employers, if this is what this directive is all about. Do we really think that the Filipina caregiver is indispensable? Think again.
If you look around Toronto nowadays, you will notice that there are a lot of Mexicans in the city now. One house that’s being constructed in my neighborhood all the workers are Mexicans. The school where my daughter goes just a year ago you don’t see any latinos. But now, latino kids are beginning to show their numbers.
Many Mexicans who are in the US who otherwise cannot get a status there are beginning to look at Canada as the next best place to be. And why not? Canada needs people and need them quick. And the Canadian dollar is going strong as well.
Now, that’s only Mexico as an example. Don’t forget other Latin countries, Sri Lanka, India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, China, Pakistan, some Eastern European countries etc. See, Filipinos have plenty of competition. If the Philippine labor representative will not wise-up, the competition will eat the Philippines alive.
Remember, Canada is not Saudi Arabia or Singapore or Hong Kong where live-in caregivers do not have a chance of becoming citizens. In Canada, those workers have a great chance of becoming Canadians as well and become beneficiaries of Canada’s wealth. That’s why even if a Filipina comes here under a difficult circumstance like say a caregiver, it’s still better than Saudi or Singapore. That’s why CAnada is sought after by different worker groups.
You want to protect the Filipina worker? Review Ms. Mila Echevarria’s suggestions or Ms. Eva Agpaoa’s offer of help (Manila Media Monitor p. 9, May 2008, Year 11, No. 11).
That’s the kind of assistance our kababayans need and not some contract that does not have any “teeth”.
May
6
NOTE: For information on how this blog came about, go to the Press Release of the Philippine Labor Attache as published in The Philippine Reporter (which can be downloaded in their archive section at www.philreporter.com) and the reprint of the article questioning the new contract titled New LCP Contract Scares Canadian Employers Away…..
======================================================
Recently, the labor attache of the Philippines to Canada, Frank Luna, came out with a directive that before a Filipino/Filipina live in caregiver will be allowed to leave the Philippines for Canada to work as a caregiver, an additional contract must be signed by her/his employer (The Philippine Reporter, Issue April 16-30, 2008 - pages 13 and 30).
This addition is also the subject of an article in same paper, titled “New LCP Contract Scares Canadian Employers Away” (The Philippine Reporter, issue April 16-30, 2008 - page 24) and the continuation, titled “LCP Flawed, Needs Major Changes” (The Philippine Reporter, issue May 1-15, 2008 - page 15).
The press release by the Philippine Overseas Labor Office which can be found on page 13 of the paper states:
Addendum to Employment Contract. The employer undertakes to be responsible for:
1) Cost of 2-way transportation to and from Canada;
2) Health coverage for the employee before the provincial health insurance applies;
3) Termination of employment shall only be for cause;
4) In case of work-related death, cost of repatriation of remains to the Philippines;
Employer Employee
Date ___________________________________
That “short” addition to the contract must be forwarded to the Philippine Overseas Labor Office in Toronto and have to be paid a signature verification fee of US$10 and another CAD$28.75 for consular authentication fee.
Now the question is - how will this “new” additions protect the live-in caregiver?
In case the employer reneged on the signed agreement, how will the Philippine Overseas Labor Office plan to implement any “serious” penalty for violation of those addendum, like say “a day in jail”?
To answer those questions, let us take a look at this additions…..
The first one - the cost of 2-way transportation to and from Canada that must be shouldered by the employer;
In the Labor Market Opinion of Service Canada for the live-in caregiver program, this requirement IS NOT existing (LMO-LCP2 or see screenshot here) and (LMO-LCP1 or see screenshot here) - but the office of the labor attache instead quoted the Expedited Labor Market Opinion for temporary workers for Alberta and British Columbia ( E-LMO) repeatedly in their press releases (The Philippine Reporter, Letter To The Editor, issue May 1-15, 2008 - page 14) and also at another paper (Atin Ito, Vol. 33 No. 4, April 2008 - page 1).
Now, I’m not very good in regulations or any kind of law for that matter but it seems, this are two different set of rules - one for the live-in caregiver program and one for the temporary worker program (E-LMO).
Let’s take a shortcut and include the remaining directives from Philippine Overseas Labor Office new contract which are: health coverage for the employee, termination clause and the work-related death clause.
NOT EVEN ONE of those are in the Labor Market Opinion intended for the live-in caregiver program!
So, how does violation of any one of the additions protect the rights of the caregiver? I don’t think there’s any.
Let’s give an example. Let’s say for the sake of argument that a “bad” employer signed the “new” contract so the caregiver can come to Canada. The employer have no intention of keeping the live-in caregiver and instead will terminate the caregiver as soon as she arrive in the employers house. And the employer did so without having second thoughts and fired the caregiver immediately.
Would the Philippine Overseas Labor Office do something to fight for the rights of this caregiver by “waving” the contract to the proper authorities?
They couldn’t. Why?
Because there is no Canadian law that was broken even if the employer signed that contract. Even the LMO of the live-in caregiver program was not violated.
The labor attache himself said this in one of his press release, “the contract, while approved for LMO purposes, is still a PRIVATE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE EMPLOYER and the WORKER. That being the case, such contract is still subject to the laws and policies of the Philippines, which can prescribe additional conditions to protect the interests of its nationals going abroad.” (The Philippine Reporter, issue April 16-30,2008 - page 13).
Those alone are proof that this new contract will not provide any protection at all that even law enforcers in Canada cannot cite any ordinance that have been violated. Prove me wrong. Give me any proof that a Canadian law was broken just because the employer changed his or her mind in hiring the caregiver or that the employer does not want to pay for the airfare of the caregiver or does not want to pay for the caregivers repatriation in case of death.
(By the way, the airfare and repatriation of body thing is a big issue, moneywise. No “regular” Canadian employer would agree to that - but that’s another blog post.)
Any one of those directives are argumentative.
We’re not questioning the sincerety of the labor attache for coming out with a directive like this. Maybe his intentions are good. But what he should have done is come up with a draft of his proposition and arrange several meetings with all those who’s going to be somehow affected by it. Employment agencies, caregiver groups or immigration consultants and lawyers. Ask for their input because only those involved in the caregiver employment business knows who the crooks were and “witch hunting” or unfair accusations will not help your cause of weeding out the “bad eggs” - if that’s the intention.
More study should have been done before directives like those are sent out to “take effect immediately” - where the most affected people are those who you’re trying to protect. How so?
All the live-in caregivers who are just waiting to leave for Canada when this contract came out would have to wait if their employers would be willing to sign their names knowing that those add-ons can possibly put them in debt, specially the repatriation of the body clause.
Some of this caregivers have been waiting more than a year for their “first step to a better future” but this new contract will “screw it up” if the employer does not sign it. What do we do about them now?
The Philippine Consulate and the Labor Attache better come to terms with the reality that this new additional contract will not do good to protect a caregiver’s welfare. Scrap it. Canada already has enough laws to protect every individual in this country. What should be additionally done is to disseminate every important information to newly arrived Filipinos, whether immigrants or workers, about their rights and numbers to contact in case of emergency. Information, education and extended help is what they need.
Noli Maniquis
www.AdoboRepublic.net
