March 02, 2007
GUEST BLOGGER: Paolo Cruz (Dumpling Press)
Indi, a Filipina grad student in Denmark, recounts a lunch spent with an acquaintance from Kryrgyzstan:
Well, for starters, they *ought* to have access to the rights detailed in the UN Women's Convention (CEDAW): job security (even during pregnancy); maternity leave; loans, mortgages, and financial credit; and safe working conditions (including measures related to reproductive health). Except there's one huge problem: the United States is one of the States Parties that has never ratified its commitment to CEDAW. Therefore, OFWs working in the US do so at the mercy of Federal law, especially when Philippine embassies and consular offices claim to be over-burdened already.
That's just one reason why human rights advocates paid such close attention to President Bush's most recent State-of-the-Union Address, on January 24 this year. Bush announced that he would be pushing for a comprehensive reform of immigration laws, incluing a much-touted foreign "guest worker" program. Dubya regards these measures as being "without animosity" but also "without amnesty". As I understand it, this basically means that documented foreign contract workers get some of the benefits automatically recieved by ordinary American citizens, for the duration of their short-term labor contracts. This is meant as an incentive for workers to eventually sign up for legitimate citizenship (which remains a slow, labyrinthine process, post-9/11, even with all the technological efficiencies of a "First World" nation). However, as soon as a worker decides to over-stay (or "go TNT" -- tago ng tago, "always hiding"), they're on their own.
As one might guess, response to this announcement has been mixed. It's not uncommon to read articles like this one, with headlines proclaiming "FilAms cheer Bush's guest worker plan". But not everyone is uniformly pleased about the new measures. Responding to the news item linked above, Sociology professora Robyn Magalit Rodriguez comments:
The main concern is that existing undocumented workers will end up being deported, or forcibly held in detention centers like the Hutto Family Residential Facility (a de facto prison for undocumented illegals), as their papers await processing within the Byzantine network of government bureaus.
But even as the debate continues in the U.S., worsening economic conditions over here ensure the growing lines of would-be OFWs outside the POEA offices. It's a hard life, one way or another -- for some, perhaps the indignities and uncertainty of H-2 "guest worker" status are more bearable than "going TNT" or enduring the poverty of our native land.
______________
A clip from an episode of Speak Out (produced by The Filipino Channel) discussing Bush's proposed guest worker program. Originally aired September 17, 2006:
Indi, a Filipina grad student in Denmark, recounts a lunch spent with an acquaintance from Kryrgyzstan:
Anyway, umupo na kami at nagkwentuhan kami tungkol sa kanya-kanyang bansa. Siya ang pangatlong Kyrgyz na nameet ko. Very Eurasian ang itsura niya. 10 years old siya nung nag collapse ang Soviet Union at yung main industry nila dati ay wool - kasi bawat Soviet State ay specialized kasi nga centralized.
"So what's the biggest earner for your country now?" tanong ko.
"Drugs!" sabi niya sabay tawa. "And in Philippines?" pahabol niyang tinanong.
"Workers."
[Anyway, we sat down and chatted about each other's country. She is the third Kyrgyz that I have met here. Her looks are very Eurasian. She was 10 years old when the Soviet Union collapsed and their main industry used to be wool - because each Soviet State was specialized, due to the centralized economy.She's right, of course. The National Statistics Office estimates that Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) in North and South America alone remitted 6.4 billion Pesos in 2004. Even within the United States, on its own, there are at least 26,000 Filipina women active in the labor force ("at least", because the figure only represents those who completed all the paperwork necessary for legit employment). But let's get past these numbers and consider the human implications -- just what kinds of rights and benefits are they granted, as contractual "guest workers"?
"So what's the biggest earner for your country now?", I asked.
"Drugs!" she said while laughing. "And in Philippines?" she followed up.
"Workers."]
Well, for starters, they *ought* to have access to the rights detailed in the UN Women's Convention (CEDAW): job security (even during pregnancy); maternity leave; loans, mortgages, and financial credit; and safe working conditions (including measures related to reproductive health). Except there's one huge problem: the United States is one of the States Parties that has never ratified its commitment to CEDAW. Therefore, OFWs working in the US do so at the mercy of Federal law, especially when Philippine embassies and consular offices claim to be over-burdened already.
That's just one reason why human rights advocates paid such close attention to President Bush's most recent State-of-the-Union Address, on January 24 this year. Bush announced that he would be pushing for a comprehensive reform of immigration laws, incluing a much-touted foreign "guest worker" program. Dubya regards these measures as being "without animosity" but also "without amnesty". As I understand it, this basically means that documented foreign contract workers get some of the benefits automatically recieved by ordinary American citizens, for the duration of their short-term labor contracts. This is meant as an incentive for workers to eventually sign up for legitimate citizenship (which remains a slow, labyrinthine process, post-9/11, even with all the technological efficiencies of a "First World" nation). However, as soon as a worker decides to over-stay (or "go TNT" -- tago ng tago, "always hiding"), they're on their own.
As one might guess, response to this announcement has been mixed. It's not uncommon to read articles like this one, with headlines proclaiming "FilAms cheer Bush's guest worker plan". But not everyone is uniformly pleased about the new measures. Responding to the news item linked above, Sociology professora Robyn Magalit Rodriguez comments:
ummm exactly who's cheering? recuitment agencies who profit from helping american firms import cheap filipino workers and the employers who hire them?
The main concern is that existing undocumented workers will end up being deported, or forcibly held in detention centers like the Hutto Family Residential Facility (a de facto prison for undocumented illegals), as their papers await processing within the Byzantine network of government bureaus.
But even as the debate continues in the U.S., worsening economic conditions over here ensure the growing lines of would-be OFWs outside the POEA offices. It's a hard life, one way or another -- for some, perhaps the indignities and uncertainty of H-2 "guest worker" status are more bearable than "going TNT" or enduring the poverty of our native land.
In every headline we are reminded
That this is not home for us
Bloc Party,
"Where Is Home?"
A clip from an episode of Speak Out (produced by The Filipino Channel) discussing Bush's proposed guest worker program. Originally aired September 17, 2006:
Labels: economics, governance, livelihood, politics
February 18, 2007
GUEST BLOGGER: Paolo Cruz (Dumpling Press)
Sass Rogando-Sasot uses a conversation with a Filipina domestic worker in Hong Kong as a jumping-off point for her smart critique of the Philippine Overseas Employment Agency's "competency training and assessment programme", which runs for two to three weeks, at a cost of PhP 10,000 - 15,000! To quote Miz Sass:
So let's see if I understand this correctly -- have a look at Article 11(d) of the UN Women's Convention, which our government has agreed to (in theory, at least). It qualifies the following basic rights: "equal remuneration, including benefits, and to equal treatment in respect to work of equal value." So, apparently, knowing how to work modern household gizmos and provide "hot and cold food beverage services" is of equal value to not being treated like [expletive deleted] by one's employers (foreign and otherwise). Which is also of "equal value" to ten thousand pesos. Yeah, that really sounds fair to me, doesn't it?
Article 11(f) of CEDAW provides for the right "to protection of health and to safety in working conditions." Apparently, in the POEA's view, this only applies to those who can pay for it.
Sass Rogando-Sasot uses a conversation with a Filipina domestic worker in Hong Kong as a jumping-off point for her smart critique of the Philippine Overseas Employment Agency's "competency training and assessment programme", which runs for two to three weeks, at a cost of PhP 10,000 - 15,000! To quote Miz Sass:
The rationale behind this programme is the tired ears of Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA). Flooded by stories of Filipino maids being abused by their employers for lack of necessary skills to operate appliances and gadgets, POEA came up with this 10,000 pesos required skills: house cleaning, laundry and ironing, preparation of hot and cold meals, and provision of hot and cold food and beverage services. POEAs compassion for maids is sincere -- it comes with a price tag. HORRENDOUS.
...
Labour Department secretary Arturo Brion considers the proposal as a long-term investment for maids, giving them better protection against abuses and making them more competent. Mr Brion said this programme is "not mandatory". It doesn't take a genius to know that your papers will be processed faster if you undergo it. Hence, it's semi-compulsory.
So let's see if I understand this correctly -- have a look at Article 11(d) of the UN Women's Convention, which our government has agreed to (in theory, at least). It qualifies the following basic rights: "equal remuneration, including benefits, and to equal treatment in respect to work of equal value." So, apparently, knowing how to work modern household gizmos and provide "hot and cold food beverage services" is of equal value to not being treated like [expletive deleted] by one's employers (foreign and otherwise). Which is also of "equal value" to ten thousand pesos. Yeah, that really sounds fair to me, doesn't it?
Article 11(f) of CEDAW provides for the right "to protection of health and to safety in working conditions." Apparently, in the POEA's view, this only applies to those who can pay for it.
Labels: economics, education, governance, livelihood
