FIFTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC 
) 
OF THE PHILIPPINES 
) 
First Regular Session 
) 
'1-( <n 
, "'. 
,,~. 
SENATE 
S. No. 1742 
\ 
i 
I / 
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 PURPOSES", 
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 all 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 are regulatory provisions on Deployment, 
Illegal Recruitment, Services and other provisions, including penalties for illegal recruitment, 
1 


which serve to carry out stated policies of protection and promotion of the rights of Filipino 
migrant workers and which regulate the recruitment ofFilipiuos 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. I ) 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 ofR.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. 
2 


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 ofOFWs. 
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 
OFW s, 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 XIII of the 
Constitution and Section 18, Atiicle 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. 
3 


This is a senate counterpart bill to the one filed in the House of Representatives by Rep. 
Etta Rosales. I 
I This bill was originally filed during the 14'h Congress I" Regular Session 
4 


FIFTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC 
) 
m: 
fl'· 
OF THE PHILIPPINES 
) 
First Regular Session 
) 
SENATE 
1742 
S. No. ~"'-'.-"-=-
Introduced by Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago 
AN ACT 
2 
STRENGTHENING THE REGULATORY FUNCTIONS OF THE PHILIPPINE 
3 
OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT ADMINISTRATION (POEA), AMENDING FOR THIS 
4 
PURPOSE REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8042, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE "MIGRANT 
5 
WORKERS AND OVERSEAS FILIPINOS ACT OF 1995" 
Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the Philippines in 
Congress assembled: 
6 
SECTION 1. Section 23, paragraph (b.l) of Republic Act No. 8042, otherwise known as 
7 
the "Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995" is hereby amended to read as 
8 
follows: 
9 
"(b. I) Philippine Overseas Employment Administration - [Subject to deregulation and 
10 
phase-out as provided under Sections 29 and 30 herein,] The Administration shall regulate 
11 
private sector participation in the recruitment and overseas placement of workers by setting up a 
12 
licensing and registration system. It shall also formulate and implement, in coordination with 
13 
appropriate entities concemed, when necessary, a system for promoting and monitoring the 
14 
overseas employment of Filipino workers taking into consideration their welfare and the 
15 
domestic manpower requirements." 
16 
SECTION 2. Section 29 of the same law is hereby repealed. 
17 
"[SEc' 29. Comprehensive Deregulation Plan on Recruitment Activities. -
18 
Pursuant to a progressive policy of deregulation whereby the migration of workers becomes 
19 
strictly a maller between the worker and his foreign employer, the DOLE, within one (1) year 
20 
from the effectivity of this Act, is hereby mandated to formulate a five-year comprehensive 
21 
deregulation plan on recruitment activities taking into account labor market trends, economic 
22 
conditions of the country and emerging circumstances which may affect the welfare of migrant 
23 
workers.] 
1 


• 
1 
SECTION 3. Section 30 of the same law is hereby repealed. 
2 
"[SEC. 30. Gradual Phase-out of Regulatory Functions. - Within a period of five (5) 
3 
years from the effectivity of this Act, the DOLE shall phase-out the regulatory functions of the 
4 
POEA pursuant to the objectives of deregulation.]" 
5 
SECTION 4. Repealing Clause. - All laws, orders, issuances, rules and regulations or part 
6 
thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed, amended or modified 
7 
accordingly. 
8 
SECTION 5. Effectivity Clause. - This Act shall take effect within fifteen (15) days after 
9 
its publication in the' Official Gazette or in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation, 
10 
whichever comes earlier. 
11 
Approved. 
2