ECOP bucks stiffer penalties on private security agencies

MANILA, Philippines - Employers are strongly opposing proposed amendments to the Private Security Agency Law which entails stiffer penalties on private security agencies for non-payment of the prescribed minimum wage rates and other benefits.

The Employers Confederation of the Philippines (ECOP) said the fines as proposed under House Bill 4651 are too excessive.

“The imposition of such excessive fines for a mere civil liability is ultra vires as no less than the Constitution in Sec. 19 of the Bill of Rights prohibits the imposition of excessive fines,” ECOP said.

The bill suggests a P100,000 fine and imprisonment of six months to one year on the first offense, P5000,000 and imprisonment of one year to three years on the second offense, and P1 million and imprisonment of three years to  years and cancellation of license to operate on the third offense.

Aside from the penalties, House Bill 4651 also seeks to amend various provisions of Republic Act 5487, or the Private Security Agency Law.

ECOP, however, said the proposed amendments to the Private Security Agency Law, consisting mostly of an enumeration of  the benefits to which security guards are entitled to, are not only already provided  to all workers under existing laws but more specifically and comprehensively elaborated in the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE)’s revised guidelines.

DOLE Department Order 150 Series of 2016 revised guidelines was issued “for the purpose of ensuring compliance with mandated employment benefits and working conditions security guards and other private security personnel in the private security industry.”

 “With due respect, we see no real need to amend the Private Security Agency Law which already succinctly prescribes entitlement of security guards to all the rights and benefits provided to all workers under existing laws and which are comprehensively elaborated by DOLE Department Order 150, Series of 2016, with an enumeration of the same rights and benefits,” ECOP said.

 “In the light of the foregoing considerations, ECOP is not endorsing this bill,” the group added.