The Philippine Church and Contractualization of Labor

“I have heard the cry of my people, because they are held in bondage,

and I have remembered My covenant” (Ex. 6:5).

The ascendancy of Pope Francis to the papacy has given much hope to the Church especially his perceptible and profound concern for the poor. One of the first words he has spoken was, “How I long for a poor Church for the poor!”

With these words spoken after being elected pope, Jorge Bergoglio underscored a theme that continues to be front-and-center of his papacy. Not surprisingly, such statements demonstrate that Pope Francis wants Catholics to devote greater attention to poverty-alleviation.[1]

PCP-II
Poverty alleviation one of the visions of the Philippine Catholic Church. During the Second Plenary Council of the Philippines, the Phil­ippine Church boldly proclaimed: “As we approach the year 2000, in order to credibly witness to the love of God in Christ Jesus, Christ bids this community . . . the laity, religious and clergy of the Catholic Church in the Philippines to be Church of the poor”[2] (PCP 124). Since PCP-II, the expression, Church of the poor, has become a central theme and the main thrust of the Philippine Church. And one of the most important aspects of being a Church of the Poor is for the Church to be able to help the poor people rise up from the bondage of poverty, become self-sufficient and regain their dignity as children of God.[3]

However more than twenty years after PCP II, it is sad to note that the Philippine Church has not really taken any major concrete step towards alleviating poverty in the country. Whereas the domestic anti-poverty program of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has approved more than $9 million in grants to help alleviate poverty and injustice throughout the United States,[4] the Philippine Church has not allocated anything to promote its vision of becoming a Church of the Poor and alleviating the severe poverty that majority of our people are experiencing for decades. The vision of Church of the Poor has just remained a rhetoric. Twenty years after PCP-II, the incidence of poverty in the Philippines remained as high as ever.

The Evil of Contractualization

Indeed poverty is such a complex phenomenon and there are numerous factors that leads to the continuing bondage to poverty of majority of our people. But the fact cannot be denied, that despite the unprecedented growth rate of 7.6% in our Gross National Product (GDP) which our government officials are constantly boasting of, the resultant effect of the massive GDP growth has not tricked to the poor masses. And one of the main reason is that our poor workers still toil for very low wages, and are blatantly subjected to unfair labor practices, one of which is the contractuali­zation and outsourcing of regular jobs.

Contractualization is a practice wherein laborers are given only 5-month contracts to keep them from becoming regular employees because according to the Philippine Labor Law, a laborer who has completed six months of employment automatically becomes a permanent employee. These contractual employees are not given any benefit normally given to regular employees such as SSS, Philhealh or Pag-Ibig. In most cases, since they are not yet regular employees, they are given salaries way below the prescribed minimum wage. Thus, the practice of employers is to terminate the laborer after five months, with or without a just cause. Now how can a person rise up from poverty and become self sufficient if he finds himself without a job every after five months of work? This is the reason why contractual workers become perennially poor.

The main point is, labor contractualization is illegal, unconstitu­tional and immoral. The practice of using agency contractual labor is ille­gal according to provisions of Philippine labor laws. Article 279 of the Labor Code of the Philippines speaks of Security of Tenure for employ­ees. It states that “In cases of regular employment, the employer shall not terminate the services of an employee except for a just cause.”[5]

Further, the Philippine Constitution also  guarantee security of tenure for employees. The guarantee of security of tenure under the Constitution means that an employee cannot be dismissed from the service for causes other than those provided by law and only after due process is accorded the employee.[6] It has been also settled that even if proba­tionary employees do not enjoy permanent status, they are accorded the constitutional protection of security of tenure. This means they may only be terminated for just cause or when they otherwise fail to qualify as regular employees in accordance with reasonable standards made known to them by the employer at the time of their engagement.[7]

Employers, local and transnational, however have gotten away defy­ing Philippine labor laws. It is apparent that the Department of Labor has neither clout nor guts to address this crime. Capital makes billions each quarter. And the great irony is, the contractual workers who are creating all those billions of net profit live below subsistence level. A study by the International Labor Organization found that the rate of “contractualization” is now at 70% of the Philippine workforce. Almost every large company depends on contractual workers to get the day’s business done

The government guidelines on subcontracting must protect the interests of both capital and labor. In fact, when most companies’ net profit amounts to millions or billions every year, the contractual minimum wage laborer who bleeds and sweats to create billions of profit for his employer, is left with not enough to eat. The contractual agency also grabs a slice from the employee’s daily minimum wage as administrative fee.[8]

Laborem Excersens

Ultimately, contractualization of labor is not only illegal and unconstitutional but more so immoral as it goes against the social teaching of the Church. The encyclical Laborem Excersens of Pope John Paul II evi­dently indicates that full employment is a basic human right of a laborer.

We must first direct our attention to a fundamental issue: the question of finding work, or, in other words, the issue of suitable employment for all who are capable of it.” The problem is not a lack of resources—“conspicuous natural resources remain unused”—but poor organization. The criterion of full employment will only be achieved through planning and coordination among all the indirect employers, and a better coordination of education with employment.[9]

Thirty years after the release of the encyclical, workers still toil for very low wages, and are subjected to unfair labor practices, contractualiza­tion and outsourcing of regular jobs. And this issue is undoubtedly a moral one. When the government continues to encourage the export of manpower as alternative employment, when poverty and injustice are everywhere, these matter turn into a moral issue.[10]

The workers are counting on Church leaders to fight this decade-old injustice. And the Church ought to speak up and do what it preaches, not only on putting emphasis on the holy sacraments but more so on putting flesh and blood to social encyclicals like Laborem Exercens. [11] It is only by means of putting a firm stand against the evil of labor contractualization can the Philippine Church contribute, albeit minutely, to the alleviation of poverty that it has envisioned in the Second Plenary Council of the Philippines and the teaching of our new Pontiff, Pope Francis.

There had been numerous bills pending in Congress against this unfair labor practice.[12] Problem is, most of them are left unacted by our lawmakers. That is why the Catholic Bishop’s Conference of the Philip­pines would like to add its voice in order to ensure that this evil labor practice called contractualization would be put on halt by our lawmak­ers.[13].

May St. Joseph, the patron of saint of workers, guide our people in combating the evils of contractualization and thereby realize the vision of becoming a Church of the Poor.

---

[1] Samuel Gregg, “Pope Francis on the True Meaning of Poverty.” Crisis Magazine, June 5, 2013.

[2] Acts and Decrees of the Second Plenary Council of the Philippines (Manila: Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines, 1992), xciv.

[3] Arnel F. Lagarejos, The Church of the Poor: A New Perspective on The Church, The State, and The Poor. Pontificia Universita Gregoriana, 1998.

[4] Catholic News Agency, http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/us-bishops-group-approves-9-million-in-anti-poverty-funds.

[5] The 1976 Labor Code of the Philippines, Article 279.

[6] Philippine Jurisprudence, Phil-Singapore Transport Services, Inc., vs. NLRC, G.R. No. 95449, August 18, 1997.

[7] Philippine Jurisprudence, Agoy vs. NRLC, 112096, 30 January 1996.

[8] Dahli Aspillera, Malaya Business Insight, published on Monday, 27 May 2013.

[9] John Paul II, Laborem Exercens, 1 May 1981, AAS 73 (1981): 13.

[10] Arthur R. Barrit, Sunstar Newspaper, September 12, 2011

[11] Ibid.

[12] For instance, House Bill No. 3402 introduced by DIWA Party-list Representative Emmeline Y. Aglipay: An act strengthening the security of tenure of employees in the Labor Code of the Philippines.

[13] How I wish that all the efforts put into action by the CBCP against the RH Law would also be applied to fight against this immeasurable malpractice.