OFWs spared unified
contract -- for the moment



AFTER MUCH HUE and cry by migrant labor groups and this columnist against the Unified Contract scheme agreed to by the Saudi Arabian National Labor Committee (Sanarcom) and the Overseas Placement Association of the Philippines (OPAP), it was the Saudi embassy in Manila that announced its temporary suspension and not Philippine government officials.

Labor Secretary Patricia Sto. Tomas and Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) administrator Rosalinda Baldoz have refused to intervene and stop the unified contract from being implemented, even though it is clearly disadvantageous to Filipino workers wishing to work in Saudi Arabia. For one, it expressly forbids a worker from running away from his employer, no matter what abuse he is subjected to. It also allows contract substitution once a worker reaches the Kingdom, a clear violation of the Philippine law that bans contract substitution.

Sto. Tomas initially said that she couldn't intervene in the unified contract agreement because it was a private initiative, and that the Philippine government didn't want to meddle in private business deals. After much prodding by migrant labor groups and politicians, she begrudgingly agreed to form a committee to study the issue. The committee is headed by former ambassador Roy Señeres, who is now head of the National Labor Relations Commission, and should deliver its recommendation on what the Philippine government should do vis-a-vis the unified contract scheme within two weeks.

I really think that President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo should fire Secretary Santo Tomas for failing to protect Filipino workers and Philippine interests.

Five senators -- Manuel Villar, Rodolfo Biazon, John Osmeña, Loren Legarda-Leviste and Franklin Drilon -- have each filed separate resolutions calling for the suspension of the unified contract scheme. They also urged the Senate Committee on Labor, Employment and Human Resources and the Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs to conduct an inquiry into the unified contract scheme.

The House of Representatives Committee on Labor and Employment conducted a hearing on the unified contract scheme on March 18. At that hearing, Jocelyn A. Santos, a representative of YHMD International Manpower Services Inc., said her agency had signed five unified contracts while processing five domestic helpers who were being sent to Saudi Arabia. She claimed that her agency had been pressured into signing the new contracts by its Saudi counterpart.

According to sources who attended the House meeting, POEA administrator Baldoz refused to divulge the contents of an analysis of the Unified Contract that her agency did, saying its recommendations were confidential and that they had been passed on to the secretary of labor. Baldoz also refused to suspend the unified contract until the Señeres-led committee issued its recommendations. Finally, the POEA administrator admitted that Sanarcom had not provided her with a copy of an alleged Saudi ministerial decree that approved the unified contract scheme.

It is ironic that if the Saudi Embassy hadn't suspended the unified contract scheme, Filipino workers would have continued to be deployed to Saudi Arabia under the new scheme as Sto. Tomas and Baldoz dilly-dallied, waiting for their committee to issue its recommendations.

This apparent total lack of concern for the welfare of OFWs displayed by Philippine labor officials is frankly mind-boggling and hard to believe. When the export of human resources is the most important export of the Philippines, it is patently clear that the protection and welfare of these people should be paramount to the Philippine government. That Baldoz and Sto. Tomas have washed their hands of this responsibility means that they have let down the strategic interests of the Philippines.

* * *

Watching Gulf War II

AS I WRITE this column on Thursday morning, I'm watching at least three different news channels providing live coverage of the beginning of the Gulf War, Part II. Sky News, MSNBC and CNN International are all providing minute-by-minute coverage of the US cruise missile attack on Baghdad overnight and of the Iraqi missile attacks on Kuwait.

I stay glued to Sky News as it reports every single emergency siren that seems to be set off every 15 minutes in Kuwait City. Each time the reporters on screen must scramble to put on their gas masks, but each time it thankfully turns out to be a false alarm, although several Iraqi Scud missiles have landed in northern Kuwait.

Although we are relatively safe here in Jeddah on the Red Sea coast of Saudi Arabia, and on the other side of the Arabian Peninsula from Kuwait, it is still nerve rattling to watch the events unfold on our television screens.

I was here for the first Gulf War, and then we had to make do with pre-recorded CNN reports aired on Saudi TV. Now we have a plethora of satellite television channels to choose from to provide us with round-the-clock coverage of every hiccup of the war.

As newspaper reporters and editors, we all feel frustrated with the fast pace at which events such as these unfold. There is no way that any paper can be up to date in a war situation such as this one. As soon as we go to press, events overtake us, making our news out of date and stale. It is the 24-hour television news channels that show their best qualities during such times of stress and rapidly changing events, as only they can truly be up to date. We can only provide our readers with analysis of events in an attempt to give them a fresh perspective on the war.

* * *

Visit the author's website at http://www.manilamoods.com to read past columns.