Five months into the Duterte administration, the President’s campaign promise to put an end to illegal labor contractualization and “endo” (or end-of-contract) labor scheme remains unfulfilled.
Labor Secretary Silvestre Bello III has said that by the end of 2016 (which is just a few days away) the incidence of “endo” will be reduced by 50 percent, and that by the end of 2017, it will be a thing of the past.
To date, however, the circular from his office that will flesh out that commitment has not been issued.
Thus, for all intents and purposes, the regulations that “legitimized” the illegal labor scheme remain in place.
While awaiting Bello’s action, many of the affected companies are holding in abeyance their plans on the composition of their work staff for the coming year.
This means, no new hires of regular or contractual employees are being made to avoid having to make adjustments in position and salary classifications when the circular comes out.
The delay has prompted some lawmakers to take matters into their own hands by filing legislative measures that will amend the existing laws on security of tenure of private workers.
While many hearts are bleeding for private employees, their counterpart in the government sector seems to have been forgotten, if not completely ignored.
Scant attention has been given to government personnel who perform vital public functions but do not enjoy security of tenure, much less the employment benefits that usually accrue to those jobs.
They are described in the payroll sheets as—take your pick—contractual, job order, emergency hire, casual, memorandum of agreement employee, or project personnel.
According to reports, there are approximately 120,000 such employees and all they get for their services is a daily wage that is paid weekly or monthly depending on the internal rules of the government office concerned.
They are not entitled to sick leave, vacation leave, maternity leave or separation pay when their employment contracts expire because they are not considered regular employees.
In the Department of Social Welfare and Development, for example, there are several employees with that kind of status who have been in the service for more than 15 years.
When the contracts of these employees are terminated, or they quit their job for medical reasons or due to their advanced age, they cannot claim the retirement benefits that normally accompany long years of government service.
Because of the provisional nature of their employment, these employees have to be in their best element every day to be, more or less, assured of the renewal of their contracts. They also have to remain in the good graces of whoever has the final say on the renewal of their contracts.
It’s sad that these employees are treated like second class citizens in the country’s labor pool.
It is as if their contribution to the economy is not in the same league or as important as those of “endo” employees in the private sector.
The only significant difference between them is the source of their compensation. Government employees are paid from public funds, while private employees draw their pay from the business owners’ pockets.
But regardless of the source, they pay income tax on their earnings.
The contractual government employees are as much entitled to security of tenure in their jobs, or not having to worry about losing their source of income when their employment contract expires after five months.
They too have families to feed and children to send to school.
The lack of attention to the problem of these employees may be attributed to the fact that they are not as organized or as vocal as their private sector counterpart.
They do not have a Kilusang Mayo Uno or other militant organizations that can hold demonstrations to demand that President Duterte redeem his promise to put an end to contractualization.
But this should not be a reason for Bello to ignore their plight because, after all, they too are entitled to the protection of our labor laws.