Finally: Solon files bill ensuring BPO workers’ welfare, protection

In a move seeking to protect workers of the Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) industry from labor abuses, KABATAAN Representative Mong Palatino today filed a bill that would allow BPO workers to join and form unions, institutionalize an occupational safety and health policy, and ensure just compensation for BPO workers who attend work during non-working holidays.

House Bill 6921 or the BPO Workers’ Welfare and Protection Act of 2009, Palatino said, seeks to ensure the welfare and protection of BPO workers and recognize of rights as provided by the Labor Code of the Philippines. Palatino also said his office has also been receiving a steady stream of reports and complaints on violations and abuses by BPO companies from call center workers.

Citing a data from the National Labor Relations Committee, Palatino said 327 cases were filed against BPOs involving 408 workers in Metro Manila. During the first semester of 2009, 124 cases were filed against BPOs involving 175 workers.

“There is an urgent need to pass a law that would ensure the rights of our BPO workers especially since the BPO industry touted by the government as the sunshine industry. Despite our labor laws, violations and abuses are repeatedly committed by companies, who put premium on ensuring profits at the expense of our workers’ rights and welfare,” Palatino said.

The young solon said, “We should not be distracted from the fact that even if this is a dollar earning industry, our mandate, especially the mandate of the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), is to protect the workers in this sector. I think it will be advisable for the DOLE to immediately come up with a proposal to establish programs or even a committee within the department with the major intention of advancing the welfare of BPO workers,” Palatino said.

Data from the DOLE shows that there are already 500,000 workers in the BPO sector, and government predicts that the number will increase to one million by the end of 2009.

Under the proposed legislation, erring companies shall be punished with a fine of not less than Ten Thousand Pesos (P10,000) and/or imprisonment of not less than two (2) months but not more than one (1), or both at the discretion of the Court.

Meanwhile, Palatino said Kabataan Partylist would launch a series of fora and symposia among call center workers to inform them about their rights as workers of the BPO industry.

Full text of the bill can be read here.

An Analysis on The Presidential Aspirants' Stand on Cha-Cha

On October 6, in the Top News in GMA News.TV, the headline reads: 4 presidential aspirants open to Cha-Cha. What is charter change anyway? According to Wikipedia.org:

Charter Change, also known as "Cha-Cha" in the Philippines, refers to the political and other related processes involved in amending or revising the current 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. Under the current constitution there are three modes of which it could be amended: people's initiative (PI), constituent assembly and constitutional convention. All three would lead to a referendum wherein the proposed amendment/s or revision/s has to be approved by the majority of Filipinos in order to be adopted.

Like majority of Filipinos, I understood Cha-cha as a venue for our form of government to switch to Parliamentary form. Moreover, this change will also ensure the current people in government to extend their terms indefinitely. Now with the Presidential aspirants' comments about the said controversial issue, made me realize not to vote for some of them.

I am not satisfied with their reasons why is it that they do not agree with charter change. Answers like because it is not timely or if it would not undergo due process, blah blah blah. I can accept Aquino's reason which is to quote:

We must ensure that Charter change is needed before we make any concrete move.

In addition, we should also ask the heavier question which is, who will benefit from such change in our constitution?

Due to this, all of a sudden I recalled what I read in the compiled Issue Analysis by the Center for People Empowerment in Governance (CenPEG)'s 2006: Philippine Politics in Review. Yup, that was three years ago, and here we are, faced with the same zombie of our society!

In it's Issue Analysis No. 8: Cha-Cha Favors the Elite and the US, it tackled there the not so secret reasons why the administration that time was pushing for the same music groove as today. The keywords given emphasis on that analysis are: political dynasties and the capitalist and imperialists' reasons of the US.

Going to the first keyword political dynasty, how would the political dynasties in the Philippines benefit from this constitutional amendment? What will happen basically is that the provisions hindering any official or law-maker from extending their terms in office might be erased totally from the Constitution.

To quote:

The elimination of term limits would allow them [lawmakers] as well as their relatives to run for parliament as often as they like. With the elimination of term limits, there would be no fixed terms, their staying on in parliament being dependent solely on their party or coalition's numerical dominance.

To quote again Issue Analysis No. 8 and to give a concrete example:

As for Mrs. Arroyo, while she would have to step down once a parliament is in place, she could very well run for MP in her sphere's of influence in Pampanga and who knows, aspire once more for the post she's now clinging to like a barnacle, depending on what the specifics of the parliamentary system and the federation would be.

Where does the US's interests enter into the picture?




Beyond the reason that a Cha-Cha can solve the Arroyo crisis through this blinding "constitutional means," there is something that has so far escaped scrutiny. Those are the amendments to the Constitution and the Philippine policies the US wants, other than the shift to a parliamentary system and to a federation.

That was reiterated by Presidential aspirant Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro Jr. (Lakas-Kampi-CMD). To quote from GMA News.TV:

According to him [Teodoro], among the provisions that should be amended are those concerning autonomous regions and foreign ownership of lands and corporations. He said the Constitution should be amended because piece-meal legislation seeking to address certain issues are "not sustainable" in the long run.

The primary changes that involve provisions in the Constitution cited in the Issue Analysis No. 8 are the ff:

• policies that restrict foreign investments in key economic sectors
• foreign ownership of the mass media and public utilities
• policies that restrict foreign ownership of telecommunications to 40%
• 60% Filipino ownership is required for those firms that wish to contract with the Philippine government in the construction of water, telecommunications and transport systems as well as electric power distribution
• policies that enforce that only Filipinos may own rural banks
• for the fast growing insurance business, foreigners are limited to 51% equity in insurance companies
• there is also a policy that only Filipino-owned seacraft may engage in domestic shipping
• no foreign ownership of educational institutions, or of land and rice and corn processing plants is allowed
  

Fidel V. Ramos was the loudest and earliest proponent of Constitutional amendments to remove these restrictions. He allowed the unrestricted entry of foreign capital and removing all protection for local industries in his suga coated globalizing the Philippine economy. In his term as well the Mining Act of 1995 which converts the entire country into potential mining area - was passed.

By the way, the Philippine Mining Act was passed into law as RA 7942 in March 1995. This new mining code that was passed into law is the Senate version of the bill filed by then Senator Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, then Sen. Heherson Alvarez who became Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and Francisco Tatad.

Again, we call for a strong opposition against Cha-Cha. Let us not be stripped once more of our sovereignty and rights. Let us continue to aspire for a country run by Filipinos for Filipinos in its truest sense. When can we feel the real freedom?

Ang Cha-Cha At Si Gloria!!! Ibasura!!!
Ibasura!!! Ang Cha-Cha at si Gloria!!!

JUNK CHA-CHA NOW!!!

4 presidential aspirants open to Cha-cha - Nation - GMANews.TV - Official Website of GMA News and Public Affairs - Latest Philippine News

4 presidential aspirants open to Cha-cha - Nation - GMANews.TV - Official Website of GMA News and Public Affairs - Latest Philippine News

Shared via AddThis

Four presidential aspirants in next year's elections had expressed openness toward amending the 1987 Constitution, but with conditions.

The presidential hopefuls - Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro Jr. (Lakas-Kampi-CMD), Sen. Francis Escudero (NPC), Sen. Manuel Villar Jr. (NP), and Sen. Benigno "Noynoy" Aquino III (LP) - made their stances on Charter change known Tuesday during a forum at the Asian Institute of Management in Makati City.

Teodoro, a former congressman representing Tarlac province, said he is in favor of amending the 1987 Constitution but only if it's done after the May 2010 elections and through a constitutional convention..

"It failed to look foward," Teodoro said of the current Constitution, which he described as "reactive" as its focus was to remove all "vestiges" of the Marcos dictatorship.

According to him, among the provisions that should be amended are those concerning autonomous regions and foreign ownership of lands and corporations. He said the Constitution should be amended because piece-meal legislation seeking to address certain issues are "not sustainable" in the long run.

Villar said amending the Constitution should undergo the proper process. "Basta tama lang ang proseso, wala akong problema diyan (As long as the proper process is observed, I have no problem with it)," he said.

Like Teodoro, Villar said Charter change should be done only after next year's polls, as any attempt to amend the Constitution now would make the public suspicious of the motives behind it.

Escudero said amending the Constitution should not be done at the end of any administration. "Hindi po ako sang-ayon sa Charter change kapag patapos na ang termino ng sinumang administrasyon (I am not in favor of Charter change if it is done at the end of any administration)."

Even as he maintained that the implementation of laws, and not the fundamental law itself, is what needs to be changed, Escudero said plebiscites must be held to determine whether the public wants Charter change, and if so, how they want it done.

If the public is in favor of Charter change, provisions on the terms of local officials, ownership limits, and limits to executive powers should be reviewed, he said.

Aquino likewise said there must be debates and consultations over whether Charter change is necessary. "Bago po natin guluhin yung lipunan, manigurado tayong kelangan nga natin yun (We must ensure that Charter change is needed before we make any concrete move)," he said.

But if the public wants the Constitution amended, it should be done through a constitutional convention, he said, adding that there must also be a "social contract" limiting the amending of the Constitution to certain provisions like the powers of the President.

It was under the administration of Aquino's mother, the late President Corazon Aquino, when the 1987 Constitution was created through a constitutional convention shortly after the fall of the Marcos dictatorship.

Moves by President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo's House allies to amend the Constitution, particularly through the passage of House Resolution 1109, which calls on Congress to convene itself into a constituent assembly, have been met with widespread protests.

Critics allege that Mrs. Arroyo want to extend her stay in power - a claim repeatedly denied by Palace officials. - GMANews.TV