Distinguished guests, Friends, Ladies and Gentlemen, Let me, at the outset, congratulate the Ministry of Employment and Labor (MOEL) and the HRD-Korea for seven very fruitful and meaningful years of managing and charting the direction of the Employment Permit System. In my years of service as a diplomat, I have come to learn that we can all benefit from the best practices of different countries. The EPS, I am proud to say, is one of those systems that deserve emulation. The EPS is so efficient and holistic as to include all processes from selection and deployment to feedback and contract termination, and yet it so accessible and open-minded as to be able to adjust to, and improve with, the demands of the times. Such a system, indeed, is a rarity.
It therefore comes as no surprise that the EPS was selected as the 1st place winner of the UN Public Service Awards on June 23, 2011, in the category of �Preventing and Combating Corruption in the Public Service.� I am very honored to be given the opportunity today to humbly share some of my thoughts about the EPS with our distinguished audience.
As an EPS sending country, the Philippines has approximately 27,000 EPS workers throughout South Korea. The previous speakers have given ample information about the EPS so I will focus my ten-minute intervention on my viewpoint as an ambassador. In drafting my speech, I have consulted with other embassies as well.
Allow me now to elaborate on my point about how exemplary a system the EPS is. With the entry of foreign workers come various issues related to immigration. Adjustments are made not just by the worker, but also by the employer and the community that shelters the foreign worker. The adjustment, in fact, is not made just by the workforce alone but by the entire Korean society. The presence of locals and foreigners leads to a dynamic interaction that inevitably shapes the way of life and thinking of the people. Multiculturalism is a societal trend that is made possible not only by foreign spouses and expatriates, but also by the thousands of EPS workers who have found a second home in South Korea � no matter how short their stay is.
The EPS makes sure that the foreign worker is able to adjust as smoothly as possible.
For instance, EPS workers require knowledge of Korean prior to deployment, since developing language skills early on helps minimize communication gaps.
The workplace is not a perfect setting, and anywhere in the world, there are problems related to possible worker maltreatment, abuse or discontent. In South Korea, common complaints we receive from EPS workers pertain to delayed salaries, misrepresented contracts, and physically or verbally abusive sajangnim or colleagues. It is important that we become aware of these issues but it is even more important that we address these issues. The EPS is unique in that the system has established several centers nationwide that are specifically tasked to handle the grievances of workers. I therefore reiterate my thanks to the MOEL and the HRD because they are directly concerned with the welfare of our workers. For example, an EPS worker can get his or her delayed salary and transfer to a better workplace through MOEL Job Centers and HRD branch offices. The MOEL and HRD help make the job of embassies to protect the rights and welfare of foreign workers easier, because your offices are placed strategically nationwide, in areas that are far from where embassies are located.
The EPS is not only concerned about the stay of the workers here, but also about the future of the workers once their tenure ends. The HRD offers various training programs to current workers that will help them gain employment in their home countries or start a business. Such reintegration programs are essential, because their focus on capacity-building gives workers greater confidence to pursue other exploits.
The Philippines understands very well the need for reintegration programs. There are more than eight million Filipinos working abroad, and it is our desire to continually strengthen our economy to generate more local employment. We want our nationals to bring back their experience abroad and share their skills in the Philippines. At the same time, we want to give them every reason and opportunity to return.
Here in South Korea, the Philippine Embassy, through the Philippine Overseas Labor Office, regularly conducts regular sessions on skills and knowledge enhancement for Filipino workers. Last year, for example, the embassy conducted one course on PC assembly; six seminars on financial management; two three-weekend classes on entrepreneurship; one seminar each on franchising and the business climate in the Philippines; and one forum about housing options for foreign workers. All in all, around 800 workers have taken part in our reintegration programs.
In the Philippines, workers and their families can take advantage of various similar reintegration programs. The Philippine Overseas Workers Welfare Administration, for example, has several other skills and knowledge programs that range from SME development to scholarship opportunities for talented but needy children. The Philippine Department of Labor has recently announced the availability of non-collateralized loans for those who wish to start a business. Budgeted at around US$47 million, the loan includes a program for business matching and entrepreneurship training.
Perhaps the reason why EPS workers are in a position of greater flexibility and decision-making compared to foreign workers in other countries is because the system itself has inherent processes that do not restrict themselves with sole deployment; the system oversees and prepares for the stay and eventual return of the worker. I hope that I am able to speak on behalf of my diplomatic counterparts when I say that, in spirit and implementation, the HRD and the embassies have a common goal: the welfare and the rights of the workers.
Having said that, let me take this opportunity to air some views that I believe can be used to further improve the EPS. It is not everyday that I am able to discourse with individuals such as you, so I hope you understand my audacity at raising ideas that can perhaps lead to policies that are even more meaningful and relevant in our common quest.
For instance:
For workers who have completed their sojourn, it may be best if they no longer have to retake the Korean Language Test and other exams. These are people who already passed the tests once and who have lived in South Korea as EPS workers. Requiring them to take the same test to be included anew in the roster is a redundant process that only consumes time and resources. This requirement can be waived without damaging the reason behind the exams, which is to ensure that the workers are able to adjust to Korean society and perform their jobs. Returning workers have already proven that.
The waiting period of six months for EPS workers who have completed their sojourn translates to a period when productivity risks a dip. Employers who wish to retain the same people have to deal with the costs of retraining and adjustment while waiting for the period to lapse, while EPS workers who are still qualified to apply have to contend with half a year of untapped potential.
Attention can perhaps be given to further improvements in the agricultural and construction sectors, which appear to have less defined parameters of operation than the manufacturing sector.
It is our understanding that the EPS is developed in such a way that it prioritizes the infusion of new blood � meaning that workers can only stay up to a certain period and up to a certain age. The idea is that they will go back to their home countries and they will be replaced by other individuals, thereby giving others a chance to become part of the system. Now may be a good time to re-examine this arrangement.
The bond between an employer and an employee who have developed mutual trust and confidence is sacred. Such a relationship needs time and nurture. It is a relationship that can be viewed as a long-term investment because it leads to greater productivity and can expand operations.
The current system only allows up to a maximum of four years and ten months of sojourn for the EPS worker. The worker then has to wait out six months in the home country. Upon return, he or she can only work up to around 38 years old. An EPS worker who joins now at the age of 22, for instance, can only work three times or a total of approximately 14 years with six-month breaks in between.
Assuming that the worker goes to the same employer each time, the bond between them will have to be broken once the worker�s age ceiling is reached. In a typical workplace, the benefits of 14 years of experience are immeasurable.
I respectfully wish to propose a system where, for as long as the employer is willing to take in the worker, the worker can be allowed to stay legally. The employer is in the best position to judge the skills and resourcefulness of the worker. Once either employer or worker wishes out of the contract, the worker can find employment elsewhere � assuming that another SME is willing to receive the transfer.
We are not even talking about permanent residence. We are talking about giving the employer and the employee who have formed a bond the opportunity to let the working relationship flourish � such bonds cannot be aptly captured or maximized by designations of age ceilings. Short-term employment visas that have to be periodically renewed can be used.
The worker will still be under the EPS and will still be counted in the quota. In the long term, this arrangement may be more feasible than a regular turnover of workers. It will also be cost-effective for the MOEL / HRD when handling its operations. We can expect more workers to violate the provisions of their visa for every turnover that takes place. Over time, the number of undocumented workers may increase. The age ceiling may thus be counterproductive in the long run if one overriding purpose is to encourage workers to stay legally.
By abolishing the age ceiling, workers can have the opportunity to stay legally. Certain conditions should of course be put in place, first and foremost of which is the willingness of the registered employer.
I wish to highlight the importance of the employer in this set up. Oftentimes, when we talk about the EPS, we think about the foreign worker. In reality, several other stakeholders exist, such as the government and, of course, the employer.
And many employers themselves like to retain their workers. Employers, in fact, are among those who signed a petition last year requesting improvements in the EPS. I believe that their voices should also be heard in forums like this, because they are the ones who directly deal with the foreign workers.
I hope that, at an opportune time, the Korean Government can also study the possibility of providing amnesty to overstaying workers and find a way for them to become eligible to apply to the EPS. The EPS is such an excellent system to deny, and I sincerely hope that the system will cover as many workers as possible. It is a system that I sincerely believe should be emulated by other countries and in other sectors.
In summary, the EPS is an excellent system that deserves the praise it has received. Thanks to your hard work, the goal of the MOEL / HRD and the embassies in South Korea in protecting the rights and welfare of workers is ably shared. Lastly, there are many ways to further enhance the current system, and I hope that you will find merit in some of my points.
Thank you very much.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
courtesy of Philippine Embassy to Korea
http://www.philembassy-seoul.com/news_details.asp?id=461
