Migration for Employment Convention (Revised), 1949 (No. 97) - Philippines (Ratification: 2009)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

The Committee notes the Government’s reports received in 2017 and 2021, and its report on the application of the Migrant Workers (Supplementary Provisions) Convention, 1975 (No. 143), which also contains information relevant to Convention No. 97.

Article 1 of the Convention. Information on national policies, laws and regulations. With reference to its previous comment, the Committee notes, from the Government’s reports, the new Joint Manual of Operations in Providing Assistance to Migrant Workers and Other Filipinos Overseas, published to provide assistance to overseas Filipino workers, particularly those in distress, at all times. This Joint Manual was signed by the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA), the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), the Department of Health (DOH), the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) and the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA). The Committee further takes note of the list of programmes and services offered to overseas Filipino workers. Among these, the Committee notes with interest the “Balik Pinay! Balik Hanapbuhay!” (BPBH) Programme which provides training and starting capital to female overseas Filipino workers who returned to the country after being victim of illegal recruitment, trafficking, exploitation (unpaid and underpaid), sexual and physical abuse, or with a contract which was terminated prematurely. The Committee also notes the development of the POEA Mobile Application, which makes the POEA’s database easily accessible to potential overseas jobseekers who wish to verify the status of a recruitment agency, the existence and availability of approved job offers and other relevant information to avoid illegal recruitment. The Government indicates that since its launch in March 2014, 424,762 users have downloaded the application. The Committee notes, however, that all the information provided concerns overseas Filipino workers and that the Government does not provide any information on the measures taken to assist foreign workers in the Philippines. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on: (i) the results of the Balik Pinay! Balik Hanapbuhay! Programme, including on the number of women who benefited from it; (ii) any activities undertaken to give effect to the provisions of the Convention and to promote and protect the rights of Filipino migrant workers, and (iii) any developments in law and policy regulating the employment of foreign workers in the Philippines, as well as any structures that have been set up to assist those workers in accordance with the Convention.

Article 2. Free services to assist migrant workers, in particular the provision of accurate information. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in reply to its previous comment, that services rendered under the pre-employment orientation seminars (PEOS) and post-arrival orientation seminars (PAOS) are free of charge. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, in 2016, a total of 724,983 migrants followed the Pre-Departure Orientation Seminar (PDOS), women representing 49 per cent of them. The Government further indicates that the Commission of Filipinos Overseas (CFO) information services are available free of charge. These services include PDOS, Guidance and Counseling Program (GCP), Country Familiarization Seminars for Au Pairs, Exchange Visitor Program (US J-1 visa) and Peer Counseling Seminar to departing emigrants. It notes however that a fee of 400 Philippine pesos (PHP) (approximately USD7.9) is charged to cover registration expenses. The Committee also notes the list of benefits and services covered by the OWWA membership fee, including disability and death insurance, scholarship for dependants, and on-site assistance. Recalling that Article 2 of the Convention requires to provide free services, the Committee requests the Government to lift the registration fee charged by the CFO for its information services. Noting that no information was provided in this regard, the Committee reiterates its requests that the Government indicate how it is being ensured, in practice, that accredited service providers, local recruitment agencies and private employers, involved in PDOS, PEOS and PAOS, are not charging fees to the overseas worker, and how potential migrant workers are being informed of the existence of these services.

Article 3. Misleading propaganda. In reply to its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s information on the different measures taken to prevent and address human trafficking. Among these measures, the Committee notes the Community Education Program (CEP), a nationwide annual information campaign conducted by the CFO in coordination with various government agencies, non-governmental organizations, and media organizations, which seeks to assist prospective migrants in making informed decisions regarding working or settling abroad, as well as generating community involvement on migration concerns. It also aims to raise public awareness about issues concerning migration, inter-marriages, and existing government policies and programs directed against illegal recruitment, documentation fraud and trafficking. The Committee further notes that the POEA regularly posts anti-illegal recruitment advisories on its social media accounts with over 2 million views. The Committee takes note of this information.

Article 4. Measures to facilitate departure and arrival – household service workers. The Committee notes that the Government’s reports are silent on the effectiveness of the Household Service Workers Programme on the protection of the rights of such workers, and that no information is provided on the reason for imposing a minimum age (23 years) for household workers, as required in its previous comments.The Committee further notes, from the concluding observations of the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW): (i) the existence of widespread exploitation and abuse of Filipina migrant workers working abroad, in particular as domestic workers; (ii) the insufficient support provided to reintegrate those who return; and (iii) that the protection of migrant workers under the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) migration policies does not cover unskilled migrants, who constitute the majority of Filipina migrant workers (CEDAW/C/PHL/CO/7-8, 25 July 2016, para. 37).The Committee further notes, from the Government’s 2021 report to the CEDAW, that, in order to address the vulnerability of overseas Filipino workers, particularly female domestic workers, it has entered into bilateral labour agreements with destination countries and continues to conduct regular dialogue with them to ensure that their rights and welfare are protected (CEDAW/C/PHL/9, 4 October 2021, para. 112). The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the effectiveness of the Household Service Workers Programme on the protection of the rights of household service workers, including compliance with the provisions of their contract of employment. With regard to the age restriction on the departure of household service workers, the Committee refers to its comment under Convention No. 143 and requests the Government to indicate the underlying reasons for the age restriction on the departure of household service workers, as well as whether any such restrictions are imposed on sectors in which predominantly male migrants are being deployed. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the percentage of household service workers that attended the OWWA’s Comprehensive Pre-departure Orientation Programme and training with the Technical Education and Skills Development Agency (TESDA), and how the implementation of the programme is being monitored and coordinated.

Restrictions on departure of migrant workers. Noting that the Government does not provide information to its previous request, the Committee once again asks the Government to provide information on any ban imposed on the deployment of migrant workers, in general, or with respect to certain sectors of employment or countries of destination, pursuant to section 5 of Republic Act (RA) No. 8042 and section 6 of the Omnibus Rules and Regulations implementing RA No. 8042, indicating the reasons for imposing such a ban, as well as its impact.

Article 5. Medical examinations and requirements for entry and departure. With reference to the Committee’s previous request, the Government indicates that under the Philippine AIDS Prevention and Control Act of 1998, compulsory HIV testing is unlawful as a precondition to employment, admission to educational institutions, the exercise of freedom of abode, entry or continued stay in the country, or the right to travel, the provision of medical service or any other kind of service, or the continued enjoyment of said undertakings.However, the Committee notes that section 29(a)(2) of the Immigration Act, which provides for the prohibition of entry or expulsion on the grounds that the immigrant worker is suffering from an infection or illness, is still in force and may result in discrimination against migrant workers. Therefore, the Committee requests the Government to provide information onhow it is ensured, in practice, that medical examinations, required when applying for a visa (or the renewal of a visa) and for employment, either as a foreign national seeking employment in the Philippines or as a Filipino candidate for overseas employment, do not include compulsory HIV testing or pregnancy testing and do not lead to the exclusion of the applicant on the basis of the results of such testing, or on the basis of an infection or illness which has no effect on the task for which the worker has been recruited. Noting that no data is made available by the Government on this point, the Committee also requests it to provide information on the contents of the medical examinations for foreign workers in the Philippines and the practical application of section 29(a)(2) of the Immigration Act, including any assessment made as to whether the infection or illness would have an effect on the task for which the worker has been recruited. Once again please provide information on the number of non-nationals seeking employment in the Philippines who have been prohibited entry or who have been expelled on the basis of this provision, including on the basis of their real or perceived HIV status.

Article 6. Equality of treatment. The Committee notes the restrictions imposed on foreign workers regarding trade union activities pursuant to sections 269 and 272(b) of the Labour Code and refers to its comments on Convention No. 143 and on the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87).

Article 7(1). Cooperation with employment services of other Member States, in appropriate cases.Noting that the Government does not provide any information in this regard, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that the POEA and other services connected with migration cooperate with the corresponding services of other Member States.

Article 7(2) and Annex I: Articles 4 and 6 – Free services by the public employment services in connection with recruitment, introduction and placement.With reference to its previous request, the Committee notes that the Government does not provide any new information on this point and once again requests the Government to clarify the relationship between sections 2(i) and 36 of RA No. 8042, and the practical application of section 4 of Rule XVII, and to confirm that the services offered by the public employment services in connection with recruitment, introduction and placement of migrant workers are free of charge.

Annex I, Articles 3(3)(a) and (b) and (4). Recruitment by the employer, his or her representative, or private recruitment agencies. The Committee notes that the Government’s reports do not reply to its previous comments and requests on this point. The Committee notes, from the concluding observations of the United Nations Committee on the Protection of Migrant Workers (CMW), that private recruitment agencies: (1) charge excessive placement fees, and provide often incomplete information, which may result in acceptance of salaries below the minimum wage and deprivation of other labour benefits; and (2) serve as intermediaries for abusive foreign recruiters (CMW/C/PHL/CO/2, 2 May 2014, para. 42). The Committee invites the Government to adopt measures to ensure that recruitment fees or related costs are not collected from workers. The Committee also once again requests the Government to provide information on (i) the activities of the POEA Licensing and Regulation Office (LRO) with regard to its supervising activities of private recruitment agencies and employers, in accordance with Article 3(4) of Annex I; and (ii) any administrative violation cases regarding recruitment and pre-employment addressed by the POEA, as well as the administrative penalties imposed.

Annex I, Article 5. Supervision of contracts. With reference to its previous comment, the Committee notes, from the Government’s report to the CEDAW, that through the Philippine Overseas Labour Offices (POLO), present in 40 countries, the Government provides assistance to workers on issues and concerns of overseas Filipino workers relative to their work conditions and well-being. The Government also established an Overseas Filipino Workers’ Command Centre to ensure that overseas workers and their next-of-kin’s concerns and issues are acted upon promptly (CEDAW/C/PHL/9, para. 112). The Committee notes, however, that the Government did not provide the information requested, in its previous request, on several issues. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on: (i) how compliance with the provisions of the employment contract is being monitored in practice by the POEA once the worker has arrived in the country of destination; and (ii) the number and nature of complaints submitted to the National Labour Relations Commission (NLRC) by overseas workers regarding non-compliance with the contract of employment, and their outcome. Furthermore, recalling that contract-substitution was noted by the Committee as a practice being known to occur particularly in the Gulf States (General Survey on migrant workers, 1999, paragraphs 143–144), some of which are primary destinations for overseas Filipino workers, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken to monitor and address this practice, including through bilateral agreements.

Contract of employment for Saudi Arabia. In reply to the Committee’s previous request, the Government indicates that the POEA standard contract for overseas Filipino workers going to Saudi Arabia prohibits employees to engage in trade union activities because Saudi laws prohibit foreigners to do so. The Committee once again emphasizes that particular attention should be paid to provisions in migrant workers’ contracts which may be contrary to the ILO fundamental principles and rights, such as the right to organize, and the right to engage in collective bargaining. It recalls that the Convention guarantees migrant workers the right to establish and join organizations of their own choosing without previous authorization and that the fact of being a foreign worker should not present an obstacle to membership of trade unions (General Survey on promoting fair migration, 2016, para. 413). The Committee refers to its comments on Convention No. 87 and requests the Government to take the necessary measures to delete trade union activities from the list of grounds for termination in standard contracts.

Immigrant workers. In reply to the Committee’s previous comment, the Government indicates that, for the issuance of the Alien Employment Permit (AEP), the DOLE requires a copy of the employment contract. The Committee also takes notes of the Government’s indication that the agencies responsible for supervising the contracts of employment of foreign workers are the Bureau of Immigration (BI), the Bureau of Local Employment (BLE), and the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the activities of the BI, the BLE and the PRC with regard to the supervision of contracts of employment of foreign workers in the Philippines, for example by providing information on the number of contracts reviewed, the number of infringements founds and the proposed remedies.

Article 8. Maintenance of residence in case of incapacity for work. The Committee notes that the Government’s reports do not provide any information in relation to its previous request. The Committee recalls that under Article 8 of the Convention, a migrant worker who has been admitted on a permanent basis and the members of his or her family shall not be returned to their territory of origin or the territory from which they emigrated because the migrant is unable to follow his or her occupation by reason of illness contracted or injury sustained subsequent to entry, unless the person concerned so desires or an international agreement to which the Member is a party so provides. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to provide information on how the right of immigrant workers who have been admitted on a permanent basis to reside in the Philippines is maintained in practice in the event of incapacity for work.

Article 9. Earnings and savings – Remittances. In reply to its previous comment, the Committee notes that the Government provides detailed information on the Manual of Regulations on Foreign Exchange Transactions, but that this information does not clarify whether section 22 of the Labour Code imposes an obligation on Filipino workers abroad to remit a portion of their foreign exchange earnings to their families, dependents, and/or beneficiaries in the country. The Committee does note, from the concluding observations of the CMW, that in practice, under section 22 of the Labour Code, certain categories of Filipino workers abroad, such as seafarers, are reportedly obliged to remit up to 80 per cent of their foreign exchange earnings to their families and dependents and other beneficiaries in the country (CMW/C/PHL/CO/2, 2 May 2014, para. 40).Recalling that under Article 9 of the Convention, migrant workers should be able to transfer such part of their earnings and savings as they may desire, the Committee requests the Government to take measures to amend section 22 of the Labour Code to ensure that migrant workers shall have the right, but not the obligation, to transfer such part of their earnings and savings as they may desire. In the meantime, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the practical application of section 22 of the Labour Code, and copies of the relevant rules and regulations.

Bilateral agreements. With reference to its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Philippines has signed 14 new labour agreements with countries employing Filipino land-based workers. It also notes the conclusion on 24 November 2017 of the ASEAN Consensus on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights of Migrant Workers. The Committee further notes, from the Government’s report on Convention No. 143, that among the existing bilateral agreements which are in effect, 14 of them contain a provision on equality of treatment, allowing Filipino migrant workers to have the same social security rights, obligations and qualifying conditions as the nationals of the host country. The Committee welcomes the Government’s efforts in strengthening international cooperation. It requests the Government to provide: (i) information on the practical application of the bilateral agreements in place; (ii) a copy of the Philippine Labour Agreement Guidelines and the Guidelines on the recruitment and deployment of Filipino “au pairs”; and (iii) information on the conclusion of any new bilateral agreements and other arrangements. In this regard, it refers to the ILO General Principles and Operational Guidelines for Fair Recruitment and Definition of Recruitment Fees and Related Costs inviting Members to make the international agreements on labour migration publicly available.

Article 11(2)(b). The Government indicates, in reply to the Committee’s previous request, that the longest period which is regarded as constituting “short-term entry” within the meaning of Article 11(2)(b) is the period for which a person enters the country for tourism or business without the need for a visa, which for most countries is a maximum period of 30 days. The Committee recalls that Article 11(2)(b) of the Convention provides that it does not apply to short-term entry of members of the liberal professions and artistes. The Committee requests the Government to confirm that beyond 30 days and after obtaining a working visa, both overseas Filipino workers and immigrant workers in the Philippines, are covered by the Convention.

Statistics on migration flows. The Committee notes, from the Government’s reports, that as of December 2013, there were 10,238,614 Filipinos working and living in 221 countries of destination. Of those, 4,869,766 (47.6 per cent) are permanent residents; 4,207,018 (41.1 per cent) are expected to return at the end of their contract of employment; and 1,161,830 (11.3 per cent) are in an irregular situation (i.e. undocumented, or without valid residence or work permits, or overstaying in a foreign country; these were estimated at 8 per cent as of December 2010). The Government also indicates, that in 2015-2016, a total of 70,364 working permits were issued to foreign nationals, 16,571 for female workers and 53,793 for males. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide: (i) detailed information on the numbers of overseas Filipino workers by economic sector, sex and country of destination; and (ii) up-to-date statistics, disaggregated by sex and nationality, as well as economic sector, on the number of migrants that have entered the Philippines for employment.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

The Committee notes the Government’s first and second reports and the legislation and statistical information attached thereto. It also notes the Government’s report on the application of the Migrant Workers (Supplementary Provisions) Convention, 1975 (No. 143), which also contains information relevant to Convention No. 97.

Article 1 of the Convention. Information on national policies, laws and regulations. The Committee notes the provisions in the Labour Code, Title II (Employment of non-resident aliens), the Commonwealth Act (CA) No. 613 on Immigration, 1940, and the various memorandum orders and circulars issued by the Bureau of Immigration regarding visa requirements, employment permits and immigration status. It notes in particular section 9(g) and 20(a) of the Immigration Act regarding admission of foreigners coming to pre-arranged employment. The Bureau of Immigration is responsible for the administration and enforcement of the legislation relating to immigration, citizenship and admission and registration of foreigners in accordance with the Immigration Act. The Bureau of Employment Services (BES) maintains a registration and work permit system to regulate the employment of foreigners (section 15(a)(4) of the Labour Code). The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on any developments in law and policy regulating the employment of foreign workers in the Philippines, as well as any structures that have been set up to assist those workers in accordance with the Convention. The Committee also requests the Government to provide up-to-date statistics, disaggregated by sex, and nationality, regarding the number of foreigners that have entered the Philippines for pre-arranged employment, and the number of work permits registered by the BES.

Article 2. Free services to assist migrant workers, in particular the provision of accurate information. Further to its observation noting the range of pre-departure orientation (PDOS), pre-employment orientation (PEOS) and post-arrival orientation (PAOS) seminars for Filipino migrant workers conducted by the Commission on Filipinos Overseas (CFO), the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA), the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA) and the Philippine Overseas Labor Offices (POLOs), the Committee notes from the website of OWWA the list of accredited land-based PDOS providers which include private recruitment agencies and non-governmental organizations. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that PDOS for agency-hired overseas workers is mandatory and is free of charge where OWWA and POEA assume the costs. A standard fee of 100 Philippine pesos (PhP) is charged to local recruitment agencies by accredited service providers to cover the cost of training materials. The Committee notes that membership in OWWA is obtained (a) by enrolment upon processing of contracts at the POEA or (b) by voluntary registration of Filipino workers at jobsites overseas, and that a membership contribution has to be paid (section IV(1)(a) and (b) and (2) of the OWWA Board Resolution No. 138 of 2003). Furthermore, the Migrant Workers and Other Overseas Filipinos Resource Centers (MWRCs) also provide information to migrant workers in the host countries. The Committee asks the Government to clarify in which cases POEA and OWWA do not assume the costs of PDOS and PEOS, and whether the PAOS and the information provision to migrants provided by the CFO is free of charge. Please also indicate what costs and services are covered by the OWWA membership fee. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate how it is being ensured that accredited service providers, local recruitment agencies and private employers, involved in PDOS, PEOS and PAOS, are not charging fees to the overseas worker, and how potential migrant workers are being informed of the existence of these services.

Article 3. Misleading propaganda. The Committee notes the provisions in the Labour Code, the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act (RA 8042) and the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act (RA 9208) defining, listing and prohibiting acts constituting illegal recruitment and acts of trafficking in persons, as well as the penalties imposed on any persons found guilty of illegal recruitment under section 7(a) and (b) of RA 8042. It also notes Executive Order No. 41 of 29 April 2011 reactivating the Presidential Task Force Against Illegal Recruitment created under Executive Order No. 759 of 2008 and the anti-illegal recruitment campaigns and pre-departure and pre-employment information provided to migrant workers. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the activities and measures taken by the various institutions against false information regarding the migration process stemming from private recruiters, recruitment agencies or employers, as well as any measures taken or envisaged to cooperate with other governments in this regard.

Article 4. Measures to facilitate departure and arrival – household service workers. The Committee notes from the statistics provided by the Government that in 2010, almost one third of the overseas Filipinos were domestic workers, 98 per cent of them being women. In 2010, 94,880 female migrant workers compared to 1,703 male migrant workers were employed as household service workers. Female overseas workers also outnumbered male overseas workers as cleaners and related workers (9,521 women compared to 2,612 men), professional nurses (10,254 women compared to 1,828 men) and caregivers and caretakers (8,750 women compared to 543 men). The Committee notes that on 16 December 2006, the Government promulgated the Household Service Workers’ (HSW) Policy Reform Package 2006 which sets a minimum age for household workers at 23 years of age and requires upgrading of skills of domestic workers through skills training and certification with the Technical Education and Skills Development Agency (TESDA). Employers of household service workers are to cover the placement costs and pay a minimum wage of US$400. Prior to departure, household service workers must attend OWWA’s Comprehensive Pre-departure Orientation Programme (CPDEP). The Committee notes the steady increase in the deployment of household service workers in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries, the GCC share of new hires being 63 per cent in 2010. The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the effectiveness of the Household Service Workers Programme on the protection of the rights of household service workers, including the payment of the minimum wage of US$400 and compliance with the provisions of their contract of employment. Please indicate the underlying reasons for the age restrictions on the departure of household service workers, as well as whether any such restrictions are imposed on sectors in which predominantly male migrants are being deployed. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the percentage of household service workers that attended the CPDEP and training with TESDA, and how the implementation of the programme is being monitored and coordinated.

Restrictions on departure of migrant workers. The Committee notes that pursuant to section 5 of RA 8042 and section 6 of the Omnibus Rules and Regulations implementing RA 8042, as amended by RA 10022, the POEA Governing Board, after consultation with the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) , may, in the pursuit of national interest and or when public welfare so requires, at any time terminate or impose a ban on the deployment of migrant workers. It may also grant exceptions to the ban or lift the ban. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any ban imposed on the deployment of migrant workers, in general, or with respect to certain sectors of employment or countries of destination, pursuant to section 5 of RA 8042 and section 6 of the Omnibus Rules and Regulations implementing RA 8042, indicating the reasons for imposing such a ban, as well as its impact.

Article 5. Medical examinations and requirements for entry and departure. The Committee notes that pursuant to sections 3 and 4 of the POEA Rules and Regulations Governing Recruitment and Employment of Land-Based Overseas Workers (Rule VIII, Part II), the private agency who refers an applicant for overseas employment to a medical examination shall ensure that the examination be conducted “in accordance with the requirements of the employer”. With respect to immigrants, the Committee notes that section 29(a)(2) of the Immigration Act excludes “persons afflicted with a loathsome or dangerous contagious disease”. The Committee further notes the Government’s statement that medical exams are required for foreign nationals in the Philippines when applying for renewal of a visa and for employment. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to paragraph 266 of its 1999 General Survey on migrant workers stating that refusal of entry or repatriation on the grounds that the worker concerned is suffering from an infection or illness of any kind which has no effect on the task for which the worker has been recruited, constitutes an unacceptable form of discrimination. The Committee also refers to Paragraphs 24–28 of the HIV and AIDS Recommendation, 2010 (No. 200), according to which HIV testing must be genuinely voluntary and free of any coercion, should not be required of workers, including migrant workers, and migrant workers should not be required to disclose HIV-related information about themselves or others; those seeking to migrate for employment, should not be excluded from migration by countries of origin, of transit or of destination on the basis of their real or perceived HIV status. The Committee asks the Government to provide information as follows:

• (i) how it is ensured that medical examinations do not include compulsory HIV testing or pregnancy testing and do not lead to the exclusion of the applicant for overseas employment on the basis of the results of such testing, or on the basis of an infection or illness which has no effect on the task for which the worker has been recruited; and
• (ii) the contents of the medical examinations for foreign workers in the Philippines and the practical application of section 29(a)(2) of the Immigration Act, including any assessment made as to whether the infection or illness would have an effect on the task for which the worker has been recruited. Please also provide information on the number of non-nationals seeking employment in the Philippines who have been prohibited entry or who have been expelled on the basis of this provision, including on the basis of their real or perceived HIV status.

Article 6. Equality of treatment. The Committee notes the restrictions imposed on foreign workers regarding trade union activities pursuant to sections 269 and 272(b) of the Labour Code, and refers to its comments on Convention No. 143 and the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87).

Article 7(1). Cooperation with employment services of other Member States, in appropriate cases. Please indicate the measures taken to ensure that the POEA and other services connected with migration cooperate with the corresponding services of other Member States.

Article 7(2) and Annex I: Articles 4 and 6 – Free services by the public employment services in connection with recruitment, introduction and placement. The Committee notes section 15(a)(2) of the Labour Code providing that the BES shall provide for free placement services to workers, and that RA 8759 or the Public Employment Service Office (PESO) Act of 1999 establishes non-fee charging employment services (PESOs) which, among others, conduct pre-employment counselling and orientation to prospective local and overseas workers, and provides reintegration assistance services to returning Filipino migrant workers. The Committee also notes that pursuant to section 2(i) of the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act RA 8042 “government fees and other administrative costs of recruitment, introduction, placement and assistance to migrants shall be rendered free without prejudice of section 36 thereof”. However, section 36 of the RA 8042 states that upon approval of the Act, all fees charged by any Government office to migrant workers shall remain at their present levels. Section 4 of Rule XVII of the Omnibus Rules and Regulations implementing RA 8042, also provides that all fees for services being charged by any government agency on migrant workers prevailing at the time the Rule entered into force shall not be increased. All other services rendered by the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) and other government agencies in connection with the recruitment and placement of and assistance to migrant workers shall be rendered free. The administrative cost thereof shall not be borne by the worker. The Committee requests the Government to clarify the relationship between sections 2(i) and 36 of RA 8042, and the practical application of section 4 of Rule XVII, and to confirm that the services by the public employment services in connection with recruitment, introduction and placement of migrant workers shall be rendered free.

Annex I, Articles 3(3)(a) and (b) and (4). Recruitment by the employer, his or her representative, or private recruitment agencies. The Committee notes that the POEA shall regulate private sector participation in the recruitment and overseas placement of workers by setting up a licensing and registration system (section 23(b) of RA 8042). It also notes the establishment of the POEA Licensing and Regulation Office (LRO) and the provisions in the Labour Code, the RA 8042, the Omnibus Rules and Regulations implementing RA 8042 regarding illegal recruitment and related penalties, the suspension or cancellation of the licence or authority given, and the jurisdiction of the POEA to hear and decide administrative cases involving or arising out of recruitment rules and regulations. POEA can also receive complaints or institute proceedings on its own initiative. It also notes that the POEA can impose administrative penalties for pre-employment and recruitment violation cases including reprimand, suspension, or cancellation or revocation of licence (Rule X, sections 3, 6(a) and (b), 8 and 10). The Committee asks the Government to provide additional information on the activities of the LRO and the manner in which it supervises the activities of private recruitment agencies and employers, in accordance with Article 3(4) of Annex I. Please provide information on any administrative violation cases regarding recruitment and pre-employment addressed by the POEA, as well as the administrative penalties imposed.

Annex I, Article 5. Supervision of contracts. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that the POEA is the competent authority to examine the employment contracts of overseas Filipino workers. It notes in this regard sections 1–4 of Part III, Rule I of the POEA Rules and Regulations Governing the Recruitment and Employment of Land-based Overseas Workers, regarding the Verification of Documents and Registration of Foreign Principals, Employers and Projects. Section 2 provides for document verification, including the model employment contract, prior to registration with the POEA, by the POLOs and for minimum provisions in the employment contract. It also notes the Government’s indication that employment contracts of household service workers are individually verified by the POLOs in the host country to ensure the existence of the job, in compliance with the relevant legislation and the employer’s capacity to comply with the terms and conditions of employment. The Committee further notes that the National Labour Relations Commission (NLRC) has the exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide claims arising out of an employment relationship or by virtue of any law or contract involving Filipino workers for overseas employment. The Committee requests the Government to provide additional information on how compliance with the provisions of the employment contract is being monitored in the country of destination. Considering that contract-substitution was noted by the Committee as a practice being known to occur particularly in the Gulf States (General Survey on migrant workers, 1999, paragraphs 143–144), some of which are top destinations for overseas Filipino workers, the Committee also requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken to monitor and address this practice, including through bilateral agreements. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the number and nature of complaints submitted to the NLRC by overseas workers regarding non-compliance with the contract of employment, and their outcome.

Contract of employment for Saudi Arabia. The Committee notes that the POEA standard contract for overseas Filipino workers going to Saudi Arabia, states that “engagement in trade union activities by the employee”, is a valid reason for the employer to terminate the contract of employment. Such a condition is not included in the general standard employment contract for various skills. The Committee emphasizes that particular attention should be paid to provisions in migrant workers’ contracts which may be contrary to the ILO fundamental principles and rights, such as the right to organize, and the right to engage in collective bargaining. The Committee refers to its comments on Convention No. 87 and asks the Government to provide information on any measures taken or envisaged to delete trade union activities from the list of grounds for termination in standard contracts.

Immigrant workers. The Committee notes that section 20(a) of the Immigration Act provides that the petition of an employer requesting a foreigner to come on pre-arranged employment shall be accompanied by a written employment contract and information regarding length of service, wages and additional benefits. Please indicate the competent authority regarding the supervision of contracts of employment of foreign workers in the Philippines.

Article 8. Maintenance of residence in case of incapacity for work. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on how the right of immigrant workers who have been admitted on a permanent basis to reside in the country is maintained in practice in the event of incapacity for work.

Article 9. Earnings and savings – Remittances. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that a foreign worker has the freedom to remit all or a portion of his or her earnings. At the same time, section 22 of the Labour Code provides that it shall be mandatory for all Filipino workers abroad to remit a portion of their foreign exchange earnings to their families, dependents, and/or beneficiaries in the country in accordance with rules and regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Labour. Recalling that under Article 9 of the Convention, migrant workers should be able to transfer such part of their earnings and savings as they may desire, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on the practical application of section 22 of the Labour Code, and copies of the relevant rules and regulations.

Bilateral agreements. The Committee notes from the Government’s report on Convention No. 143 that the Philippines has signed labour agreements with 23 countries employing Filipino land-based workers, 14 of which are still in effect. It notes that the DOLE has prioritized the review of these agreements with countries in the Middle East. The Government further indicates that the DOLE issued Administrative Order No. 28 series 2012 on “The Philippine Labour Agreement: Guidelines and procedures which shall be adopted to harmonize the forging of bilateral agreements between the Philippines and another country”. Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) have also been signed between the Philippines and the Republic of Korea on the sending and receiving of workers under the employment permit system of the Republic of Korea, and with Canada concerning cooperation in human resources and development; Memoranda of Agreements (MoAs) have been signed with the United Arab Emirates in the field of labour, and with Bahrain on health services cooperation. The POEA has also issued rules on the minimum monthly income United Arab Emirates employers have to pay Filipino household services workers, and guidelines on the recruitment and deployment of Filipino “au pairs” to Switzerland and Norway. Please continue to provide information on the conclusion of bilateral agreements and other arrangements, including information on their practical application and impact. Please also provide copies of any memoranda of agreements or understanding concluded with countries of destination, as well as of the Philippine Labour Agreement Guidelines and the Guidelines on the recruitment and deployment of Filipino “au pairs”.

Article 11(b). The Committee requests the Government to indicate the longest period which is regarded as constituting “short-term entry” within the meaning of Article 11(b).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

The Committee notes the Government’s first and second reports and the legislation and statistical information attached thereto.

Statistics on migration flows. The Committee notes that the Philippines is mainly a country of emigration and that according to statistics of the Commission on Filipinos Overseas (CFO), 9,452,984 Filipinos were working and living overseas as of December 2010. Of those, 47 per cent are permanent residents in the country of destination, and 45 per cent are overseas Filipino workers who are expected to return at the end of their contract of employment. The remaining 8 per cent of the total estimated number of overseas Filipinos are in an irregular situation (i.e. undocumented, or without valid residence or work permits, or overstaying in a foreign country). The highest number of permanent overseas Filipinos is found in the Americas (3,481,263, mostly in the United States and Canada), while the highest number of temporary overseas Filipinos are found in West Asia (2,717,046, mostly in Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain) and in South and East Asia (644,446, mostly in China – Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Japan, Malaysia, Taiwan and Singapore). The Committee further notes from the statistics collected by the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) that of the 340,279 land-based overseas Filipinos deployed in 2010, 55 per cent were women, the majority of whom are employed in the services sectors. The Committee notes from the Government’s report to the United Nations Committee on Migrant Workers that according to the most recent data there are 36,150 foreign workers in the Philippines (CMW/C/PHP/1, 7 March 2008, paragraphs 36–45). The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide detailed information on the numbers of overseas Filipino workers (hires and re-hires) by economic sector, sex and country of destination. Please also provide up-to-date statistics, disaggregated by sex and nationality, as well as economic sector, on the number of migrants that have entered the Philippines for employment.

Laws, policies and structures promoting and protecting the rights of migrant workers. The Committee notes with interest the extensive legal and policy framework applying the Convention, illustrating the Government’s commitment to promoting and protecting the rights of Filipino migrant workers. It notes, in particular, Republic Act (RA) No. 8042 on Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos of 1995, as amended by RA No. 9422 to Strengthen the Regulatory Functions of the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration of 2006; RA No. 10022 Further Improving the Standard of Protection and Promotion of Welfare of Migrant Workers, Their Families and Overseas Filipinos in Distress and for Other Purposes, the Omnibus Rules and Regulations Implementing the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995; RA No. 9208 on the “Anti-Trafficking Act” of 2002, the POEA’s Rules and Regulations Governing the Recruitment and Employment of Land-Based Overseas Workers, 2002, and the Overseas Workers’ Welfare Administration (OWWA) Omnibus Policies. The Committee also notes with interest the ratification by the Philippines of a number of international instruments relevant to migrant workers, in particular the United Nations Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and their Families (1990), the Migrant Workers (Supplementary Provisions) Convention, 1975 (No. 143), and most recently, the Domestic Workers Convention, 2011 (No. 189).

Furthermore, the Committee notes with interest the multitude of programmes for overseas Filipino workers covering all stages of the migration process (from pre-departure, arrival in destination country and return), as well as the support structures for Filipino migrant workers, including the Commission on Filipinos Overseas (CFO), the National Reintegration Center for Overseas Foreign Workers (NRCO), OWWA, POEA, the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), the Technical Education and Skills Development Agency (TESDA), the Inter-Agency Council Against Trafficking (IACAT), the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) and the Philippine Overseas Labor Offices (POLOs), and labour attachés and consulates abroad addressing migrant workers’ issues. The Committee notes in particular that the CFO is in charge of conducting a range of pre-departure programmes for Filipinos migrating permanently to other countries, including the pre-departure orientation seminars (PDOS), the Guidance and Counselling Programme for spouses and partners, the Peer Counselling Programme, and the Community Education Programme. It also notes the important role and functions of the POEA which is in charge of the recruitment and placement of overseas Filipino workers. The activities of the POEA include selection, referral to medical examination, processing of contracts, assistance and securing of passports and visas, pre-employment orientation seminars (PEOS) and anti-illegal recruitment seminars, PDOS and travel arrangements. PDOS are mandatory for all overseas Filipino workers going through the government-to-government arrangement and those who are directly employed by a foreign employer without the help of a recruitment agency (“name hires”). PEOS are offered in coordination with the local government units and aimed at providing prospective overseas workers with information on the realities of international labour migration including its challenges and risks. Gender-sensitive information and programmes and services are directed to prospective female migrants, including preparatory courses on conditions of work and life. The Committee further notes that Migrant Workers and Other Overseas Filipinos Resource Centers (MWRCs) are established in the premises of Philippine embassies in countries in which there are a large number of Filipino overseas workers. MWRCs provide a range of services, including counselling and legal services; welfare assistance, information, advice and programmes to promote social integration, including post-arrival orientation; registration of undocumented workers, training and skills upgrading, gender sensitive programmes and activities to assist with the particular needs of women migrant workers; orientation programmes for returning migrants, and monitoring of the situation with respect to migrant workers. The Legal Assistant for Migrant Workers in the DFA and the Legal Assistance Fund (RA 8042) have also been created with a view to ensuring that overseas Filipino workers have access to appropriate redress mechanisms while employed abroad. The National Re-integration Council for Overseas Foreign Workers (NRCO) delivers reintegration services to Filipino migrant workers using the full-cycle approach covering pre-departure, on-site and return phases of migration. Services include financial literacy orientation, counselling, and assistance with respect to local and overseas employment opportunities, skills training and upgrading and livelihood and business development. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the activities undertaken by the above institutions to give effect to the provisions of the Convention and to promote and protect the rights of Filipino migrant workers.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.