Why are our labor laws applicable abroad for ofws?
Any freshman Law student will tell you that, because of the principle of territoriality of laws, our statutes are effective only within Philippine territory. The only exception he will hasten to add is the principle of extra-territoriality, whereby we also have jurisdiction over the premises of all our embassies, consulates, missions, and other diplomatic places of operations abroad, regardless of whether the Philippine government owns the property or is just leasing. The territoriality principle is the result of an international treaty agreed upon by all members of the United Nations and other international associations of civilized states.
Well, by our ILO conventions and related treaties, we should add another exception and that is the principle of “Lex Loci Contractus.” It means that the law of the country where the contract is signed shall govern the relationships of the contracting parties anywhere in the world. Thus, when an employment contract is executed before the POEA by the OFW as an employee, and the foreign principal employer, represented by the local recruitment agency or manning agent, then the principal in Dubai, Kuwait, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Italy, Canada, or USA shall be bound by Philippine labor laws. Foreign principals cannot complain of lack of due process because they are always represented by their local agency. Thus, any OFW who agrees to be employed by direct hiring without any agency or POEA assistance will not have any protection.
Thus, in the case of Rutcher Dagasdas vs. Grand Placement (GR 205727) decided by the highest court on January 18, 2017, it was held that OFWs are entitled to the Philippine Constitution’s guarantee of security of tenure. Within his usual two-year contract, he could not be dismissed without just cause, and is entitled to full due process. Even if they were made to sign a waiver of this right of tenurial security, that waiver would be deemed null and void. He can file a case of illegal dismissal here upon arrival. His waiver would not result to estoppel of his rights. In that case, contract substitution is condemned --that practice of compelling OFWs to sign another agreement upon arrival at the country of destination.
In another case involving a seaman, in Careers Philippines Shipmanagement vs. E.J. Godinez, (GR 2068261, October 2, 2017) the Supreme Court emphasized the State’s protection to labor even when the Filipino seaman is cruising the seven seas. The court said that seamen should be treated as human beings not as robots. It involved a young seafarer (it was his first time to go abroad and first time to board an ocean-going vessel) who became mentally deranged because of alleged maltreatment aboard the vessel. The court bewailed: “Even as Godinez was already exhibiting the symptoms of a nervous breakdown, his superiors and the crew provided no medical intervention or support. He was treated as a stray dog whose presence was merely condoned.” This is quite sad and alarming and the highest court of the land expressed outrage at this tragic experience.
Our labor laws are applicable abroad because thousands of our OFWs are being maltreated, maligned, abused, raped, and murdered. And we cannot just close our eyes to the pains and sufferings they are going through. I should know. I served them as labor attaché for nine years under very trying and unjust circumstances.
- Latest
