Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTAT!
Quezon City

SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session RECISTRATION WNIT
1700 BILLS N20 INSEX SERVICE

House Bill No.

Introduced by AKBAYAN Representative Tomasito S. Villarin

EXPLANATORY NOTE

In the case of “Antonio M. Serrano vs. Gallant Maritime Services, Inc. and
Marlow Navigation Co., Inc.”, G.R. No. 167614 (March 24, 2009), the clause
“or for three months for every year of the unexpired term, whichever is less”
which appears in the fifth paragraph of Section 10 of Republic Act No. 8042
as follows:

“Sec.10. Money Claims. - x x x in case of termination of
overseas employment without just, valid or authorized cause as
defined by law or contract, the workers shall be entitled to the
full reimbursement of his placement fee with interest of twelve
percent (12%) per annum, plus his salaries for the unexpired

portion of his employment contract or for three (3) months for

every year of unexpired term, whichever is less.”

x x x x (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)

was declared by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional for violating the
equal protection clause of the 1987 Philippine Constitution.

The Supreme Court held in Serrano:

“In sum, prior to R.A. No. 8042, OFWs and local workers with fixed-
term employment who were illegally discharged were treated alike in
terms of computation of their money claims: they were uniformly
entitled to their salaries for the entire unexpired portions of their
contracts, But with the enactment of R.A. No. 8042, specifically the
adoption of the subject clause, illegally dismissed OFWs with an
unexpired portion of one year or more in their employment contract
have since been differently treated in that their money claims are
subject to a 3-month cap, whereas no such limitation is imposed on
local workers with fixed-term employment.

“The Court concludes that the subject clause contains a suspect
classification in that, in the computation of the monetary benefits of


fixed-term employees who are illegally discharged, it imposes a 3-
month cap on the claim of OFWs with an unexpired portion of one
year or more in their contracts, but none on the claims of other OFWs
or local workers with fixed-term employment. The subject clause
singles out one classification of OFWs and burdens it with peculiar
disadvantage.

eed XXX XXX

“Thus, the subject clause in the St paragraph of Section 10 of R.A.
No, 8042 is violative of the right of the petitioner and other OFWs to
equal protection.”

Unfortunately, notwithstanding the Court’s ruling in the Serrano case, the
unconstitutional clause “or for three months for every year of the unexpired
term, whichever is less” in the fifth paragraph of Section 10 of Republic Act
No. 8042 was carried over in the current text of Republic Act No. 8042, as
amended by Republic Act No. 10022 which was passed by Congress on July
27, 2009.

This bill seeks to amend the fifth paragraph of Section 10 of Republic Act
No. 8042 in order to harmonize the text of the law with the Supreme Court’s
decision in the Serrano case by deleting the unconstitutional clause “or for
three months for every year of the unexpired term, whichever is less” in the
fifth paragraph of Section 10 of Republic Act No. 8042, as amended.

During the 16 Congress Akbayan’s representatives filed this bill as House
Bill No. 3871. This current version adopts the text based on House Bill No.
5988, which was passed on third and final reading last Congress.

In the light of the foregoing, the passage of this bill is earnestly sought.



Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

1700
House Bill No.

Introduced by AKBAYAN Representative Tomasito S. Villarin

AN ACT
GRANTING THE OVERSEAS FILIPINO OWRKERS THE RIGHT TO EQUAL
PROTECTION ON MONEY CLAIMS, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE THE
FIFTH PARAGRAPH OF SECTION 10 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8042, AS
AMENDED BY REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10022

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in
Congress assembled:

SECTION 1, The fifth paragraph of Section 10 of Republic Act No.
8042, otherwise known as the “Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act
of 1995”, as amended by Republic Act No. 10022, is hereby further amended
to read as follows:

“SEC. 10. Money Claims. - x x x

“In case of termination of overseas employment without just, valid or
authorized cause as defined by law or contract, or any unauthorized
deductions from the migrant worker’s salary, the worker shall be entitled to
the full reimbursement of his placement fee and the deductions made with
interest at twelve percent (12%) per annum, plus his salaries for the
unexpired portion of his employment contract for for three (3) months for
every year of the unexpired term, whichever is less}.

nat Se


SEC. 2. All laws, presidential decrees, issuances, executive orders,
letters of instruction, rules or regulations inconsistent with the provisions of
this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.

SEC. 3. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its publication
in the Official Gazette or in a newspaper of general circulation.

Approved,