Should DFA or DOLE handle migrant workers' affairs?

The ongoing processes of rescue, evacuation and repatriation of Filipino workers in Libya, as well as the search and rescue operations for Filipino victims in the New Zealand earthquake, at one point, when tempers were uncontrolled, had representatives respectively of Dole/POEA, on the one hand, and DFA, on the other, reportedly pointing fingers at each other. That incident lead some policy-makers to ask the often recurrent question, whether the Office of the Undersecretary for Migrant Affairs (OUMWA) should continue under the DFA, or should it be absorbed by DOLE. To resolve this issue, it is important to understand the historical antecedents, which led to the present set-up.

 The creation of OUMWA was one of government’s response to what was considered in the nineties as a major debacle, the so-called Flor Contemplacion Imbroglio, which resulted to the execution of said Contemplacion, an OFW in Singapore for having been found guilty of murder of a fellow OFW, Delia Maga. The said imbroglio led Pres. FVR to fire a very competent Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Sec Roberto R. Romulo and an excellent Labor Secretary, Nieves Roldan-Confesor, as well as the undeserved recall of a very fine Ambassador and Labor Attaché. Further to the firing of good government officials, Congress responded by enacting the Migrant Workers Act, creating the OUMWA and assigning the migrant workers affairs to the DFA and the Philippine embassy, in duplication of the existing overseas labor operations under the DOLE, POEA and OWWA.

 The law also entrusted the legal aid budget to OUMWA, thus taking away from DOLE the control of much-needed resources in overseas labor operations. This scheme worked well under then DFA Secretary Blas Ople, who, in his younger years, was the longest-serving, and largely acknowledged as the greatest Labor Secretary. Under BFO, coordination between DOLE and DFA was not a problem because Sec. Ople was highly respected in DOLE and he was acknowledged as the Father of the Labor Code and the Overseas Labor Migration Program. More so, when the Undersecretary handling OUMWA then was Usec. Jose Brillantes, a former Labor Undersecretary and Acting secretary of DOLE himself. But under different leaders, there appeared some problems in coordination and cooperation between DFA and DOLE. Of course, Usec Esteban Conejos is a very competent official but this is not about personalities. This is about a structural issue that needs an objective analysis.

 Putting the OUMWA under the DFA has given rise to some measure of confusion among the clientele OFWs and their families. It is the general expectations among migrant workers that all their problems, while they are in the host country, should be attended to by the overseas labor personnel, except consular matters, which are clearly DFA functions. And so, in the light of the law, they are told to go the ATN Unit in the Embassy, and they consider this as another aberration in bureaucracy. When workers seek legal aid abroad for cases, even if related to work and contract, they need to seek financial help from DFA and not DOLE. Many times, even the staff of the ATN Unit and the Office of the labor attaches are unclear as to the areas of their respective responsibility, and the areas of delineation and cooperation. This is not a simple turf war. This is locating the situs of responsibility and the source of funding. The Migrant workers’ act has introduced confusion in the frontlines. This should be corrected in due time.

 The most difficult problem arises, in case of a crisis like Libya, Bahrain, Yemen and New Zealand. Instead of managing only one integrated organic unit, the President has to deal with DFA and DOLE. Movements and decisions are often delayed because coordination and cooperation have to be carefully put in place. The OFWs and their families are expecting fast and precise actions, especially when lives and security are at serious risks.

 One very contentious area is sharing of information. Many important facts, figures and data are in the hands of Labor officials and personnel but the budget for migrant workers’ aid are in the hands of OUMWA. If the two units do not have have good teamwork, the speed, the accuracy and the quality of services are bound to be prejudiced. In case of criminal or civil cases and legal litigations involving OFWs abroad, the funding comes from OUMWA but the families of the accused are expecting the services to come from the overseas labor office. The problems make excellent service virtually impossible. There is a need to rectify this organizational issue immediately.

 Based on our experience as labor diplomat, in different countries, including Malaysia, Kuwait and Central Taiwan, it is our well-considered view that Congress should conduct an inquiry, in aid of legislation, to determine how to address this problem. And it better be soon, before another incident similar to that in Libya or new Zealand come about. The time has come to enact a law that considers solutions that are not only technically feasible, but also administratively practicable and shall give rise to better quality of service to the migrant workers and their families. The OFWs deserve no less.

* * *

Email: [email protected].