Clarifications and comments by readers

We give way to two readers today. The first is from Raul Q. Montemayor, national manager of the Federation of Free Farmers, who wishes to clarify data that he cited, and which we picked up in the BizLinks column of Aug. 8 entitled “Correcting the flaws of rice law’s year 1.”

He writes: “In one section, you quote me regarding the reported undervaluation of rice imports. Just a clarification on how I came up with the figures. When DOF issued their press release, they said 1.43 million tons had been imported and P5.9 billion in tariffs had been collected. 

“If we do the math on this, we can derive that the average cost of the imports per metric ton is indeed $227, which is way below international prices. Later on, DOF said the figure is wrong because the 1.43 million tons included NFA imports that had zero tariffs. Well, the fault lies with them for releasing the wrong data or not providing full information.

“Anyway, I was able to access the BOC (Bureau of Customs) website and got the database of individual shipments of rice from January to July 2017 and was able to do a detailed analysis. I would like to share with you a copy of my report which I have forwarded to Secretary (Carlos) Dominguez and (Agriculture Secretary William) Dar for appropriate action.

“I computed the lost revenues from the rice shipments during the period at P1.58 billion, consisting of: a) Declaration of FOB values below the BOC reference values. b) Understatement of freight and insurance charges (which are added to the FOB value to come up with the CIF value which is then multiplied by the tariff rate). and c) Wrong application of tariff rates particularly on rice imports from non-ASEAN countries.

“This analysis already sets aside NFA imports at zero tariffs and zeroes on in imports from the major rice exporters – Vietnam, Thailand, Myanmar, Pakistan and India. I hope this analysis will be of use to you.”

Endo also affects customers

Our next letter sender is Lily Galace who tackles two issues: the practice of some unscrupulous employers of dodging labor laws by ending the contract of new hires to avoid giving them permanent positions and benefits, or more popularly known as endo; and Metro Manila’s traffic congestion. Please read on.

“There are so many issues with endo that has many implications not just to the worker, but also to the public.

“Some time ago, I was trying to check in at a PAL (Philippine Airlines) counter on an international flight. The desk clerk seemed unsure about what I was asking for. Then she mentioned to me she was new as she was just a contract employee. 

“I was very surprised that such an essential service of an airline company uses contract employees. It wasn’t a busy season, so why was PAL using a contract employee. 

“On my return to Manila, the service desk was asking for my visa to the Philippines when I was merely returning to my country of origin. Nakakalokah. You guessed it, contract employee. 

“While it is understandable that large retail establishments take on endo employees during the busy season, endo is the norm, busy season or not, most employees are contract employees who are then re-employed after a gap of a month or two, or three. These are the loopholes that need to be addressed by an endo law.

“I was on a flight to the US when afternoon snacks were being served. I was in one of the last three rows on a full flight when the airline ran out of food. There were no apologies to those who did not get any food. No harm done, the food was terrible anyway.”

A commuter’s woes

On traffic, here’s what Lily wrote: “I have a very concerning issue that affects me and many other service consuming public. Due to the EDSA congestion, someone had a seemingly brilliant idea to close EDSA to provincial buses and get the passengers off in Valenzuela or Sta. Rosa. 

“I live in Zambales and go to Quezon City when I need to go to Manila for various things. I take a bus because it is cheap, comfortable, and convenient. I am a senior citizen. What do I do once in Valenzuela? Find another bus, taxi, jeep? No way, I (will) bring my car. An alternative is to get fetched by a driver or family member.

“Does that solve traffic congestion in Manila? No. Many passengers who travel to Manila are not poor. We have cars, but take a bus. Once in the Trinoma area, I take a taxi that costs me about P250 to my destination. 

“Have our authorities thought of what happens to passengers after Valenzuela? Are there enough public transport to take them to their ultimate destinations? As usual, it is the poor who will bear the brunt of this decision.  Those who have cars will take their cars, those who do not will hire cars, and the poor who can’t afford either, does anyone care?

“Big cities overseas have a good public transport system to discourage people from bringing their cars to work and avoid traffic congestion. In Manila, we want buses to make way for private vehicles. Banning provincial buses is a short-term solution. 

“What Manila needs is a good public transport system that will encourage people who have cars to take public transport. It will also help if the rich and politicians stop using their massive SUVs in Metro Manila.” 

Facebook and Twitter

We are actively using two social networking websites to reach out more often and even interact with and engage our readers, friends and colleagues in the various areas of interest that I tackle in my column. Please like us on www.facebook.com/ReyGamboa and follow us on www.twitter.com/ReyGamboa.

Should you wish to share any insights, write me at Link Edge, 25th Floor, 139 Corporate Center, Valero Street, Salcedo Village, 1227 Makati City. Or e-mail me at [email protected]. For a compilation of previous articles, visit www.BizlinksPhilippines.net.