Executive Summary

Three decades of sustained and large-scale labor migration have transformed the Philippines into a major source country of workers of various skill levels for the global labor market.

The Philippines’ feat in capturing a niche in the global labor market has been accompanied by the pursuit of a labor migration policy and the active participation of a well-established migration industry. Over the years, a legal and institutional framework that provides protection for overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) – from pre-departure, to on-site support and assistance, and to the return and reintegration of migrant workers – developed as well. Despite the various protective mechanisms and good practices that are in place, overseas Filipino workers experience many problems, including problems even before they leave for abroad. Cases of illegal recruitment or migrant workers getting a raw deal in the destination countries are routinely reported in the media.

The need to address pre-migration conditions is important to prevent other problems later on, particularly when migrants are already in the countries of destination and are beyond the reach of national laws. In the interest to promote safer pre-migration conditions, the Philippine Migrants Rights Watch (PMRW) embarked on a research project to examine the experiences of migrant workers as they prepare for overseas employment, i.e., from the time that they apply for overseas work up to the point of departure. The aims of the study were:

• To document the requirements recruitment agencies/manning agencies ask of applicants seeking overseas jobs;

• To know migrant workers’ experiences in dealing with other agencies prior to deployment: medical clinics/hospitals, training centers, relevant departments of the POEA/OWWA, NGOs, PDOS providers, and other institutions; and

• To determine migrant workers’ knowledge of the provisions of their work contract, working and living conditions abroad, rights, and access to support and assistance in the destination.

Data and Methods

The research focused on legal migrant workers, i.e., those who are going through the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA). By focusing on workers going through the legal channels, the research aims to uncover the loopholes and problems in the existing system, which may not be so obvious given the legal mantle that surrounds the process.

The main data came from a survey of 990 departing migrant workers who attended the Pre-Departure Orientation Seminars (PDOS) provided by the POEA Central Office, POEA/OWWA offices in Cebu and Davao, selected NGOs and a licensed industry provider. The selection of respondents was not based on probability sampling and most of the respondents were women migrants, limitations that have to be considered in the interpretation of the data.

Other than the survey, the study also conducted key informant interviews with key personnel from government agencies, PDOS providers, and selected migrant workers; and focus group discussions with migrant workers across different occupational groups. The collection of primary data was undertaken between June and September 2004.

The profile of survey respondents reveal migrants who had considerable human capital: 46 percent were college graduates and some 86 percent had worked in the Philippines. More than half (59 percent) had also worked abroad. The majority of these departing OFWs (68 percent) will take up work as domestic workers and caregivers/caretakers. The rest will be engaged in various jobs – e.g., factory workers, restaurant/hotel workers, IT, teachers, nurses and others. They will be working in different countries; most will be working in Asian countries.

Major Findings

1. Economic reasons, mostly the lack of regular employment and the low wages in the Philippines, prompted respondents to work abroad. Migrants viewed working abroad as a means to provide a better future for their children and their families, and for this reason, migrants sometimes defied their spouses’ or parents’ objections to their plans.

2. At the pre-migration stage, migrants relied mostly on their personal networks, largely relatives based abroad (and also in the Philippines) as sources of information. Government agencies and NGOs did not figure as sources of information at this stage. Many migrants did consult the POEA, but only to verify whether they were dealing with licensed recruitment agencies.

3. Next to family members and relatives, recruitment agencies played a central role in the pre-migration stage. In most cases, migrants selected a recruitment agency based on the recommendation or referral of family members. Seven out of 10 respondents in the survey were agency hires while three out of 10 were direct hires (i.e., they did not find jobs through the agencies; they also include those who were placed by the POEA).

4. The steps and requirements (i.e., excluding the placement fees and other fees) in the application process were fairly uniform.

5. Much variation was noted in the placement fees paid by migrants who were applying for the same job in the same destination. The survey data and qualitative data from the focus group discussions and in-depth interviews reveal rampant violation of the standard placement fee (the equivalent of one month’s salary). Many direct hires, who were not supposed to pay placement fees, reported paying such fees.

6. Thirty-seven percent of respondents did not know the standard placement fee for the job and the country they were applying for. In general, they acquiesced to the fees charged by recruitment agencies. Some migrants who had salary deductions arrangements did not know the repayment period and/or the amount of the deduction.

7. Many migrants did not count the costs/expenses involved in the application process. Further probing of expenses for various items reveal considerable financial investments. Migrants expected to recover their expenses once they started working abroad.

8. Except for the placement fees, migrants reported no major problems during the pre-migration stage. In general, they did not have problems in their dealings with government agencies and the migration industry. The government agencies migrant-applicants had to deal with typically include the National Statistics Office, the National Bureau of Investigation, the Philippine Regulatory Commission, Malacañang, the Department of Foreign Affairs, and the POEA. There were some references to irregularities, fixers, and excessive fees (which happened to other people); very few migrants had such personal experiences.

9. About 79 percent of migrants had signed a contract at the time of the study. Although they were legal migrant workers, not all of them were expecting to have the requisite days off or to be covered by health insurance. Some participants in the focus group discussions remarked that the contract signed in the Philippines was not binding.

10. In terms of access to support, 66 percent of survey respondents had relatives and friends in their intended country of destination. At the destination, migrants mentioned the Philippine missions and other offices, family and friends, the Church/NGOs as sources of assistance should they encounter problems. Very few respondents considered approaching the government and other institutions in the destination country.

Challenges for Policy and Advocacy

The widespread contravention of the standard placement fee and the reservations cast on the efficacy of the standard employment contract are significant cracks in legal labor migration. This problem could be addressed in various ways. Over the short-term, resources could be directed at enhancing the dissemination of information, reinforcing the regulation and monitoring of recruitment agencies, and enforcing sanctions on errant recruitment agencies. POEA could consider documentation of cases gathered by NGOs as information in aid of preliminary investigations or spot checks of alleged errant agencies. A fundamental task is the review of the standard placement fee and the standard employment contract: what purpose do they serve and what would be more viable alternatives? In terms of migrant education, more community-based approaches should be explored, particularly the strengthening of links with local governments, in order to reach potential migrants.

Print this document | Introduction