by ISAGANI DE LA PAZ
“Imbalanced services and weak state capacity are some of the factors fettering the Philippine government’s welfare fund in protecting the country’s economic heroes,” two Filipino analysts pointed out.
“In the Philippines, where one in 12 people is a migrant and where everyone is related to migrant in one way or another, managing institutions like the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA) can be inherently difficult,” Dovelyn Rannveig Agunias and Neil G. Ruiz concluded in their paper “Protecting Overseas Workers: Lessons and Cautions from the Philippines”.
Agunias of the Washington, DC-based Migration Policy Institute and Ruiz of The Brookings Institution presented their 32-paged paper on December 18, 2007.
Based on their interviews with “several high-level government officials and migrants’ organizations, as well their analysis of several data on the welfare and protection services available to overseas workers,” Agunias and Ruiz said challenges remain in making a welfare fund like OWWA work.
“A welfare fund must find the right balance of services, create meaningful partnerships, build strong state capacity, and actively involve destination countries,” the authors recommended.
Based on OWWA data, the authors found the Welfare Fund Administration “tilted more toward achieving fund stability” than providing services. The bulk of OWWA spending last year was for repatriation of overseas Filipino workers and payment of insurance and burial benefits which formed nearly 14 percent of the agency’s spending last year or nearly P170 million. Payment of insurance and for burial benefits formed the second-largest bulk of spending at 12 percent or P155 million.
The OWWA’s revenue last year was pegged at P1.3 billion and had a total of 994,191 members.
However, the bulk of spending for repatriation last year benefited just above one percent or 10,834 OFWs of its total membership. On the other hand, spending for insurance and burial benefits went to less than one percent (1,122 OFWs’ claims or 0.11 percent) of the total membership.
Spending
AGUNIAS and Ruiz found that OWWA spent only three percent of its fund balance on services two years ago.
“OWWA may be spending less on services now so more is available for future services to future members. It may also mean OWWA is simply under-investing in services,” Agunias and Ruiz stressed.
According to OWWA’s latest audited financial statement, 644,373 individuals were cited by OWWA as having benefited from their revenue spending.
In that report, OWWA should have provided services to a total of 644,373 OFWs or members of their families of whom 2,177 are seafarers who were listed as having availed a training program.
The majority of these beneficiaries or 614,697 local and overseas workers were those that OWWA “assisted” by its 24-hour call center.
The OWWA however, did not cite how much it spent for 11,759 OFWs it “assisted” at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport.
The OWWA’s Financial Management System (FMS) “does not allow for itemizing the specific services spent on workers’ assistance.” Hence, OWWA’s total spending of P446.5 million (US$8.93 million at P50=US$1) last year went to 29,676 individuals or at P15,044 each on the average.
Trust
AGUNIAS and Ruiz described the OWWA as “essentially a single trust fund pooled from the mandatory US$25 membership contributions of foreign employers, land-based and sea-based workers, investment and interest income on these funds, and income from other sources.”
In the last five years, OWWA’s income averaged P1.9 billion (US$38 million) per year. Membership fees comprise the great majority of this income (73 percent) while the rest is from investments and other income, it was reported.
For four years, OWWA spent more than half of its average annual spending of P0.9 billion to salaries of its employees and other administrative costs rather than on programs and projects.
Categorized as a quasi-government entity, it is entirely self-funded. It receives no budget allocation from the national government. “OWWA serves a population of 3.8 million, highly mobile temporary workers scattered in over 190 countries, as well as the families left behind –an enormous task that few governments have even attempted systematically,” Aguinas and Ruiz pointed out.
In an interview with administrator Marianito D. Roque, he said, OWWA targets to reach a P10-billion income in 2007.
“Once OWWA surpassed that level, it will be able to spend more on services,” Roque said. While such goal makes sense, it has “compromised OWWA’s past and present ability to fund welfare services.”
Talks
Aguinas and Ruiz elaborated on their findings in a forum at the Coconut Palace in Manila on December 18, the International Day for the protection of the rights and welfare of migrant workers and their families, as designated by the United Nations.
Atty. Ildefonso Bagasao expected Aguinas and Ruiz to help local groups come up with “at least a consensus on action steps “regarding these issues that have tugged at us for quite a long while.”
Agunias and Ruiz proposed that other labor-exporting countries should also cull lessons from the OWWA experience as the matter of protection would rear its head in government halls around the world as “temporary migration continues to grow worldwide.” “Temporary migration presents countries of origin with the dilemma of ensuring the protection of their workers abroad,” Agunias and Ruiz pointed out. They pointed to OWWA as a way to address this dilemma.
“Once its limitations are addressed, OWWA can be a useful template for many developing countries as they face the mounting challenges of protecting workers abroad,” Agunias and Ruiz stressed.
“Welfare funds require effective institutions that allow for transparency as well as a way to represent the views of the dues-paying members themselves. This guarantees that services remain relevant to the needs of beneficiaries. It is a challenge to design a useful way to consult the beneficiaries, given that migrants are typically dispersed to many countries.” /MP
“In the Philippines, where one in 12 people is a migrant and where everyone is related to migrant in one way or another, managing institutions like the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA) can be inherently difficult,” Dovelyn Rannveig Agunias and Neil G. Ruiz concluded in their paper “Protecting Overseas Workers: Lessons and Cautions from the Philippines”.
Agunias of the Washington, DC-based Migration Policy Institute and Ruiz of The Brookings Institution presented their 32-paged paper on December 18, 2007.
Based on their interviews with “several high-level government officials and migrants’ organizations, as well their analysis of several data on the welfare and protection services available to overseas workers,” Agunias and Ruiz said challenges remain in making a welfare fund like OWWA work.
“A welfare fund must find the right balance of services, create meaningful partnerships, build strong state capacity, and actively involve destination countries,” the authors recommended.
Based on OWWA data, the authors found the Welfare Fund Administration “tilted more toward achieving fund stability” than providing services. The bulk of OWWA spending last year was for repatriation of overseas Filipino workers and payment of insurance and burial benefits which formed nearly 14 percent of the agency’s spending last year or nearly P170 million. Payment of insurance and for burial benefits formed the second-largest bulk of spending at 12 percent or P155 million.
The OWWA’s revenue last year was pegged at P1.3 billion and had a total of 994,191 members.
However, the bulk of spending for repatriation last year benefited just above one percent or 10,834 OFWs of its total membership. On the other hand, spending for insurance and burial benefits went to less than one percent (1,122 OFWs’ claims or 0.11 percent) of the total membership.
Spending
AGUNIAS and Ruiz found that OWWA spent only three percent of its fund balance on services two years ago.
“OWWA may be spending less on services now so more is available for future services to future members. It may also mean OWWA is simply under-investing in services,” Agunias and Ruiz stressed.
According to OWWA’s latest audited financial statement, 644,373 individuals were cited by OWWA as having benefited from their revenue spending.
In that report, OWWA should have provided services to a total of 644,373 OFWs or members of their families of whom 2,177 are seafarers who were listed as having availed a training program.
The majority of these beneficiaries or 614,697 local and overseas workers were those that OWWA “assisted” by its 24-hour call center.
The OWWA however, did not cite how much it spent for 11,759 OFWs it “assisted” at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport.
The OWWA’s Financial Management System (FMS) “does not allow for itemizing the specific services spent on workers’ assistance.” Hence, OWWA’s total spending of P446.5 million (US$8.93 million at P50=US$1) last year went to 29,676 individuals or at P15,044 each on the average.
Trust
AGUNIAS and Ruiz described the OWWA as “essentially a single trust fund pooled from the mandatory US$25 membership contributions of foreign employers, land-based and sea-based workers, investment and interest income on these funds, and income from other sources.”
In the last five years, OWWA’s income averaged P1.9 billion (US$38 million) per year. Membership fees comprise the great majority of this income (73 percent) while the rest is from investments and other income, it was reported.
For four years, OWWA spent more than half of its average annual spending of P0.9 billion to salaries of its employees and other administrative costs rather than on programs and projects.
Categorized as a quasi-government entity, it is entirely self-funded. It receives no budget allocation from the national government. “OWWA serves a population of 3.8 million, highly mobile temporary workers scattered in over 190 countries, as well as the families left behind –an enormous task that few governments have even attempted systematically,” Aguinas and Ruiz pointed out.
In an interview with administrator Marianito D. Roque, he said, OWWA targets to reach a P10-billion income in 2007.
“Once OWWA surpassed that level, it will be able to spend more on services,” Roque said. While such goal makes sense, it has “compromised OWWA’s past and present ability to fund welfare services.”
Talks
Aguinas and Ruiz elaborated on their findings in a forum at the Coconut Palace in Manila on December 18, the International Day for the protection of the rights and welfare of migrant workers and their families, as designated by the United Nations.
Atty. Ildefonso Bagasao expected Aguinas and Ruiz to help local groups come up with “at least a consensus on action steps “regarding these issues that have tugged at us for quite a long while.”
Agunias and Ruiz proposed that other labor-exporting countries should also cull lessons from the OWWA experience as the matter of protection would rear its head in government halls around the world as “temporary migration continues to grow worldwide.” “Temporary migration presents countries of origin with the dilemma of ensuring the protection of their workers abroad,” Agunias and Ruiz pointed out. They pointed to OWWA as a way to address this dilemma.
“Once its limitations are addressed, OWWA can be a useful template for many developing countries as they face the mounting challenges of protecting workers abroad,” Agunias and Ruiz stressed.
“Welfare funds require effective institutions that allow for transparency as well as a way to represent the views of the dues-paying members themselves. This guarantees that services remain relevant to the needs of beneficiaries. It is a challenge to design a useful way to consult the beneficiaries, given that migrants are typically dispersed to many countries.” /MP
No comments:
Post a Comment