/ I  
FOURTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC) 
. .  
OF THE PHILIPPINES 
1 
, ,’ 
, ! ; I ;  
. 
~
/
i
 :: 
,~ 
First Regular Session 
1 
SENATE 
S. B. No. 
Introduced by Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago 
EXPLANATORY NOTE 
Republic Act No. 8042 entitled “AN ACT TO INSTITUTE THE POLICIES OF 
OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT AND ESTABLISH A HIGHER STANDARD OF 
PROTECTION AND PROMOTION OF THE WELFARE OF MIGRANT WORKERS, 
THEIR FAMILIES AND OVERSEAS FILIPINOS IN DISTRESS, AND FOR OTHER 
PWOSES”, also known as the “Migrant Workers Act of 1995” for short, was enacted 
to protect and promote the rights and welfare of Filipino migrant workers. 
One of the policies it sets out in Section 2, under Declaration of Policies, restates 
the constitutional provision on the State’s duty and responsibility to protect labor (Section 
18, Article 11, Declaration of Principles and State Policies; and Section 3, Article XIII, 
Social Justice and Human Rights), to wit: 
“(b) The State shall afford full protection to labor, local and overseas, 
organized and unorganized, and promote hll employment and equality of 
employment opportunities for all. Towards this end, the State shall provide 
adequate and timely social, economic and legal services to Filipino migrant 
workers.” 
It further asserts in letter (c) of the same Section 2 that: 
“(c) x x x The existence of the overseas employment program rests solely 
on the assurance that the dignity and fundamental human rights and freedoms of 
the Filipino citizen shall not, at any time, he compromised or violated.” 
Accordingly, all throughout R.A. 8042, there axe regulatory provisions on 
Deployment, Illegal Recruitment, Services and other provisions, including penalties for 


illegal recruitment, which serve to carry out stated policies of protection and promotion 
of the rights of Filipino migrant workers and which regulate the recruitment of Filipinos 
for employment abroad. 
Unfortunately, however, Sections 29 and 30 of the Act also provide for the 
eventual deregulation of recruitment activities over a period of five years following the 
effectivity of the act in July 1995, which would make migration of workers “strictly a 
matter between the workers and his foreign employer.” 
“SEC. 29. Comprehensive Deregulation Plan on Recruitment Activities. - 
Pursuant to a progressive policy of deregulation whereby the migration of 
workers becomes strictly a matter between the worker and his foreign employer, 
the DOLE, within one (1) year from the effectivity of this Act, is hereby 
mandated to formulate a five-year comprehensive deregulation plan on 
recruitment activities taking into account labor market trends, economic 
conditions of the country and emerging circumstances which may affect the 
welfare of migrant workers. 
“SEC. 30. Gradual Phase-out of Regulatory Functions. - Within a period 
of five (5) years from the effectivity of this Act, the DOLE shall phase-out the 
regulatory functions of the POEA pursuant to the objectives of deregulation. 
In this regard, Section 23, par. (b.1) also subjects the regulatory mandate of the 
Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) to said deregulation and phase- 
out provisions of Sections 29 and 30. 
Congressional records of the Bicameral Committee deliberations at the time show 
that these two provisions, which originated from the Senate version of the law, Senate 
Bill No. 2077, were included in the final version because: 1) it was expected at the time 
that the Philippines will have achieved the status of a “newly-industrialized country” by 
the year 2000; and 2) it would do away with “bureaucratic red tape” and corruption in the 
process of recruitment. 
Today, nine years from the enactment of R.A. 8042, it is clear that the dream of 
achieving NIC-hood has not materialized and it seems will not materialize anytime soon. 


As to the second reason, deregulation is not the answer and solution to the problem of 
corruption and “bureaucratic red tape.” It would be tantamount to “throwing the baby out 
with the bath water,” as the saying goes. 
The realities faced by our overseas Filipino workers today also calls, in fact, for 
more protection rather than less or none at all. They constitute compelling arguments for 
the outright scrapping of the deregulation provisions of Sections 29 and 30 of R.A. 8042. 
Despite R.A. 8042, illegal recruitment still continues to be committed against 
prospective Filipino migrant workers, as borne out by the records of the Philippine 
Overseas Employment Administration (POEA). Incidents of on-site violations of the 
rights of overseas Filipino workers also still continue, ranging from non-payment of 
wages to maltreatment and physical abuse. 
The hope of R.A. 8042 that migration becomes strictly a matter between workers 
and their foreign employers also appears not to be borne out by the reality that there are 
layers of intermediaries between them, in the Philippines as well as in host countries. 
Brokers in labor markets worldwide continue to emerge, and local private employment 
agencies are allowed to continuously participate in the recruitment and placement of 
OFWs. 
Likewise, the feminization of the OFW sector and the upsurge of vulnerable skills 
overseas, like domestic helpers and performing artists, require continued government 
intervention to promote their welfare. Efforts to forge bilateral labor agreements for the 
protection of OFWs have also not borne much fruit. Out of the 187 countries of 
destination of OFWs, only twenty-one (21) countries have signed bilateral labor 
agreements with the Philippine government. 
These realities highlight the fundamental argument against deregulation, which is 
that the constitutionally mandated responsibility of the State to extend full protection to 
labor, whether local and overseas, organized and unorganized, as provided in Section 3 of 
Article XI11 of the Constitution and Section 18, Article 11, should not be abdicated. 


Deregulation would also violate the UN Convention for the Protection of the 
Rights and Welfare of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families that was 
ratified by the Philippines in June 1995. 
In view of all the foregoing, Sections 29 and 30, and with them, Section 23, par. 
(b.l), of R.A. 8042 should be repealed and the regulatory functions of the Philippine 
Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) strengthened thereby. 
This is a senate counterpart bill to the one filed in the House. of Representatives 
by Rep. Etta Rosales. 


6 
7 
8 
9 
lo 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
.I 
FOURTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC ) 
OF THE PHILIPPINES 
1 
i
:
.
 
i;;i; 18 
First Regular Session 
1 
Introduced by Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago 
AN ACT 
STRENGTHENING THE REGULATORY FUNCTIONS OF THE PHILIPPINE 
OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT ADMINISTRATION (POEA), AMENDING FOR THIS 
PURPOSE REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8042, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE “MIGRANT 
WORKERS AND OVERSEAS FILIPINOS ACT OF 1995” 
Be it enacted by the Senate and the House ofRepvesentatives of the Philippines in 
Congress assembled: 
SECTION 1. Section 23, paragraph (b.1) of Republic Act No. 8042, otherwise 
known as the “Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995” is hereby amended 
to read as follows: 
“(b.1) 
Philippine Overseas Employment Administration - [Subject to 
deregulation and phase-out as provided under Sections 29 and 30 herein,] 
The 
Administration shall regulate private sector participation in the recruitment and overseas 
placement of workers by setting up a licensing and registration system. It shall also 
formulate and implement, in coordination with appropriate entities concerned, when 
necessary, a system for promoting and monitoring the overseas employment of Filipino 
workers taking into consideration their welfare and the domestic manpower 
requirements.” 
SECTION 2. Section 29 of the same law is hereby repealed. 
“[SEC. 29. 
Compvehensive Deregulation Plan on Recruitment Activities. - 
Pursuant to a progressive policy of deregulation whereby the migration of workers 
becomes strictly a matter between the worker and his foreign employer, the DOLE, 
within one (1) year from the effectivity of this Act, is hereby mandated to formulate a 
five-year comprehensive deregulation plan on recruitment activities taking into account 
1 


1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
labor market trends, economic conditions of the country and emerging circumstances 
which may affect the welfare of migrant workers.] 
SECTION 3. Section 30 of the same law is hereby repealed. 
“[SEC. 30. Gradual Phase-out of Regulatory Functions. - Within a period of five 
( 5 )  years from the effectivity of this Act, the DOLE shall phase-out the regulatory 
hnctions of the POEA pursuant to the objectives of deregulation.]” 
SECTION 4. Repealing Clause. - All laws, orders, issuances, rules and 
regulations or part thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby 
repealed, amended or modified accordingly. 
SECTION 5. Effectivity Clause. - This Act shall take effect within fifteen (15) 
days after its publication in the Of$ccial Guzette or in at least two (2) newspapers of 
general circulation, whichever comes earlier. 
13 
Approved. 
2