September 18, 2015

Zarah

Book 1 of Labor code

Pre-employment to Recruitment and Placement of Workers covers up to Article 39, from Article 12 to Article 39. A word of caution, so many of the provisions between Art. 12 to 39 have been repealed. First, by RA 8042 “Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995”, which became effective in 1995. Subsequently, RA 8042 was drastically amended by RA 10022, which became effective May 9, 2010. Now, is that in your periodic copy of RA 10022? Do you have a copy? So here is your copy.

Q: What is recruitment and placement? A:

1. Any act of canvassing, enlisting, contracting, transporting, utilizing, hiring or procuring workers; and

2. Includes referrals, contact services, promising or advertising for employment, locally or abroad, whether for profit or not. (Art. 13 [b],LC)

Q: What are the essential elements in determining whether one recruitment/placement? A: It must be shown that:

1. The accused gave the complainant the distinct impression that she had the power or abilityto send the complainant for work,

2. Such that the latter was convinced to part with his money in order to be so employed. (People v. Goce, G.R. No. 113161, Aug. 29, 1995)

Q: Who is deemed engaged in recruitment and placement? A: Any person or entity which, in any manner, offers or promises for a fee employment to 2 or more persons. (Art. 13[b], LC)

Q: What is the rule in recruitment and placement? A: GR: No person or entity other than the public employment offices, shall engage in the recruitment and placement of workers XPN:

1. Construction contractors if authorized by the DOLE and Construction Industry Authority

2. Other persons or entities as may be authorized by SLE

3. Members of the diplomatic corps (but hiring must go through POEA)

4. Public employment offices Private recruitmen

t offices 5. Private employment agencies 6. POEA 7. Shipping or representatives 8. Name hires

Q: Who are names hires?A: They are individual workers who are able to secure contracts for overseas employment on their own efforts and representations without the assistance or participation of any agency. Their hiring, nonetheless, shall pass through the POEA for processing purposes. (Part III, Rule III, POEA Rules Governing Overseas Employment as amended in 2002)

Q: What if employment is offered to only one person? A: Immaterial. The number of persons dealt with is not an essential ingredient of the act of recruitment and placement of workers. The proviso merely lays down a rule of evidence that where a fee is collected in consideration of a promise or offer of employment to 2 or more prospective workers, the individual or entity dealing with them shall be deemed to be engaged in the act of recruitment and placement. The words "shall be deemed" create that presumption. (People v. Panis, G.R. L58674 77,‐ July 11, 1986)

Q: What is a private employment agency? A: Any person or entity engaged in the recruitment and placement of workers for a fee which is charged, directly or indirectly, from the workers or employers or both.

Q: What is a private recruitment agency? A: It is any person or association engaged in the recruitment and placement of workers without charging any fee, directly or indirectly, from the workers or employers.

Q: Who is a seaman? A: Any person employed in a vessel engaged in maritime navigation. *has the highest mandatory remittance= 60%* land-based= 40%

Q: What is overseas employmentA: It is employment of a worker outside the Philippines.

Q: Who is an overseas Filipino worker (OFW)? A: A person who is to be engaged, is engaged or has been engaged in a remunerated activity in a State of w

hich he or she is not a citizen or on board a vessel navigating the foreign seas other than a government ship used for military or noncommercial purposes or on an installation located offshore or on the high seas; to be used interchangeably with migrant worker. (Sec.2, R.A. 10022 amending R.A. 8042)

Q: Who is an emigrant? A: Any person, worker or otherwise, who emigrates to a foreign country by virtue of an immigrant visa or resident permit or its equivalent in the country of destination

Let me bring to your attention this recently decided case of SAMEER Overseas Placement Agency v. Cabilles (August 05, 2014).

SAMEER OVERSEAS PLACEMENT AGENCY, INC., v. JOY CABILLESAugust 5, 2014Justice Leonen

Petitioner is a recruitment and placement agency.

Joy C. Cabiles, submitted her application for a Quality Control job in Taiwan and signed with a one year employment contract for a monthly salary of NT$15,360.00. Sameer Overseas Agency required her to pay a placement fee of P70,000.00 when she signed the employment contract.

She was deployed to work in Taiwan for Wacoal, but was given a position as a cutter.

Petitioner claims that on July 14 1997, a certain Mr. Huwang from Wacoal informed Joy, without prior notice, that she was terminated and that she should immediately report to their office to get her salary and passport. She was asked to prepare for immediate repatriation.

She was told that she only earned a total of NT$9,000 from June 26 to July 14, 1997. NT$3,000 was deducted to cover her plane ticket to Manila.

Subsequently, Cabiles filed a complaint with the NLRC against petitioner and Wacoal. She claimed that she was illegally dismissed. She askedd for the return of her placement fee, the withheld amount for repatriation costs, payment of her salary for 2* months as #ell as moral and e8emplary damages. She

identified Wacoal as Sameer Overseas Placement Agency’s foreign principal

SAMEER’s Defense: Respondent’s termination was due to her

inefficiency, negligence in her duties and her failure to comply with the work requirements of her foreign employer.

It claimed that it did not ask for placement fee

Wacoal’s accreditation with petitioner had already been transferred to the Pacific Manpower on august 6, 1997. Thus, obligation is substituted with Pacific, which the latter denied.

Labor Arbiter’s Ruling: Case was dismissed; complaint was based on

mere allegations No excess payment of placement fees, based

on the OR presented Transfer of obligation to Pacific is immaterial

NLRC Ruling: Joy Cabiles was illegally dismissed The burden of proof that the dismissal is

based on just or valid cause belongs to the employer

It found that the petitioner failed to prove that there were just causes for termination.

CA: Affirmed. Remanded the case to NLRC to

address the validity of petitioner’s allegations against Pacific.

SC: Respondent Joy Cabiles, having been illegally

dismissed, is entitled to her salary for the unexpired portion of the employment contract that was violated together with attorney’s fees and reimbursement of amounts withheld from her salary.

Republic Act No. 10022 was promulgated on March 8, 2010. This means that the reinstatement of the clause in Republic Act No. 8042 was not yet in effect at the time of respondent’s termination from work in 1997. Republic Act No. 8042 before it was amended by Republic Act No. 10022 governs this case.

The reinstated clause, this time as provided in Republic Act. No. 10022, violates the constitutional rights to equal protection and due process

As observed, illegally dismissed overseas workers whose employment contracts had a term of less than one year were granted the

amount equivalent to the unexpired portion of their employment contracts. Meanwhile, illegally dismissed overseas workers with employment terms of at least a year were granted a cap equivalent to three months of their salary for the unexpired portions of their contracts.

The clause, "or for three (3) months for every year of the unexpired term, whichever is less" in Section 7 of Republic Act No. 10022 amending Section 10 of Republic Act No. 8042 is declared unconstitutional and, therefore, null and void.

En Banc decision, penned by Justice Marvic Leonen, the most recent addition to the Supreme Court. Justice Leonen is the former dean of UP Law School and he is the principal author of infamous BBL. Because he brought this law together, and as a prize he was appointed to the Supreme Court. He comes up with this En Banc decision, which has something to do with the very controversial provision of RA 10022. Now, this landmark case I gave this to 2014 batch for Bar examination. Noticed that this is August 05, 2014 decision. This is already beyond the cut off. But nevertheless, I took it upon myself to give it those who will take the Bar examination, because it’s an unusual decision and I consider it to be tempting for the Bar Examiner to ask it. How do they do it? They will just make it hypothetical, then it happens to be just like the case. And sure enough it come out. That’s why our batch as a class in AdDU scored the highest in Labor, because something like 3 cases here came out. Tsamba ra ‘to.

Now, why is this case very important? First of all it violates the political principle of judicial review. You know very well that the text of the law, its provision, is ultimately what the Supreme Court says it and becomes part of the law of the land. The Supreme Court always refrains from rendering, whether or not a law is constitutional, because it does not want to take over the job of the Legislature. You know the legislative power is plenary in nature. There is no such thing as a law that cannot be amended. The Congress has plenary powers. But it is the Supreme Court’s power to measure that law, whether or not that law is in conformity with the Constitution.

Now, when does the Court do that? The court does that when it has no longer a choice. It can interpret the provision in such a manner as to escape, holding it as unconstitutional. The court will do that, because it behooves upon this court to assume on becoming modesty in correcting the two equal branch of the government.

So, unless there is a case, that is actual case and the provision of the law is applicable to this case. And not only that there is no choice but to interpret the provision, the interpretation is the very lis mota, no other choice, then the SC is forced to render the law as unconstitutional.

Now, sure enough that is a clear, you must have a justiciable case before you can render a law unconstitutional. Here there is no justiciable case. Because the applicable law is an old law, before this law (RA 10022) became effective. And let the court renders RA 10022 as unconstitutional. Matapang si Leonen, and it is unanimous, en banc, and there is no dissenting opinion. Why? There is no case ha, the case admittedly happened before the law became effective and yet he uses this law and says it’s unconstitutional because of this case. You can see why this is very tempting. Why the examiner will use this. Because it is unprecedented. Now, Leonen does this, you can really see his scholarship, because there was a similar case like this and the SC, in division, said, we cannot hold this provision of RA 10022, because it is not yet in effect when this case happened. So when relate it to another case, the court said that in division. Here comes Leonen, as appointed, and this case happens and Leonen says this Court holds this provision as unconstitutional. Why is that? Because the provision in question was already unconstitutional in RA 8042. And then Congress, legislates it again, incorporates it to RA 10022 without any change. So it’s a completely identical provision of law, re-enacted in a new law when before it’s already held to be unconstitutional.

Now, what is that controversial provision? The controversial provision is Section 10 of RA 8042. Subsequently re-enacted in Section 7 of RA 10022.

Now, that particular provision provides that an illegally terminated Overseas Contract Worker (OCW) is entitled to among other benefits, his salaries for the unexpired employment contract or for 3 months for every year of unexpired term, whichever is less. Now, in the case

rendering this provision unconstitutional, under Section 10 of RA 8042, the SC says this is unconstitutional because it is discriminatory. If you are locally employed, you are entitled to full back wages. You are entitled to reinstatement. If you cannot be reinstated, then you are entitled to for separation benefits including 1 month salary for every year of service. Your complete service is counted. Now, just because you are an overseas worker, you are given a choice, unexpired portion of your contract or 3 months of every year of unexpired term, whichever is less. Why do you get less just because you are OCW. It is discriminatory.

Now, what is the reason why the court judges this as unconstitutional even though there is no relation to this case. Because this case is still covered by RA 8042.

This is the reasoning, the ratio decidendi, given by Leonen:

1. When a law or a provision of law is null because it is inconsistent with the Constitution, the nullity cannot be cured by reincorporation or re-enactment of the same or a similar law or provision. A law or provision of law that was already declared unconstitutional remains as such unless circumstances have so changed as to warrant a reverse conclusion.

2. The new law puts our overseas workers in the same vulnerable position as they were prior to Serrano. Failure to reiterate the very ratio decidendi of that case will result in the same untold economic hardships that our reading of the Constitution intended to avoid. Obviously, we cannot countenance added expenses for further litigation that will reduce their hard- earned wages as well as add to the indignity of having been deprived of the protection of our laws simply because our precedents have not been followed. There is no constitutional doctrine that causes injustice in the face of empty procedural niceties. Constitutional interpretation is complex, but it is never unreasonable.

So those were the reasons given by the Supreme Court why it made an exemption in this particular case.

Alright, if you points with respects with recruitment and placement. This old by laws is a continuing violation of the Code. Nobody has brought out yet to the

International Court. But most countries had already come into an agreement that just like finances, which are no longer have borders, labor should no longer have any restrictions as to as its mobility. So you should be able to work anywhere in the world, where you are qualified. Kung nakabalo pa lang ta sa balaod, miski asa unta ta makatrabaho. You know in the Philippines the practice of law requires citizenship. You cannot take the bar if you are not Filipino. But in United States and many other jurisdiction, you don’t need a citizenship. You don’t need to be a resident and citizen of the US so that you can take the Bar examination. Bar examination in New York, we have here faculty members who passed the New York Bar examination. Mas sayon pa mupasar sa NY Bar kaysa diri sa Pilipinas. Lima lang ka subjects: Obligations and Contracts, Family law, Criminal Justice, Civil Procedure (Federal), State Procedure, 50 States Legal Ethics exam. Mao ran na. When you take the Bar exam in NY you will not know what subject you will take for the day, you only know the last subject. x x x

Jan Kristy

So, anywhere in the world, you should be able to work. But this law has many requirements to be able to work outside, because this law prohibits so called direct hiring.

Q: What is Direct hiring?‐ A: It is when an employer hires a Filipino worker for overseas employment without going through the POEA or entities authorized by the Secretary of Labor.

Q: What is the ban on direct hiring?‐ A: GR: An Er may only hire Filipino worker for overseas employment through POEA or entities authorized by DOLE. XPN: Direct hiring by1.International organizations 2. Name hires3. Members of the diplomatic organizations 4. Other Ers as may be allowed by DOLE

Q: Why is direct hiring‐ prohibited? A:

1. To ensure the best possible terms and conditions of employment for the worker.

2. To assure the foreign Er that he hires only qualified Filipino workers.

3. To ensure full regulation of employment in order to avoid exploitation

A foreign employer cannot hire you directly. That is prohibited. Foreign employer cannot hire you directly. Of course there are exceptions. Like if you are an organization with a personality under international law. World Health, UNICEF, all this different international organizations with personality under international law. They can hire directly. Emphasis, all governments-- they can hire directly. But that is violated many times. What they do is, after they have a direct hiring for a foreign employer, they report to the POEA and the POEA grants an exemption.

You can now what is this, you should be able to work anywhere. Now why do I say this, because you know RA 8042 that was amended by RA 10022 , there is a proviso there that says that this law is only good for 5 years after which there will no longer be licensing or issuing of permits of recruitment and placement agencies.

Now, that particular provision has just been glossed over and the regulations. Why is that? Because the Philippines and the legislature still feels the need that our nationals working outside continue to need protection. Now it’s very difficult to provide protection because our labor laws are only municipal laws they are not effective beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the Philippines. So they have devised schemes by which the foreign principals are still made liable for unfair treatment of our workers. How do they do that-- by making the placement agencies, the recruitment agencies liable solidarily with the foreign principals. That is what they do. That is the plan, that is the structure.

Q: What is the liability of the private employment agency and the principal or foreign based‐ employer?

A: They are jointly and severally liable for any violation of the recruitment agreement and the contracts of employment.

Note: This joint and solidary liability imposed by law against recruitment agencies and foreign Ers is meant to assure the aggrieved worker of immediate and sufficient payment of what is due him. If the recruitment/placement agency is a juridical being, the corporate officers and directors and partners a

s the case may be, shall themselves be jointly and solidarily liable with the corporation or partnership for the claims and damages. (Becmen Service Exporter and Promotion v. Cuaresma, G.R. Nos. 182978 79,‐ April 7, 2009

How do you make the foreign principals liable? By going after the placement agencies. So the placement agencies must be licensed or must have permits. They must have license or permits. License if you are fee charging-- you are required to have a license. If you are not fee charging, then you need a permit. You need that authority according to Art 13. Definitions, Letter F - Authority means a document issued by the DOLE authorizing a person or association to engage in recruitment and placement activities as a private recruitment entity. Private recruitment entity under letter E means there is no charge--without charging directly or indirectly any free from workers or employees.

Q: What is a license? A: It is issued by DOLE authorizing a person or entity to operate a private employment agency.

Q: What is an Authority? A: It is a document issued by the DOLE authorizing a person or association to engage in recruitment and placement activities as a private recruitment entity. Q: Who is a non licensee‐ / non holder‐ of authority?

A: Any person, corporation or entity: 1. Which has not been issued a valid license or a

uthority to engage in recruitment and placement by the Secretary of Labor and Employment (SLE) or

2. Whose license or authority has been suspended, revoked or cancelled by the POEA or the SLE

Q: What are the grounds for revocation of license? A:

1. Incurring an accumulated 3 counts of suspension by an agency based on final and executory orders within the period of validity of its license.

2. Violations of the conditions of license 3. Engaging in acts of misrepresentation for the

purpose of securing a license or renewal 4. Engaging in the recruitment or placement of

workers to jobs harmful to the public health

or morality or to the dignity of the country. (Sec. 3, Rule I, Book VI, Rules and Regulations Governing Overseas Employment)

Q: What are the grounds for suspension or cancellation of license? A:

1. Prohibited acts under Art. 34 2. Publishing job announcements w/o POEA’s a

pproval 3. Charging a fee which may be in excess of the

authorized amount before a worker is employed

4. Deploying workers w/o processing through POEA Recruitment in places outside its authorized area. (Sec. 4, Rule II, Book IV, POEA Rules)

Q: Is the license or authority transferable? A: No, they are non transferable.‐ (Art. 29

So, now what government agency is in charge of placement and recruitment? That is the POEA, the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration. They issue, they give permits, and they also cancel permits. That is the___ it’s not the POEA that cancels permits, it is the Secretary of Labor. The POEA can suspend. But this POEA has what you call, if you will read the law, it has visitorial powers over placement and recruitment agencies.

Visitorial powers, that means, at anytime of the day or night as long as these recruitment agencies are open they can come in, ask for the contracts, ask for the list of principals-- all the requirements of licensure of recruitment agencies.

Now, there are prohibitions of course in engaging in recruitment and placement. You are required to have Filipino capital of at least 70% Filipino, 30 % Foreign is allowed. That is 70%. Remember in the Constitution what is a Filipino corporation for purposes of owning property—60-40 but here disqualified. It’s 70-30. And then there are certain people that cannot engage in recruitment agencies like those that are employed in the DO? If you have a business which is a travel agency you are involved in selling plane tickets for going abroad on tours etc. you cannot be allowed or granted permit to agent in recruitment. Why is that? What is the reason why do you think? Many problems complaints of overseas contract workers tagaan ticket lupad sila abot didto wla diay trabaho.

Eve

... Daghan gyud, mga Pilipino, tripulante. So it’s a big source of employment. That’s one of the reasons why, the dollar inward remittances is closer now to 30B dollars a year, that’s more than 2B dollars a month. The remittances, that’s one of the biggest industries diri sa Philippines. Kanang call center, medyo katunga pa ana, kay dako man kaayo.

Now, when this Vir-Jen Shipping trilogy cases happened, first it was decided in Division, and it said that the first contract is valid, the second contract is not valid. Then there was a second case, decided by the Supreme Court in Division, and the second case said, the second contract is valid, the first contract is not valid. So Vir-Jen Shipping asked for a decision en banc.

Vir-Jen Shipping and Marine Services v. NLRC, G.R. No. L-58011 & L-58012 November 18, 1983, EN BANC, GUTIERREZ, JR., J.

Certain seamen entered into a contract of employment for a 12-month period. Some three months after the commencement of their employment, the seamen demanded a 50% increase of their salaries and benefits. The seamen demanded this increase while their vessel was en route to a port in Australia controlled by the International Transport Worker’s Federation (ITF) where the ITF could detain the vessel unless it paid its seamen the ITF rates. The agent of the owner of the vessel agreed to pay a 25% increase, but when the vessel arrived in Japan shortly afterwards, the seamen were repatriated to Manila and their contracts were terminated. National Seamen Board (NSB), upheld the cancellation of the contracts of employment of the seamen, but on appeal, the NLRC ruled that the termination was illegal. Second Division of the Supreme Court held that the seamen’s dismissal was legal. Then a motion for reconsideration was filed with the Supreme Court en banc which gave its due course, after finding that there was a need to reconcile the decision of the Second Division with that of the First Division in the Wallen Decision which had ruled that the termination of the seamen was illegal. Issue: Whether or not the termination of the seamen was illegal.Held: The termination of the contract of the seamen was illegal. Filipino seamen are admittedly as competent and reliable as seamen from any other country in the world. It is competence and reliability, not cheap labor, that makes our seamen so greatly in

demand. Because of these, the court holds that neither the NSB nor the NLRC should as a matter of official policy, legitimize and enforce dubious arrangements where shipowners and seamen enter into fictitious contracts similar to the addendum agreements or side contracts in this case whose purpose is to deceive. The Republic of the Philippines and its ministries and agencies should present a more honorable and proper posture in official acts to the whole world, notwithstanding our desire to have as many job openings both here and abroad for our workers. At the very least, such as sensitive matter involving no less than our dignity as a people and the welfare of our workingmen must proceed from the Batasang Pambansa in the form of policy legislation, not from administrative rule making or adjudication.

Fr. Gus: The ponente of the decision en banc was Justice Hugo Gutierrez, and in his decision he said, the basic argument why they are asked to close our eyes to this irregularity of the first contract being supplanted by a second contract is the age-old axiom that, you should not kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. Overseas employment is the source of so much dollar remittances in the Philippines and supporting so many ___. If we don’t play along with this depressed labor market now, we might lose the market.

Kay kurakot may nadawat, nagka-anam nagka-lagom sa panit, nagkaubos ang sweldo, Sri Lankans --- You don’t realize the difficulty that you have. All five nationalities in the same crew. Unsa may kan-on ninyo? Ang uban dira gusto’g halang, ang uban dira di kaagwanta ug kahalang. Kinsay magpatigbabaw ana. You don’t realize the value of the ship captain. The ship captain is not only the master at ship navigation, but he must be master at disciplining men, mga naa dira confined. Kapitan ka’g barko, kailangan, naa kay kaisog, kay para kahadlukan ka’g tao ba, daghan buang-buang. Naa pay mga dagko kaayo’g lawas, mga bunguton. Unsaon man na nimo pagdala?

Then Hugo Gutierrez says this court rules that it is the first contract that should be upheld. And anything that is detracted of that first contract is void.

But has that practice stopped? No, it has not stop. This tells you again that it’s very difficult for the law to amend the prevailing market wage --- arang kalisod. Because that continues up to now. Samtang naa pay mga substandard ships, kanang mga karaan nang bapor.

Asa gud na dapita? Naa pa ni sa Pilipinas hah. It’s already cheaper for the Philippines to buy gasoline diesel from Singapore because Singapore is already a major market, stock market for finished oil products. Kanang mga gamay, Burma, wala pa man na silay kaayoy refineries. Adto na sila nagbitbit, daghan mag sobra sobra dira. Sometimes their oil, daghan sila’g sobra nga oil. Their refineries are so advanced that they begin to be choosy. If your oil has a very high content of sulphur it’s very expensive to refine it. And it’s also destructive to the refinery mao din a dawaton sa mga dakong refineries sa Singapore. Kinsa may mudawat ana? Kanang atong karaan na kaayong refinery diri nga hapit na maguba. It’s kept working by Elmer’s Glue . Karaan na kaayo hapit na mabungkag mao na ang murefine, barato na kaayo ang cost. The ships that carry them, kanang mga kagang-kagang na nga mga floating coffins mga gubaon na gyud kaayo. Ang mga bagong trainees tripulante di na kamao mupadagan ana, kinsa may makapadagan ana, Engineer ----- didto nga ---- usahay isa nalang ka computer ang nagapadagan ana. Pero the leasing cost is very low, because you lease it at your own risk, at least ihatag nalang na’g free, mao nay irisk.

That’s why, in the United States, what is the price of oil now per barrel? They always say, Brent West Crude. That is the high end, or the West Texas Crude, mao na nay high-end dira mubase ang presyo. But there are other oils that are lower because they are low grade. Mao na mudaghan na gani na, malipay ang Philippines kay kita ray makakuha ana, --- dalhon na diri, lease crude carriers.

But then they have this very large crude carriers 12 thousand dead weight tons basig baynte pa ka tao makapadagan, makadala pa sila asa ilang family. Ang mga opisyal, naa ang asawa. Kuha sila’g oil sa Saudi Arabia, dad-on nila all the way to Japan, 23 days. Pag-abot sa Japan, naog ang asawa sakay ang anak, puli, balik nasad. Dagko kaayo sa katanan. Those are the latest ships that can now be accommodated by the expanded Suez Canal. Kanang ---

We do not have a school for seamen, to be qualified to man VLCCs (Very Large Crude Carriers), computer kuan man na, wa man ta ana dinhi, we have to go abroad. Our new captains, they have to undergo upgrade, training, --- all these----

Now, there is also this particular area on compulsory insurance. Which is now mandated by RA 10022 (Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995 as amended).

The recruiter, the recruitment company or manning agency is required to make the principal, the foreign principal, obtain compulsory insurance for each overseas Filipino worker that they hire. And it must involve, insurance covering accidental death, natural death, permanent/total disablement and then insurance covering repatriation cost. So this is one of the added features of 10022.

Now, there is this controversy of seamen overseas contract workers that are made to undergo medical examination. Before you are deployed, you must undergo medical examination.

My question is, who pays for that examination? Now it is already very clear under 10022 that if the principal, or the recruitment agency, requires a specific medical doctor or institution to conduct the medical examination, then it must answer for the medical examination. Now if what is required is just a specific medical examination, they do not require specific doctor or a specific hospital or institution, then the OCW is free to look for his preferred doctor or hospital, and it is he who pays it.

Now, you might think that that is well settled, it’s not settled. Why? Because, for OCWs that are already immigrants, they have another physical examination, what is that? The physical examination required by country receiving them and all these embassies have their own designation physicians.

Mumigrate dayon ka sa Canada, sa Norway, sa Finland, naa man silay kaugalingong medical examination, unya naa silay accredited doctor --- di man ka kapangita ug maskin kinsa lang nga doctor dira ---- strikto an kaayo na, ikaw pay mubayad. Now these examinations are not covered by 10022, because we are talking about the medical examination required by the foreign principal, not the embassy. The embassy cannot ----. The US embassy ---accredited doctor, subject them to this ---.

RA 10022, has expanded illegal recruitment. You know there are 2 kinds of illegal recruitment. If there is anything that you should study well here, it is illegal recruitment, why? Because that is the one that is always asked in the bar examination. High-profile man gud nang illegal recruitment.

Q: Who are the persons prohibited from engaging the business of recruiting migrant workers? A:

1. Unlawful for any official or Ee of the:a. DOLE

b. POEA c. Overseas Workers Welfare

Administration (OWWA)d. DFA e. Other gov’t agencies involved in the impl

ementation of this Act 3. Travel Agencies4. Their relatives within the 4th civil degree of c

onsanguinity or affinity, to engage, directly or indirectly in the business of recruiting migrant workers. (Sec. 8, R.A. 8042)

Q: What are the elements of Illegal Recruitment? A:

1. Offender is a non licensee‐ or non holder‐ of authority to lawfully engage in the recruitment/placement of workers

2. Offender undertakes: a. Any act of canvassing, enlisting, contracti

ng, transporting, utilizing, hiring or procuring workers, and includes referrals, contact services, promising or advertising for employment, locally or abroad, whether for profit or not (Art. 13[b]); or

b. Any of prohibited practices under Art. 3

Q: When is there Simple Illegal Recruitment? A: It is considered simple illegal recruitment when it involves less than three (3) victims or recruiters

Q: What is the difference between the LC and R.A. 8042 or the Overseas Filipinos and Overseas Migrant Workers Act?

LC (Art. 38) RA 8042, as amended by RA 10022

Local recruitment Applies to recruitment for overseas employment

Illegal recruitment under Art. 38 means any recruitment activity including prohibited acts under Art. 34 committed by non- licensees or non- holders of authority

Illegal recruitment under Sec. 6 means any activity committed by non-licensees/ non- holders of authority or prohibited acts (same as Art. 34, LC)

Added to the following in the list:

1. Failure to actually deploy without valid reason;

2. Failure to

reimburse expenses incurred by the worker in connection with his/ her documentation and processing for purposes of deployment;

3. To allow a non-Filipino citizen to head or manage a licensed recruitment/ manning agency.

Now the definition of illegal recruitment, is still here, the basic definition, it’s in the law --- illegal recruitment. But it has been expanded by 8042, and it has been further expanded by 10022.

RA 10022 now makes it illegal recruitment, even if you are a licensed recruiter. Before, since your license is location specific, you will be allowed to ---- you are allowed to recruit within Pasay City, so you put up your office in Pasay City, outside of Pasay City you cannot include. If you do that is a violation of you license. But under 10022, that is illegal recruitment, so you can be subjected to criminal action. Now, 2 kinds of illegal recruitment:

1. Ordinary illegal recruitment2. Illegal recruitment that constitutes economic

sabotage, and therefore that has the maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

Q: When is illegal recruitment considered as economic sabotage?

A: When it is committed: 1. By a syndicate – carried out by 3 or more per

sons conspiring/confederating with one another or

2. In large scale – committed against 3 or more persons individually or as a group. (Sec. 6, 10022

Eliz

Now, the list is very long, of the ways by which you will commit illegal recruitment. Taas kayo ni, bisag ang

driver sa mga gi-illegally recruit, can be convicted of illegal recruitment. You read it once, so that you will see.

Q: What are prohibited practices in recruitment/placement (Art. 34.)? A:

1. Furnishing or publishing any false notice/information/document related to recruitment/employment

2. Failure to file reports required by SLE 3. Inducing or attempting to induce a worke

r already employed to quit his employment in order to offer him another unless the transfer is designed to liberate a worker from oppressive terms and conditions

4. Recruitment/placement of workers in jobs harmful to public health or morality or to the dignity of the country

5. Engaging directly or indirectly in the management of a travel agency

6. Substituting or altering employment contracts without approval of DOLE

7. Charging or accepting any amount greater than that specified by DOLE or make a worker pay any amount greater than actually received by him

8. Committing any act of misrepresentation to secure a license or authority

9. Influencing or attempting to influence any person/entity not to employ any worker who has not applied of employment through his agency

10. Obstructing or attempting to obstruct inspection by representatives SLE or by his

11. Withholding or denying travel documents from applicant workers before departure for monetary considerations other than authorized by law

12. Granting a loan to an OFW which will be used for payment of legal and allowable placement fees

13. Refusing to condone or renegotiate a loan incurred by an OFW after his employment contract has been prematurely terminated through no fault of his or her own

14. For a suspended recruitment/manning agency to engage in any kind of recruitment activity including the processing of pending applications;

15. For a recruitment/manning agency or a foreign principal/ Er to pass on the OFW or deduct from his or her salary the payme

nt of the cost of insurance fees, premium or other insurance related charges, as provided under the compulsory worker's insurance coverage

16. Imposing a compulsory and exclusive arrangement whereby an OFW is required to:a. Avail a loan only from specifically desi

gnated institutions, entities or persons

b. To undergo health examinations only from specifically designated medical, entities or persons, except seafarers whose medical examination cost is shouldered by the shipowner

c. To undergo training of any kind only from designated institutions, entities or persons, recommendatory except for trainings mandated by principals/ ship- owners. (Sec. 6, R.A. 10022)

Remember it’s the regular courts that has jurisdiction over criminal cases. As to the administrative aspect the POEA or it is the Labor Arbiter.

Labor Arbiter, where? As to venue, residence of the victim or the one the Labor Arbiter that has jurisdiction over the place where any of the elements of the illegal recruitment occur. Apil mana sa contrata didto sa Manila, after you go to the labor arbiter, the choice is always the victim.

JurisdictionLabor Arbiter POEAOriginal and exclusive jurisdiction over all claims arising out of Ee- Er relationship or by virtue of any law or contract involving OFWs including claims for:

1. Actual2. Moral3. Exemplary4. Other forms of

damages (Sec. 10, RA 8042)

Original and exclusive jurisdiction over:

1. All cases which are administrative in character relating to licensing and registration of recruitment and employment agencies

2. Disciplinary Action cases and other special cases, which are administrative in character,

involving Ees, principals, contracting partners and Filipino migrant workers. (Rule VII, Book VII, POEA Rules)

Section 5, perteng taasa ini.

RA 10022

Section 5. Section 6 of Republic Act No. 8042, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows:

"SEC. 6. Definition. - For purposes of this Act, illegal recruitment shall mean any act of canvassing, enlisting, contracting, transporting, utilizing, hiring, or procuring workers and includes referring, contract services, promising or advertising for employment abroad, whether for profit or not, when undertaken by non-licensee or non-holder of authority contemplated under Article 13(f) of Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended, otherwise known as the Labor Code of the Philippines: Provided, That any such non-licensee or non-holder who, in any manner, offers or promises for a fee employment abroad to two or more persons shall be deemed so engaged. It shall likewise include the following acts, whether committed by any person, whether a non-licensee, non-holder, licensee or holder of authority:

"(a) To charge or accept directly or indirectly any amount greater than that specified in the schedule of allowable fees prescribed by the Secretary of Labor and Employment, or to make a worker pay or acknowledge any amount greater than that actually received by him as a loan or advance;

"(b) To furnish or publish any false notice or information or document in relation to recruitment or employment;

"(c) To give any false notice, testimony, information or document or commit any act of misrepresentation for the purpose of securing a license or authority under the Labor Code, or for the purpose of documenting hired workers with the POEA, which include the act of reprocessing workers through a job

order that pertains to nonexistent work, work different from the actual overseas work, or work with a different employer whether registered or not with the POEA;

"(d) To include or attempt to induce a worker already employed to quit his employment in order to offer him another unless the transfer is designed to liberate a worker from oppressive terms and conditions of employment;

"(e) To influence or attempt to influence any person or entity not to employ any worker who has not applied for employment through his agency or who has formed, joined or supported, or has contacted or is supported by any union or workers' organization;

"(f) To engage in the recruitment or placement of workers in jobs harmful to public health or morality or to the dignity of the Republic of the Philippines;

"(h) To fail to submit reports on the status of employment, placement vacancies, remittance of foreign exchange earnings, separation from jobs, departures and such other matters or information as may be required by the Secretary of Labor and Employment;

"(i) To substitute or alter to the prejudice of the worker, employment contracts approved and verified by the Department of Labor and Employment from the time of actual signing thereof by the parties up to and including the period of the expiration of the same without the approval of the Department of Labor and Employment;

"(j) For an officer or agent of a recruitment or placement agency to become an officer or member of the Board of any corporation engaged in travel agency or to be engaged directly or indirectly in the management of travel agency;

"(k) To withhold or deny travel documents from applicant workers before departure for monetary or financial considerations, or for any other reasons, other than those authorized under the Labor Code and its implementing rules and regulations;

"(l) Failure to actually deploy a contracted worker without valid reason as determined by the Department of Labor and Employment;

"(m) Failure to reimburse expenses incurred by the

worker in connection with his documentation and processing for purposes of deployment, in cases where the deployment does not actually take place without the worker's fault. Illegal recruitment when committed by a syndicate or in large scale shall be considered an offense involving economic sabotage; and

"(n) To allow a non-Filipino citizen to head or manage a licensed recruitment/manning agency.

"Illegal recruitment is deemed committed by a syndicate if carried out by a group of three (3) or more persons conspiring or confederating with one another. It is deemed committed in large scale if committed against three (3) or more persons individually or as a group.

"In addition to the acts enumerated above, it shall also be unlawful for any person or entity to commit the following prohibited acts:

"(1) Grant a loan to an overseas Filipino worker with interest exceeding eight percent (8%) per annum, which will be used for payment of legal and allowable placement fees and make the migrant worker issue, either personally or through a guarantor or accommodation party, postdated checks in relation to the said loan;

"(2) Impose a compulsory and exclusive arrangement whereby an overseas Filipino worker is required to avail of a loan only from specifically designated institutions, entities or persons;

"(3) Refuse to condone or renegotiate a loan incurred by an overseas Filipino worker after the latter's employment contract has been prematurely terminated through no fault of his or her own;

"(4) Impose a compulsory and exclusive arrangement whereby an overseas Filipino worker is required to undergo health examinations only from specifically designated medical clinics, institutions, entities or persons, except in the case of a seafarer whose medical examination cost is shouldered by the principal/shipowner;

"(5) Impose a compulsory and exclusive arrangement whereby an overseas Filipino worker is required to undergo training, seminar, instruction or schooling of any kind only from specifically designated institutions, entities or persons, except for

recommendatory trainings mandated by principals/shipowners where the latter shoulder the cost of such trainings;

"(6) For a suspended recruitment/manning agency to engage in any kind of recruitment activity including the processing of pending workers' applications; and

"(7) For a recruitment/manning agency or a foreign principal/employer to pass on the overseas Filipino worker or deduct from his or her salary the payment of the cost of insurance fees, premium or other insurance related charges, as provided under the compulsory worker's insurance coverage.

"The persons criminally liable for the above offenses are the principals, accomplices and accessories. In case of juridical persons, the officers having ownership, control, management or direction of their business who are responsible for the commission of the offense and the responsible employees/agents thereof shall be liable.

"In the filing of cases for illegal recruitment or any of the prohibited acts under this section, the Secretary of Labor and Employment, the POEA Administrator or their duly authorized representatives, or any aggrieved person may initiate the corresponding criminal action with the appropriate office. For this purpose, the affidavits and testimonies of operatives or personnel from the Department of Labor and Employment, POEA and other law enforcement agencies who witnessed the acts constituting the offense shall be sufficient to prosecute the accused.

"In the prosecution of offenses punishable under this section, the public prosecutors of the Department of Justice shall collaborate with the anti-illegal recruitment branch of the POEA and, in certain cases, allow the POEA lawyers to take the lead in the prosecution. The POEA lawyers who act as prosecutors in such cases shall be entitled to receive additional allowances as may be determined by the POEA Administrator.

"The filing of an offense punishable under this Act shall be without prejudice to the filing of cases punishable under other existing laws, rules or regulations.”

Illegal recruitment is deemed committed by a syndicate carried out by a group of three (3) or more persons

conspiring or confederating with one another. It is deemed committed in large scale if committed against three (3) or more persons individually or as a group. So that makes it meriting life imprisonment.

There are aggravating circumstances:

If the one committing it is a government official Foreigner

So, in fact there are 8, to fail to submit reports of the status of employment, which consist of remittance of foreign exchange earnings, separation from the job, departures and such other matters or information as may be provided by the Secretary of Labor.

That is illegal recruitment, tan-awa na ha pagkataas sa listahan sa illegal recruitment.

It shall likewise include the following acts whether committed by any person, whether a non- licensing, non- holder licensing, or holder of authority or license. So you can commit. Before you can, you cannot commit unfair liber practice once. You cannot commit illegal once you have a license. Now, even you have a license you can commit.

Q: Can SLE issue search warrants or warrants of arrest? A: No. Only a judge may issue search and arrest warrants. Art 38 (c) of the Labor Code is unconstitutional inasmuch as it gives the SLE the power to issue search or arrest warrants. The labor authorities must go through the judicial process.

Q: Is compromise agreement on money claims allowed?

A: Yes. Consistent with the policy encouraging amicable settlement of labor disputes, Sec. 10 of R.A. 8042 allows resolution by compromise of cases filed with the NLRC.

Q: When shall compromise agreements on money claims be paid?

A: Any compromise/amicable settlement or voluntary agreement on money claims inclusive of damages shall be paid within 4 months from the approval of the settlement by the appropriate authority

Now, another addition is this so called legal assistance fund. If you are OCW in a place where there is pronounced presence of Filipino Overseas Workers. Like Hongkong, Taiwan, Jeddah all these places were the reason why the Filipino Consulate or Embassy must be open 24 hours a day, every day so that any OCW can access the official office. Again, if you are a resident abroad, ___ you will report to the embassy, and the embassy is obliged to procure a local lawyer to assist you. Not just a lawyer of the embassy. Who will answer for the fees? The legal assistance funds that is being set up. If there is an emergency, man-made or natural.

Sa Chile 7.9 or 8.3 earthquake, tidal wave. Nay Filipino? Naa juy Filipino didto, gusto na siya mupauli wala siya’y kwarta. At a time of natural calamity, the Overseas Welfare Fund must provide him with a money. These are the provision…

Now, if you are a minor, you discovered ____ in Tokyo. The law says mandatory repatriation. If you are a minor, found in the hospitals in abroad, mandatory repatriation. It is the fund that must shoulder your transportation.

Now, what is these places where employment is forbidden?

Q: May the POEA, at any time terminate or impose a ban on employment of migrant workers?

A: Yes, in consultation with the DFA based on the ff. grounds:

1. In pursuit of the National Interest or2. When public welfare so requires. (Sec. 4 R.A.

10022)

Q: What are the minimum conditions/ provisions of overseas employment contracts?

A:1. Guaranteed wages for regular hours and over

time, not lower than the minimum wage prescribed in all of the ff: a. The host country b.Bilateral agreements or international conventions ratified by the host country and the Philippines The Philippines

2. Free transportation to and from the worksite or offsetting benefit

3. Free food and accommodation or offsetting benefit

4. Just/authorized causes of termination of the contract or services of the worker

Note: An agreement that diminishes the Ees pay and benefits as contained in a POEA approved‐ contract is void, unless such subsequent agreement is approved by the POEA.

Q: What is the rule on deployment of OFWs?

A: The State shall allow the deployment of OFWs1. Only in countries where the rights of Filipino

migrant workers are protected. 2. To vessels navigating the foreign seas or to in

stallations located offshore or on high seas whose owners/Ers are compliant with international laws and standards that protect the rights of migrant workers.

3. To companies and contractors with international operations: Provided, That they are compliant with standards, conditions and requirements, as embodied in the employment contracts prescribed by the POEA and in accordance with internationally accepted‐ standards. (Sec. 3, R.A. 10022 amending R.A. 8042)

Q: What are the guarantees of the receiving country for the protection of the rights of OFWs? A:

1. It has existing labor and social laws protecting the rights of workers, including migrant workers;

2. It is a signatory to and/or a ratifier of multilateral conventions, declarations or resolutions relating to the protection of workers, including migrant workers; and

3. It has concluded a bilateral agreement or arrangement with the government on the protection of the rights of OFWs. . (Sec. 3, R.A. 10022 amending R.A. 8042)

Provided, that the receiving country is taking positive, concrete measures to protect the rights of migrant workers in furtherance of any of the guarantees.

Note: In the absence of a clear showing that any of the guarantees exists in the country of destination of the migrant workers, no permit for deployment shall be issued by the POEA

Does the POEA have the authority to ban deployment? Because the other right that ____ against that right of the POEA is the freedom to travel. Don’t you have the freedom to assume the risks and go to Afghanistan or Iraq or where the ISIS is operating- Syria. Mao nay mga best people sa Syria, magbayad sila sa smuggler, unya musakay sila sa barko. Makapalit sila ug ticket para sa ilang train. Ang uban gikan sa Greece, muadto sila ug Serbia, unya muadto sila ug ____. Makita gani sila galakaw-lakaw, pagkadugay ana, manakay na ug train. Paunsa nimo ug sakay sa train kung wala kay kwarta? Ohh Kadto bitaw’ng tao, nga guwang- guwang na na laki nga nag-karga ug bata, unya gi-kodakan, nadiscover nga he is one of the top football coaches in Syria. So he is now hired by Spain to coach for their team. Lupad gud iyang family, tua na didto. Hired sya, one of the ____ coaches in Syria. So these are the best people in Syria. Kung ordinaryong tao pa na, dili ka makagawas sa Syria. Unsaon man nimo? Mangita ka ug ship, sakyan nimo. Kelangan naa kay kwarta . kana silang tanan, they are the best people. Mga doctors, engineers leaving Syria. Naa pa gyud mga GPS. Naunsa man pagkahibalo sa Greece kung natundan ba nila? Dili na sila magpataka. Nagpadala na sila ug coordinates. Kuyaw kayo sila kay naa man sila’y GPS, mga expensive na mga cellphones plus they have GPS. They can read coordinates and then they send to the police in Greece. Makadial pa sila ug 911 sa Greece. Like the people who crossed the Rio Grande in Mexico, so called wet packs. Mga kuan na eh, educated, intelligent people.

Now, if you are prohibited and you go there, mandatory expatriation. But then, ngano mana makaabot mana sila sa Afghanistan or sa Iraq? Primiro, legitimate mana ilang kuan sa Jeddah, sa Kuwait or miski asa lang dapita. Pag-abot nila sa Kuwait, aduna nay mga recruiter didto. Mu-ingon “musokol ka mudrive ka ining truck magkuha mo ug gasoline didto sa Afghanistan. Magconvoy mo. Ah, Filipino pa imo, basta mu-ingon ug convoy, mutry dayon na siya. Eh di tua na sila sa Iraq. Tuan a sila sa Afghanistan. Mao nang problema nga lisod. They have to be ___ because that is demanded by once you go____.

Q: What is the rule on repatriation? A: GR : The repatriation of the:

1. Worker and the transport of his personal belongings shall‐ be the primary responsibility of the agency which recruited or deployed the

worker overseas. 2. Remains and transport of the personal belon

gings of a deceased worker and all costs attendant thereto ‐ shall be borne by the principal and/or the local agency.

XPNs: 1. If the termination of employment is due solel

y to the fault of the worker, the principal/ Er or agency shall not be responsible for the repatriation of the former and/or his belongings

2. In cases of war, epidemic, disaster or calamities, natural or man made,‐ and other similar event, and where the principal or recruitment agency cannot be identified, the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration, in coordination with appropriate international agencies, shall take charge of the repatriation. (Sec.15, R.A. 8042)

Q: What is the rule on mandatory repatriation of underage migrant workers?

A: Upon discovery or being informed of the presence of migrant workers whose ages fall below the minimum age requirement for overseas deployment, the responsible officers in the foreign service shall without delay repatriate said workers and advise the DFA through the fastest means of communication available of such discovery and other relevant information. The license of a recruitment/manning agency which recruited or deployed an underage migrant worker shall be automatically revoked and shall be imposed a fine of not less than P500,000 but not more than P1,000,000. (Sec. 9, R.A. 10022)

Remember the Supreme Court has upheld the power of the POEA or the Secretary of Labor to suspend the deployment in so called critical cases. Even when there is no mandate for natural calamities. What are these? Places where there are so many incidence of human trafficking, victimization. Then the POEA suspends deployment. And the ones who challenged that are the Money Agencies to the Supreme Court. Why? The Supreme Court said “You the money agency, you are not the real party in interest. Ahente ramo. Kana gyung magfile ana, kanang OCW. You are not the real party in interest, you cannot question the prohibition for deployment because it is not your right to travel that is jeopardized. Questioning of the discretion to compel.

So, there is in the question and answer, touching on the implementation of the compromise agreement.

Because, the compromise agreement of the money claims are under RA 10022 can no longer open-ended. There is a definite day. In other words, the compromise agreement has a definite time span. I don’t think this can longer than 1 month. Because in the discussion of the period in Congress, there were so many testimonies as to the victories of the ___. Daog na sila, nacompromise na lang. ni-ingon na lang na ang recruitment agency angkuha na ug kwarta, pa___ na lang ug kwarta. There’s now a timeframe and it must be complied.

So alright, we are ready for the examination.

Employment of the non- resident aliens

Foreigners. Remember, non-resident engaged, if you have a visa in the Philippines and you are a permanent resident, you do not need a work permit. The work permit is separate and distinct from the working visa. That was contention that was decided in the case Cone v. Secretary of Labor.

Q: What is required in the employment of nonresident aliens?

A: Any alien seeking admission to the Phil. for employment purposes and any domestic or foreign employer (Er) who desires to engage an alien for employment in the Philippines:

1. Shall obtain an employment permit from the DOLE

2. The permit may be issued to a nonresident alien or to the applicant Er after a determination of the non availability‐ of a person in the Phil. who is competent, able and willing at the time of application to perform the services for which the alien is desired

3. For an enterprise registered in preferred areas of investments, said permit may be issued upon recommendation of the gov’t agency charged with the supervision of said registered enterprise

Who is Cone? He is a coach. When he first came here, 20 years ago the Filipino Basketball Coaches Association opposed his coming in. And then, they brought out the fact the he don’t have a working permit. His defense was that he has a working visa. Mr. Uy Teng su of Alaska procured a working visa for him. Therefore, he can work. The supreme Courts said there is a difference. The working visa is your record. But you need to have a

permit to work and it is employer’s ___. You cannot transfer from one employer to another. Your work permit is as good as the employer written there, specify there. You cannot transfer. Tim Cone is the wittiest coach in the basketball.

GMC and Cone v. Hon Torres (Secretary)196 SCRA 215 [G.R No. 9366, April 22, 1991]Feliciano, J:

The DOLE issued an alien employment permit for Earl Cone, a U.S. citizen, as sports consultant and assistant coach for GMC.

Later, the Board of Special Inquiry of the Commission on Immigration and Deportation approved Cone’s application for a change of admission status from temporary visitor to prearranged employee.

A month later, GMC requested that it be allowed to employ Cone as full fledged‐ coach.

The Dole Regional Director granted the request.

The Basketball Association of the Phils. appealed the issuance of said permit to the SLE who cancelled Cone’s employment permit because GMC failed to show that there is no person in the Philippines who is competent and willing to do the services nor that the hiring of Cone would redound to the national interest.

Q: Is the act of SLE valid?

A: Yes. GMC’s claim that hiring of a foreign coach is an Er’s prerogative has no legal basis. Under Ar. 40 of the LC, an Er seeking employment of an alien must first obtain an employment permit from the DOLE. GMC’s right to choose whom to employ is limited by the statutory requirement of an employment permit.

So, now, in order to get this working permit, there must be a certification that no Filipino is available for this particular job. How do certify for that? This is equivalent with the US labor certification visa. They put a ___ system.

He must train two Filipinos that will ___. But there are so many of them. I don’t think it can be enforced.

Muanha lng ka dira sa Magsaysay (Uyanguren) oh.

ARTICLE 41. PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFER OF EMPLOYMENT

Q: Who are required to obtain an employment permit?

A: GR : Only non resident‐ aliensXPNS:

1. Diplomatic services and foreign gov’t officials 2. Officers and staff of int’l organizations and th

eir legitimate spouses 3. Members of governing board who has voting

rights only 4. Those exempted by special laws 5. Owners and representatives of foreign princi

pals who interview Filipino applicants for employment abroad

6. Aliens whose purpose is to teach, present and/or conduct research studies Resident aliens. (D.O. 75 06,‐ May 31, 2006)

Q: May the non‐resident alien transfer employment after issuance of the employment permit?

A: After the issuance of an employment permit, the alien shall not transfer to another job or change his employer without prior approval of the Secretary of Labor.

Q: What is required for immigrants and resident aliens?

A: An Alien Employment Registration Certificate

Q: What is the duration of the employment permit? A: GR : Minimum of 1 year XPN: Unless revoked and subject to renewal

Q: May aliens be employed in entities engaged in nationalized activities? A: GR : No. XPNs :

1. Sec. of Justice specifically authorizes the employment of technical personnel

2. Aliens are elected members of the board of directors or governing body of corporations or associations or

3. Enterprises registered under the Omnibus Investment Code in case of technical, supervisor

y or advisory positions, but for a limited period

Q: How will POEA regulate private sector participation in the recruitment and overseas placement of workers?

A: By setting up a licensing and registration system. (RA 10022, Sec. 14)

So our exam will be up to Article 42.

Our last exam is on termination, book six.