SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

First Regular Session

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
: 339

House Bill No.

Introduced by Representative Susan A. Yap

EXPLANATORY NOTE

‘The 1987 Constitution includes a new provision for a right that has not been enshrined in the
1935 and 1973 Constitutions:

Section 14, Article IL. The State recognizes the role of women in nation building, and shall ensure
the fundamental equality before the law of women and men.

‘The right of women (and men) to equal opportunities is also made explicit in Book 1 of the
Labor Code:

“ART, 3, Declaration of basic policy. - The State shall afford protection to labor, promote
fall employment, ensure equal work opportunities regardless of sex, race or creed
and regulate the relations between workers and employers. The State shall assure the
rights of workers to sclf-organization, collective bargaining, security of tenure, and just
and humane conditions of work.” (emphasis supplied)

It is true that at first glance Section 1 of Article 135 and Section 2 of Article 137 of the Labor
Code seem to champion affirmative action towards female employees. However, in practice,
employers have in innumerable times tried and succeeded in circumventing the declared policy of
ensuring equal work opportunities regardless of sex by discriminating women.

In a report by the Bureau of Women and Young Workers and the National Statistics Office, it
was stated that women employees generally earn less than their male counterparts because they are
predominantly in low-skilled jobs, and only a few of them advance tg the top of the organizational
hierarchy

To address this practice and to help the government live up to its promise of upholding
policies which seek to place women workers on equal footing with their male counterparts, this bill
expands the scope of acts of discrimination by an employer against women as enumerated under Art.
135 of the Labor Code, as amended. The amendment seeks to encourage employers to recruit and hire
more women in the workplace thereby eliminating the big stumbling block to women’s employability,
considering that there are more equally or even more talented, skilled and qualified women in the
country today

Under the measure, any employer found guilty of favoring a male employee over a female
employee with respect to dismissal of personnel ot the application of any retrefichment policy of the
employer solely on account of their sexes shall be fined or suffer imprisonment or both. It makes it a
violation to deny any woman the benefits of employment or other statutory benefits under our laws by
reason of her gender.

SUSAN
Representative, 2! Dist


me

ram

eI aH

in
12

13
14
15

16
17
18
19
20
21
2
23
24
25
26
27
28
29

SIXTEENTH CONGRESS )
OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )
First Regular Session )

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

House Bill No_ 399)

Introduced by Representative Susan A. Yap

AN ACT
EXPANDING THE PROHIBITED ACTS OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN
ON ACCOUNT OF SEX, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE ARTICLES 135 AND
137 OF PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 442, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE
KNOWN AS THE “LABOR CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES”

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled:
SECTION 1. Article 135 of Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended, otherwise known as
the “Labor Code of the Philippines”, is hereby amended to read as follows:

“ARTICLE 135. Discrimination Prohibited. — It shall be unlawful for any employer to
discriminate against any woman employee with respect to terms and conditions of
employment solely on account of her sex.

“The following are acts of discrimination:

“(a) Pay
remuneration and fringe benefits, to a female employee as against a male employee, for

ent of a lesser compensation, including wage, salary or other form of

work of equal value; [and]

“(b)_ Favoring a male employee over a female employee with respect to promotion,
ASSIGNMENT, training opportunities, study and scholarship grants solely on account
of their sexes[.]; AND

“(C) FAVORING A MALE EMPLOYEE OVER A FEMALE
EMPLOYEE WITH RESPECT TO DISMISSAL OF PERSONNEL OR THE
APPLICATION OF ANY RETRENCHMENT POLICY OF THE

EMPLOYER SOLELY ON ACCOUNT OF THEIR SEXES.

“Criminal liability for the willful commission of any unlawful act as provided in this
Article or any violation of the rules and regulations issued pursuant to Section 2 hereof
shall be penalized as provided in Articles 288 and 289 of this Code: Provided, That the
institution of any criminal action under this provision shall not bar the aggrieved
employee from filing an entirely separate and distinct action for money claims, which
may include claims for damages and other affirmative reliefs. The actions hereby
authorized shall proceed independently of each other.”

SECTION 2. Article 137 of the Labor Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

“ARTICLE 137. Prohibited Acts. — (a) It shall be unlawful for any employer:

“@) To deny any woman employee the benefits provided for in this Chapter or to
discharge any woman employed, by him for the purpose of preventing her from enjoying
any of the benefits provided under this Code;

“@) To discharge such woman on account of her pregnancy, of while on leave or in

1


EGBEScer aus wn

confinement due to her pregnancy;

“@) To discharge or refuse the admission of such woman upon returning to her
work for fear that she may again be pregnant[.]; OR

«@ TO DENY ANY WOMAN THE BENEFITS OF EMPLOYMENT
OR OTHER STATUTORY BENEFITS UNDER OUR LAWS BY
REASONOF HER SEX.

“ANY EMPLOYER WHO COMMITS OR ATTEMPTS IN ANY
MANNER TO COMMIT ANY OF THE ACTS PROHIBITED UNDER THIS
ARTICLE OR ANY RULE OR REGULATION ISSUED PURSUANT
THERETO SHALL, IN ADDITION TO OTHER PENALTIES AS MAY BE
PROVIDED BY LAW, UPON CONVICTION, BE PUNISHED BY A FINE
OF NOT LESS THAN FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS (P50,000.00) BUT NOT
MORE THAN TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (P200,000.00),
AND SUFFER IMPRISONMENT OF NOT LESS THAN TWO (2) YEARS
BUT NOT MORE THAN FOUR (4) YEARS: PROVIDED, THAT THE
CONVICTION OR ACQUITTAL OBTAINED BY THE EMPLOYER
SHALL NOT BE A BAR TO THE FILING BY THE FEMALE
EMPLOYEE OF A CIVIL SUIT FOR THE PAYMENT OF SALARIES OR
BENEFITS DUE HER.

“ANY EMPLOYEE OR PERSON WHO WILLFULLY AIDS OR ABETS

IN THE COMMISSION OF THE ACTS PROHIBITED HEREIN OR

WHO CAUSES THE COMMISSION OF ANY SUCH ACTS BY

ANOTHER SHALL BE LIABLE IN THE SAME MANNER AS THE

EMPLOYER.”

SECTION 3. Implementing Rules and Regulations. — Within thirty (30) days from the
effectivity of this Act, the Secretary of Labor and Employment, in consultation with the
‘Tripartite Industrial Peace Council, shall issue and publish the necessary rules and tegulations to
implement the provisions of this Act.

SECTION 4. Separability Clause. - If any provision of this Act is declared unconstitutional, the
same shall not affect the validity and effectivity of the other provisions hereof.

TION 5. Repealing Clause. — All laws, executive orders, presidential decrees, presidential
proclamations, rules and regulations or parts thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are
hereby repealed or modified accordingly

SECTION 6. Effctivity Clause. — This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its
complete publication in the Oficial Gazette or in a newspaper of general circulation.

Approved,