Feature:

OWWA Budget Explained

The OWWA has consistently denied the fact that their services are virtually nil. They quote percentages for direct services towards migrant workers which are contrary to the truth. It is our responsibility, therefore, to reveal the truth about their scam.

Let us cite explanatory notes about the hidden truth behind the numbers game of the OWWA budget:

a. Based on the OWWA 2000 budget, their projected income on fee collection will amount to P547, 108,439.74. But in fact, according to the POEA figures, 837,020 were deployed in 162 countries in 1999 (Today, May 3, 2000). So their projection is quite conservative if not misleading. They are poised to collect (since the OWWA fee is a "condition for employment") not less than P 857,945,500 for the year.

But do take note that this is still their estimate and projection even before the controversial resolution was approved. This projection is based on the existing OWWA Memorandum of Instruction No. 8 that seeks to collect US$25 on a per contract basis. The actual impact of the Resolution has not yet been factored into the approved budget for 2000. We can expect, therefore, a ballooning of collections when the OWWA Resolution takes effect on January 1, 2001.

b. Why is this so? First, the OWWA Resolution will collect the annual fee NOT ONLY from the newly hired or processed overseas workers BUT MORE SO from those already working abroad. On top of this, it is MANDATORY. In Hong Kong alone, there are 146,000 domestic helpers (March 2000 figures of the HK Immigration Department). With the very efficient collection system of the Philippine Consulate in HK, the collection would be HK$ 29.2 million (146,000 x HK$200) or P 160 million for one year.

We still maintain that the budget allocation for "direct services" only amounts to P72 million or 11% of the total OWWA budget of P629 million. Why is this so?

c. Direct services, from the migrant workers point of view includes Items 1.A.2 (Airport Assistance), 1.B. (Insurance and other Financial Benefits) and 1.C.2. (Overseas Program Funds under the category of On-Site Services) and 1.F (Legal Services). The sub-total is P 72 million.

d. Other services which are under Items 1.D., 1.E, 1.G (that are not on-site and which we term as Indirect) and Item 2 (Special Projects and Programs) amount to P114 million. These do not address directly the welfare needs of distressed overseas workers and yet the budget is greater than the abovementioned category.

e. The OWWA allocates a total of P190 million for On-site direct services. But what they do not admit is that P170 million of this goes to overseas allowances and other operational costs. They already have a 45% allocation for "Service Delivery Costs" (which encompasses wages, allowances and operations both in the Philippines and overseas) yet they even hid another 27% for on-site administrative and operational costs and called it part of On-site services. This is a malicious way to double the take. So in fact, administrative, operational costs take on P441million (70%) out of the total OWWA budget of P629 million.

f. Another point is about repatriation. RA8042 Article XV Sec 59 provides for P100 million emergency repatriation fund. However, this amount is nor freely given by the OWWA. Rather, OWWA simply advances the cost of repatriation but simultaneously, the POEA shall "ask the concerned (recruitment) agencies to work towards reimbursement of cost advanced by the OWWA." Therefore, this 100 million is NOT part of the budget of OWWA. And it is not even given by OWWA or the government but is taken supposedly from recruitment agencies. Repatriation is not a responsibility of OWWA or government but is now borne by private recruiters. This is part of the government's deregulation package for overseas workers.

g. The Medicare, contrary to popular belief, IS NOT part of the benefits provided for under the US$25 OWWA contribution. In fact, it is a separate collection amounting to P900. Also, it is mandatory.

The main issue (which their own figures show) is that a large chunk of the OWWA Budget goes to their own operational expenses. Even if they increase the collection, the allocation and share of migrant workers will remain at the most only 30% (granted that we include Indirect services) of the so-called "trust fund".
From the very beginning, the OWWA was designed to be a "self-sustaining workhorse". This means that the services it renders come from the OFWs themselves. Where then can we find the government allocation for services to its so-called New Economic Heroes? The capacity of any government to provide social services to its constituents largely rests upon its income generation from taxation. The fact that there are no free services from government for overseas Filipinos and no budget allocations for such, then these OWWA fees are taxes - no more, no less - levied on OFWs.

Who says that OFWs are actually tax-exempted under law? OFWs are the top dollar earners, remitting more than US$ 8 billion, yet we are paying so many fees to the government like authentication fee of HK$255, affidavit of HK$170, POEA of US$100, agency fee, NBI clearance, medical, Medicare etc. Still, the government keeps on inventing schemes, in the pretext of providing or improving its services to us but actually collects (extorts) money from us.

And then, it is more frightening to hear that the cost of social services should be borne by those who need it instead of being provided responsibly by the Philippine government. It is frightening how the mentality of "users pay" and privatization takes precedence over public service, welfare and social protection.