Good info for OFWs. Finally, the SUPREME COURT of the Philippines restored the dignity of the Overseas Filipino Worker (OFW) after 17 years of long wait and unearthed the unconstitutional provision of the Overseas Filipinos & Migrant Workers Act (RA 8042>RA 10022) where the 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th, 14th, 15th and present 16th Congress failed (kahiya kayo!!!) To some it may be a JUSTICE DELAYED JUSTICE DENIED thing but given the kind of poor judicial system we have back home> it is still a sweet victory for our OFWs> no pain no glory! “This government loses its soul if we fail to ensure decent treatment for all Filipinos. We default by limiting the contractual wages that should be paid to our workers when their contracts are breached by the foreign employers. While we sit, this court will ensure that our laws will reward our overseas workers with what they deserve: their dignity- SC SC is sending a strong message to our PRAs/FRAs/foreign employers: Dont screw up our OFWs!!! else!!! --------------------------------------- SC favors illegally dismissed OFWs, orders payment of unexpired contract!! The Supreme Court (SC) has declared unconstitutional a provision in the migrant workers law that limits the payment of salaries of illegally dismissed overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) to three months for every year of the unexpired term of their contracts. Declared unconstitutional was Section 7 of Republic Act No. 10022 which provides that “in case of termination of overseas employment without just, valid, or authorized cause… the migrant worker shall be entitled… to his salaries for the unexpired portion of his employment contract or for three months for every year of the unexpired term, whichever is less.” What made the provision unconstitutional is the phrase “or for three months for every year of the unexpired term, whichever is less” as this violates the equal protection clause and substantive due process enshrined in the Constitution. The SC said, “Equal protection of the law is a guarantee that persons under like circumstances and falling within the same class are treated alike, in terms of ‘privileges conferred and liabilities enforced… It is a guarantee against ‘undue favor and individual or class privilege, as well as hostile discrimination or the oppression of inequality,” it stressed. The decision penned by Justice Marvic Mario Victor F. Leonen explained that the phrase “or for three months…” has been declared unconstitutional in 2009 when it was challenged as a provision of RA 8042 (Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995). However, the questionable phrase was again included when RA 8042 was amended by RA 10022 in 2010, and as a result, the phrase was reinstated in the original law (RA 8042), the SC said. According to the SC, it had to wait for a justiciable case that would challenge the particular provision in RA 10022 on the payment of salaries for OFWs illegally dismissed by their foreign employers to banish the unlawful provision. It found such occasion when it reviewed the decision of the Court of Appeals in the case filed by Sameer Overseas Placement Agency, Inc. against OFW Joy C. Cabiles on the decision issued by the Court of Appeals (CA) in 2005. Cabiles was recruited by Sameer in1997 to work for Taiwan Wacoal, Co. Ltd for one year with a salary of NT$15,360 a month. While her contract stipulated that she would be a quality control worker, Cabiles was employed as a cutter starting on June 26, 1997. However, on July 14, 1997 Wacoal terminated Cabiles and told her to prepare for immediate repatriation. From June 26 to July 14, 1997, Cabiles said she was paid NT$9,000 from which NT$3,000 was deducted to cover her plane ticket to Manila. Cabiles filed a case in Manila for illegal dismissal against Sameer and Wacoal. Sameer claimed she was dismissed for inefficiency and negligence. The labor arbiter dismissed her case. But the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed the arbiter and awarded Cabiles three months salary equivalent to NT$46,080, reimbursement of NT$3,000, attorney’s fees of NT$300 for having been illegally dismissed. PAY UP The CA affirmed NLRC’s decision, prompting the recruitment agency to elevate the issue before the SC. The SC ruled that “having been illegally dismissed, Cabiles is entitled to her salary for the unexpired portion of the employment contract that was violated together with attorney’s fees and reimbursement of amounts withheld from her salary.” The High Court denied the petition of Sameer that sought to overturn the ruling of the CA. Instead, the SC ordered Sameer Overseas Placement Agency “to pay respondent Joy C. Cabiles the amount equivalent to her salary for the unexpired portion of her employment contract at an interest of six per cent per annum from the finality of this judgment. Petitioner is also ordered to reimburse respondent the withheld NT$3,000 salary and pay respondent attorney’s fees of NT$300 at an interest of six per cent per annum from the finality of the judgment.” “This government loses its soul if we fail to ensure decent treatment for all Filipinos. We default by limiting the contractual wages that should be paid to our workers when their contracts are breached by the foreign employers. While we sit, this court will ensure that our laws will reward our overseas workers with what they deserve: their dignity,” the SC stressed. Source: mb.ph/sc-favors-illegally-dismissed-ofws-orders-payment-of-unexpired-contract/
Posted on: Mon, 08 Sep 2014 15:36:20 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015