Uncertain future of Pogo employees

With the country’s largest business organization, the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry (PCCI), joining the call for the phaseout of Philippine offshore gaming operations (Pogo), albeit subject to certain conditions, the noose around this controversial commercial activity has further tightened.

The PCCI said Pogos posed social threats as they have become a breeding ground for crime scams and human rights violations. It, however, made a distinction between legal and illegal Pogo operations and called on authorities to crack down on the latter.

But in lieu of the abrupt termination of Pogos, the PCCI had suggested a gradual closing considering the expected loss of jobs and the impact of its closure on businesses that relate to its operation, e.g., food services, administrative support and transport services.

READ: Marcos: ‘All Pogos are banned!’

Then there is the issue of the loans that some Philippine banks had extended to Pogos. Without a firm assurance that their financiers would assume responsibility for those debts, loan defaults may become inevitable.

The magnitude of those loans is unknown, but in the event they turn sour, it is doubtful, considering the strict lending rules in force, if they would constitute a serious threat to the viability of the concerned banks.

If at all, the nonpayment may just be a slight bump in the banks’ bottom line that could be easily covered by other financing operations and would not make their external auditor raise alarm bells.

The more serious concern should be the loss of jobs of thousands of Filipinos presently employed in Pogo companies or those providing support services to them.

According to Labor Secretary Benjamin Laguesma, as of June, around 22,000 Filipinos are working in some 50 legitimate Pogo companies. For obvious reasons, the number of Filipinos working in clandestine Pogo hubs is unknown. That figure could double, or even triple, if the latter employees are counted in.

He said the closure of those companies would be a major concern or challenge to the government considering its adverse effect on the displaced employees.

In light of the tight job market that the country is in at present, a swelling of the ranks of unemployed Filipinos could give rise to serious social problems.

READ: Romualdez backs Marcos’ stance on banning Pogos, WPS ownership

Thus, the PCCI’s suggestion for the government to undertake a calibrated dissolution of Pogos is reasonable and equitable.

Those employees cannot be faulted for seeking employment in and getting employed by such companies. Neither should they be taken to task for working in illegal Pogos.

For them, working in Pogos was an acceptable means of putting food on the table and paying for their children’s education. No doubt, that was better than relying on other people for their financial needs or, worse, engaging in illegal activities.

And don’t forget that these Pogos came to the Philippines at the invitation of the government and a law was even enacted to regulate their operation.

That some of them turned out to be hotbeds for criminal acts or were used to engage in illegal activities is not the employees’ fault, and the blame should instead rest on the failure of the regulatory authorities to efficiently monitor their compliance with the terms and conditions of their license.

In other words, the fault of Pogo operators should not be vested on their employees, but on the national and local government officials who are supposed to supervise their operation.

The manner and time frame of that phaseout could be worked out between the Department of Labor and Employment (Dole) and the business groups whose members may have some use for the services of displaced employees.

The Dole has the expertise and experience to address issues with regard to the redeployment of Filipinos who had lost their jobs for reasons beyond their control.

This is not to minimize or downplay the adverse social effects of Pogos, but in putting an end to their operation, the welfare of Filipinos who stand to lose their source of income in the process should also be part of the equation in that proposed action. INQ

For comments, please send your email to [email protected].