Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

4835

House Bill No.

Introduced by HONORABLE SCOTT DAVIES S. LANETE, M.D.

EXPLANATORY NOTE

In July of 2012, the long-awaited Domestic Workers Act was passed into law. Republic Act
No, 10361 otherwise known as “Batas Kasambahay” introduced measures that would ensure
that domestic workers or “Kasambahays” are accorded the rightful wages, benefits and a
healthy working environment. Along with these measures came policies geared to protect the
dignity of domestic workers. Specifically, R.A. No. 10361 declared among others that:

‘SEC. 2. Declaration of Policies. — It is hereby dectared that:

(@) The State strongly affirms labor as a primary social force and is committed to
Tespect, promote, protect and realize the fundamental principles and rights at work
including, but not limited to, abolition of child labor, elimination of all forms of
forced labor, discrimination in employment and occupation, and trafficking in
persons, especially women and children:

(b) The State adheres to internationally accepted working conditions for workers in
general, and establishes labor standards for domestic workers in particular, towards
decent employment and income, enhanced coverage of social protection, respect for
human rights and strengthened social dialogue:

(©) The State recognizes the need to protect the rights of domestic workers against
abuse, harassment, violence, economic exploitation and performance of work that is
hazardous to their physical and mental health.”

R.A. No. 10361 also declared a “Standard of Treatment” that all employers are expected to
observe, Sec. 5 states that “the employer or any member of the household shall not subject a
domestic worker or “kasambahay” to any kind of abuse nor inflict any form of physical
violence or harassment or any act tending to degrade the dignity of a domestic worker.”

Despite these provisions, R.A. 10361 has not been successful in curtailing incidents of
employers and/or owners of establishments committing acts that tend 0 degrade
Kasambahays. Quite recently, a concerned citizen posted her horrifving experience on social
media and her post went viral. In the post, the concerned citizen narrated that her family
booked a room at a high-end condotel in Makati City. Their kasambahays were
accompanying her children who were swimming at the pool when the establishment's



security personnel approached the kasambahays and told them to leave the pool area as it was
their establishment's policy to prohibit kasambahays from using the pool. The concerned
citizen also posted a photo of the establishment’s house rules and regulations which upon
close scrutiny, revealed that kasambahays were indeed prohibited from using the poo! area.
Other concemed citizens who read the post posted their respective experiences and some
narrated that most establishments also prohibit kasambahays from using the main elevators
and instead, the kasambahays were directed to use “service” elevators.

Although these kinds of act do not cause any physical harm towards kasamabahays, they
nevertheless discriminate against kasambahays and maligns their dignity as persons. To the
mind of the author, there are no just, reasonable and compelling reasons for establishments to
prohibit kasambahays from accompanying their wards at the pool area or using any elevator
The only reason the author can think of is that establishment owners probably see
kasambahays as lower class citizens who should not be accorded privileges similar to their
employers. And there lies the rub.

Despite the “Standard of Treatment” imposed by R.A. No. 10361, incidents similar to the
above persist. Employers and establishments alike are not entirely forced to follow the
“Standard of Treatment” as R.A. No. 10361 does not impose any penalty for non-compliance.
R.A. No. 10361 only penalized acts which are declared “unlawful” and non-compliance with
the “Standard of Treatment” is not one of those acts declared as such.

‘Therefore, R.A. No. 10361 has been a toothless tiger when it comes to the protection of every
kasambahay’s dignity as a human being.

Thus, it is high time for the Philippines to adopt strict measures in ensuring that employers
and owners of establishments comply with the “Standard of Treatment” by penalizing non-
compliance therewith. As long as there is no law penalizing non-compliance with the

‘Standard of Treatment”, kasambahays will continue to be exposed to acts that tend to
degrade their dignity.

Therefore, the passage of this bill is urgently needed

SCOTT DAVIES S. LANETE, M.D.
fepresentative
‘Third District, Province of Masbate


Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

Ve 4835

House Bill No.

Introduced by HONORABLE SCOTT DAVIES S. LANETE, M.D.

AN ACT AMENDING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10361,
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE “DOMESTIC WORKERS ACT” OR
“BATAS KASAMBAHAY”, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

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

Sec. 1. Section 5 of Republic Act No. 10361 is hereby amended as follows:

“SEC. 5, Standard of Treatment. ‘Fhe employer or any member
of the household shalt-net to subject ambahay”’ to any kind of abuse
nor inflict any form of physical violence or harassment or any act tending to directly or
indirectly degrade the dignity of a domestic worker.

Sec. 2. Section 40 of Republic Act No. 10361 is hereby amended as follows:

“SEC. 40. Penalty. — Any violation of the provisions of this Act declared unlawful shall be
punishable with a fine of not less than Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00) but not more than
Forty thousand pesos (P40,000.00) without prejudice to the filing of appropriate civil or
criminal action by the aggrieved party

In addition to the fine mentioned above, the penalty of imprisonment from one to two years
shall be imposed against any employer, owner or responsible officers of establishments who,
shall violate Section 5.”

Sec, 3. If any part or provision of this Act shall be held unconstitutional or invalid, other
provisions which are not affected thereby shall continue to be in full force and effect

Sec. 4. All laws, issuances or parts thereof inconsistent with this Act are hereby repealed or
modified accordingly.

Sec. 5. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its publication in the Official Gazerte
or in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation

Approved.