Submitted by PAMANTIK-KMU on Sat, 2007/01/13 - 4:21pm.
This is the statement made by the militant Pagkakaisa ng Manggagawa sa Timog Katagalugan (PAMANTIK-KMU) to debunk the recent claims made by Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita that Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Boards (RTWPB) have more “scientific and sober approach” in determining wage hike for workers.
PAMANTIK hit on Malacañang and business groups in their “collaborative and systematic” efforts to trash House Bill 345 or the P125-legislated wage increase which recently passed the House of Representatives. Now in Senate, a counterpart bill proposes a one-time P100 hike.
“Wage boards have done no good in determining which is best for the workers. Instead, they have made it appear scientically sound to deceive the workers while maintaining partiality to the interests of capital,” said Luz Baculo, PAMANTIK secretary-general.
Citing Wage Orders No. 9, 10, and 11 promulgated in Region IV-A (CALABARZON) on November 1, 2004, June 20, 2005 and August 7, 2006, respectively, Baculo described how the wage boards made it appear to provide wage hikes while in reality dock workers’ wages.
“Before Wage Order No. 9, all non-agricultural workers in CALABARZON received a daily P237 minimum wage. However, in the study we conducted, Wage Order No. 9 made workers working in certain municipalities, like in Cavite City, Carmona, Santa Rosa, Cabuyao, Lipa, and Tanauan to receive an additional P12 hike but short of P6 in lieu of the duly implemented Wage Order.”
Despite the last two wage orders, Baculo made references to Wage Order No. 9 which she claimed “started a retrogressive effect” in terms of workers’ wages in CALABARZON.
Arbitrary reclassification
“First, we are looking into the responsibility and accountability of the RTWPB whether it has the sole authority to reclassify areas to determine the wage increase for workers.”
With the implementation of Wage Order No. 9, the RTWPB-IV-A reclassified the region in four (4) areas, namely, extended metropolitan with P18 wage hike, growth corridor with P12, emerging growth with P8, and resource-based with P5.
“The RTWPB reclassified municipalities with the most number of export processing zones (EPZs) to growth corridor and emerging growth areas.”
Previously under extended metropolitan areas, Wage Order No. 9 reclassified municipalities under growth corridor areas including 10 municipalities in Cavite (Dasmarinas, Cavite City, Carmona, Gen. Trias, Kawit, Rosario, Silang, Tagaytay City, Tanza, and Trece Martirez City), 6 in Laguna (Sta. Rosa, Cabuyao, Calamba, Los Baños, San Pablo City, and Sta. Cruz), 6 in Batangas (Baun, Lipa, Batangas City, San Pascual, Sto.Tomas, and Tanuan City), and Antipolo City in Rizal.
“Of course, these areas are not close to Metro Manila in terms of geographical proximity as how RTWPB defines municipalities in extended metropolitan areas. However, companies and businesses in the EPZs, which are mostly multinational and transnational companies, were spared by the RTPWB from providing their workers a modest raise.”
“Furthermore, in our study, most workers do not live in the same municipality where they are employed. They take from their salaries transportation expenses in going to and from work,” said Baculo.
Worse hit on contractual workers
The reclassification differentiated wage hikes for “current” and “new” employees.
Baculo stated that most of those who fall under ‘new’ employee classification are contractual or irregular workers.
In a sample case presented by PAMANTIK, an irregular woman worker employed in an electronics company in First Philippine Industrial Park in Tanauan City, Batangas received P237 prior to the implementation of Wage Order No. 9.
“When her term of employment ended and got re-hired in the same company with a new contract, (or if she was employed as a contractual worker in another company in the same EPZ and municipality), her daily wage was adjusted to P232 during the effectivity of Wage Order No. 9,” clarified Baculo.
“Apparently, there is only a disparity of P5 in the wage. However, considering the area and current-new employee reclassifications, P23 was slashed from her salary or 9.02% less from what she was supposed to get under Wage Order No. 9.”
Abolition of wage boards
“The workers were dubious since the creation of the wage boards. Workers have demanded for the abolition of these wage boards and the repeal of RA 6727 even before the law was enacted,” said Baculo.
RTWPBs were formed by virtue of Republic Act 6727 or the Wage Rationalization Act in 1989.
Although Congress approved the 3-tranche wage hike of P125, PAMANTIK said the bill continuously draws popular support among workers.
“It is far better than throwing the issue to the wage boards. Workers have been more enthusiastic to push the wage campaign forward. Even yellow unions previously against the bill are now making scenes to take advantage of the credits.”
Workers warn Arroyo
“However, with the popular clamor for the P125 legislated wage hike, the Arroyo administration flagrantly and insultingly isolates itself from the majority of the toiling masses and their interests,” PAMANTIK’s reaction to Arroyo’s attempt to veto the wage hike bill.
Baculo concluded, “The P125-legislated wage hike, which is an economic struggle, has taken a mature political shape over the years. Workers warn, and let us not dismiss the fact, that this issue will be a strong force Mrs. Arroyo has to contend with in order to preserve her regime.”
PAMANTIK hit on Malacañang and business groups in their “collaborative and systematic” efforts to trash House Bill 345 or the P125-legislated wage increase which recently passed the House of Representatives. Now in Senate, a counterpart bill proposes a one-time P100 hike.
“Wage boards have done no good in determining which is best for the workers. Instead, they have made it appear scientically sound to deceive the workers while maintaining partiality to the interests of capital,” said Luz Baculo, PAMANTIK secretary-general.
Citing Wage Orders No. 9, 10, and 11 promulgated in Region IV-A (CALABARZON) on November 1, 2004, June 20, 2005 and August 7, 2006, respectively, Baculo described how the wage boards made it appear to provide wage hikes while in reality dock workers’ wages.
“Before Wage Order No. 9, all non-agricultural workers in CALABARZON received a daily P237 minimum wage. However, in the study we conducted, Wage Order No. 9 made workers working in certain municipalities, like in Cavite City, Carmona, Santa Rosa, Cabuyao, Lipa, and Tanauan to receive an additional P12 hike but short of P6 in lieu of the duly implemented Wage Order.”
Despite the last two wage orders, Baculo made references to Wage Order No. 9 which she claimed “started a retrogressive effect” in terms of workers’ wages in CALABARZON.
Arbitrary reclassification
“First, we are looking into the responsibility and accountability of the RTWPB whether it has the sole authority to reclassify areas to determine the wage increase for workers.”
With the implementation of Wage Order No. 9, the RTWPB-IV-A reclassified the region in four (4) areas, namely, extended metropolitan with P18 wage hike, growth corridor with P12, emerging growth with P8, and resource-based with P5.
“The RTWPB reclassified municipalities with the most number of export processing zones (EPZs) to growth corridor and emerging growth areas.”
Previously under extended metropolitan areas, Wage Order No. 9 reclassified municipalities under growth corridor areas including 10 municipalities in Cavite (Dasmarinas, Cavite City, Carmona, Gen. Trias, Kawit, Rosario, Silang, Tagaytay City, Tanza, and Trece Martirez City), 6 in Laguna (Sta. Rosa, Cabuyao, Calamba, Los Baños, San Pablo City, and Sta. Cruz), 6 in Batangas (Baun, Lipa, Batangas City, San Pascual, Sto.Tomas, and Tanuan City), and Antipolo City in Rizal.
“Of course, these areas are not close to Metro Manila in terms of geographical proximity as how RTWPB defines municipalities in extended metropolitan areas. However, companies and businesses in the EPZs, which are mostly multinational and transnational companies, were spared by the RTPWB from providing their workers a modest raise.”
“Furthermore, in our study, most workers do not live in the same municipality where they are employed. They take from their salaries transportation expenses in going to and from work,” said Baculo.
Worse hit on contractual workers
The reclassification differentiated wage hikes for “current” and “new” employees.
Baculo stated that most of those who fall under ‘new’ employee classification are contractual or irregular workers.
In a sample case presented by PAMANTIK, an irregular woman worker employed in an electronics company in First Philippine Industrial Park in Tanauan City, Batangas received P237 prior to the implementation of Wage Order No. 9.
“When her term of employment ended and got re-hired in the same company with a new contract, (or if she was employed as a contractual worker in another company in the same EPZ and municipality), her daily wage was adjusted to P232 during the effectivity of Wage Order No. 9,” clarified Baculo.
“Apparently, there is only a disparity of P5 in the wage. However, considering the area and current-new employee reclassifications, P23 was slashed from her salary or 9.02% less from what she was supposed to get under Wage Order No. 9.”
Abolition of wage boards
“The workers were dubious since the creation of the wage boards. Workers have demanded for the abolition of these wage boards and the repeal of RA 6727 even before the law was enacted,” said Baculo.
RTWPBs were formed by virtue of Republic Act 6727 or the Wage Rationalization Act in 1989.
Although Congress approved the 3-tranche wage hike of P125, PAMANTIK said the bill continuously draws popular support among workers.
“It is far better than throwing the issue to the wage boards. Workers have been more enthusiastic to push the wage campaign forward. Even yellow unions previously against the bill are now making scenes to take advantage of the credits.”
Workers warn Arroyo
“However, with the popular clamor for the P125 legislated wage hike, the Arroyo administration flagrantly and insultingly isolates itself from the majority of the toiling masses and their interests,” PAMANTIK’s reaction to Arroyo’s attempt to veto the wage hike bill.
Baculo concluded, “The P125-legislated wage hike, which is an economic struggle, has taken a mature political shape over the years. Workers warn, and let us not dismiss the fact, that this issue will be a strong force Mrs. Arroyo has to contend with in order to preserve her regime.”
