HK OFWs, outraged with ‘forgive-and-forget appeal’

Press Release
28 June 2005

Reference: Dolores Balladares
Chairperson
Tel. No.: (852) 97472986, (852) 28104379


HK OFWs, outraged with ‘forgive-and-forget appeal’
“Oust GMA” campaign abroad pushes through

Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo has no more moral, legal or political right to stay in office. There’s no way for her to go but out of Malacañang.

This was declared by the United Filipinos in Hong Kong (UNIFIL-HK) after Mrs. Arroyo finally admitted yesterday in public that she was indeed the woman in the very controversial “Hello, Garci” recorded conversation.

“After a long silence, the people’s pressure and the mounting call to oust her from office has succeeded in putting Mrs. Arroyo to the defense and make her scramble for excuses to extricate herself from the mess she made,” said Dolores Balladares, UNIFIL-HK chairperson.

However, the UNIFIL – the group that led the protest action during Mrs. Arroyo’s recent visit to HK – was far from appeased by Mrs. Arroyo’s admission.

“Up to now, she is trying to hoodwink the Filipino people by not admitting that she cheated though she has already claimed that she was the woman in the tape. We will not be taken in by such an obvious ploy to rally the emotions of the people without questioning what is just and right,” Balladares added.

Additionally, Balladares also scored Mrs. Arroyo’s appeal for unity in the face of what happened.

“It is disgusting and condemnable. If she wants the Filipino people to accept an illegitimate, cheat, and fake president, she’s grossly mistaken. Each day that Mrs. Arroyo stays in Malacañang is an insult to the Filipino people,” Balladres said.

According to Balladares, Mrs. Arroyo is trying to manipulate the Filipino people by apparently taking the moral and political high grounds. She said that Mrs. Arroyo’s “underdog, forgive and forget appeal” is a farce and a sly move to veer away from the issue of her accountability to the crime she committed against the Filipinos.

“Mere apology will not change the fact that we’ve been fooled for more than a year. A million sorry will not change the fact that Mrs. Arroyo’s manipulations have disenfranchised the Filipinos, including OFWs who voted for the first time overseas,” Balladares stressed.

The UNIFIL said that Mrs. Arroyo’s declaration that her call to the COMELEC official, believed to be Commissioner Garcilllano, was merely a “lapse in judgment” is “nonsensical and a mere ‘palusot’ (way out)”.

“Such a lame excuse for a very big crime! If this is how she plans to answer the other anomalies besieging her including the ‘jueteng payola’ scandal, she is blatantly insulting the intelligence of the public,” the group stated.

Balladares affirmed that her group shall continue to drumbeat the campaign to oust Mrs. Arroyo. She pledged to rally thousands of Filipino migrants in the coming weeks, especially for Mrs. Arroyo’s State of the Nation Address (SONA).

“Only Mrs. Arroyo’s ouster shall calm the outcry of the people. The only responsible thing for her to do now is to step down – or be ousted,” Balladares concluded.#

Press Release
20 June 2005

For reference: Dolores Balladares
Chairperson
Tel Nos: 28104379, 97472986


“Arroyo exports her fascism to HK”
OFW groups vow more protest to oust GMA


A dastardly act of cowardice and fascism.

This was how the United Filipinos in Hong Kong (UNIFIL-HK) called blocking of their protest action with big police vans just as Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo was stepping out of the Island Shari-la hotel, the site of her meeting with the business community of Hong Kong.

“For sure, this uncalled for action was ordered by Mrs. Arroyo. It is not beyond her to resort to such repressive actions when faced with protests from the Filipino people,” declared Dolores Balladares, UNIFIL-HK chairperson.

The UNIFIL and about 30 migrant workers conducted the protest action today to call for the ouster of Mrs. Arroyo amidst the controversies surrounding her election, the massive corruption that involved her family, and the escalating violations of human rights in the country.

Balladares reported that UNIFIL-HK and its allied organizations have been conducting the said peaceful protest action across the road facing the hotel when about after an hour, two huge police vans parked in front of them. After a little while, a convoy of vehicles moved out of the hotel premises including the vehicle of Mrs. Arroyo.

“Mrs. Arroyo is much too afraid of the backlash of the numerous anomalies and controversies that she has been involved in. She cannot even face the glaring truth that even Filipinos abroad want her out of office,” Balladares added.

Balladares believed that the move of Mrs. Arroyo was made to “save face”.

“However, she should know that she has no more face to save. She has no more credibility to preserve. She has been exposed for what she really is: an illegitimate president, corrupt and fascist to the core.”

The group also said that the action of Mrs. Arroyo was a reflection of the treatment of the Philippine Consulate General in HK to protest actions.

“Whenever we conduct a peaceful and legitimate picket protest at the PCG lobby, they turn off the lights, lock the glass doors, and block us from the sight of onlookers. Is this how Mrs. Arroyo’s democracy works?” Balladares asked.

UNIFIL-HK said that Mrs. Arroyo is mistaken if she will think that her action today will deter Filipinos abroad from calling for her ouster.

“In fact, this has given us even more reasons to bring the full weight of the OFW’s wrath to kick out Arroyo from office. She doesn’t deserve to be there and there is no more ground for her to stay in Malacañang,” Balladres concluded.

Press Release
20 June 2005

For reference:

Dolores Balladares
Chairperson
Tel Nos: 28104379, 97472986


"GMA should stop dodging and face the music"
HK OFWs challenge GMA to face community on controversy

Instead of running abroad, deflecting the issue, issuing threats, and drumming up the hysteria of destabilization, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo must squarely face the allegations of her fraudulent presidency and corruption-ridden rule. She owes it to the Filipino people.

This was declared by the United Filipinos in Hong Kong (UNIFIL-HK) in a picket protest at the Island Shangri-la Hotel on the occasion of GMA's meeting today with business people of Hong Kong to show them that she's still in control of the country.

"If she really won fairly and squarely in the last elections as what she has been bragging, why doesn't she face the "mother of all tapes" fairly and squarely as well? No amount of dodging from the real issues shall save her now," said Dolores Balladares, UNIFIL-HK chairperson.

Instead of veering away from the real issue of election fraud, Balladares added, Mrs. Arroyo is instead fanning fears of destabilization plots to scare the Filipino people.

"She is the greatest destabilizer in the country. She has destabilized it by her mudded credibility not only in the last elections but in all other anomalies that have beset her administration," she declared.

Balladares also slammed the news that Mrs. Arroyo is planning to declare Martial Law anytime soon.

"Mrs. Arroyo is fast becoming the biggest fascist rivaling even former president Marcos. She has already threatened those that exposed the election scam. She has also clamped down on the media and threatened them with legal actions if they air the contents of the CD. Worse, she kills those that she cannot silence as experienced by activists and progressive groups."

"Martial Law will be the final act of desperation of a president who did not even win her position," she declared.

Balladares added that GMA's visit to HK shows her "desperation to salvage her fast-sliding grip of the country" by putting up a front to the business community overseas and get their confidence and trust.

"However, it is the Filipino people's trust and confidence that she is rapidly losing. How can you trust a cheat? How can you trust a president that rails against illegal gambling at every opportunity but turns a blind eye when it is her husband, brother-in-law and son who collect millions from jueteng?" she stressed.

According to the group, the absence of meeting the Filipino community in Mrs. Arroyo's agenda in Hong Kong reflects her fear of facing the OFWs on the anomalies surrounding her position. This, UNIFIL relayed, was much different from her previous visit that was full of pomp and promises.

"She knows that even abroad, we are watching. And what we are seeing is her illegitimacy, incompetence, fascism and corruption. For Filipinos abroad, she'll go down the same way as her disgraced predecessor," Balladares stated.

Balladares reported that a "broad and massive" campaign, which shall be joined with the call to oust Mrs. Arroyo in the Philippines, is already being planned by OFW groups around the world. She said that groups such as the UNIFIL and other allied organizations of the militant Migrante International that figured prominently abroad during the Oust Estrada campaign are at the front of the brewing oust GMA movement overseas.

"The latest fiasco that Mrs. Arroyo found herself in just capped the restlessness felt by migrant Filipinos over her government. We are all too prepared to join in the chorus for Mrs. Arroyo's ouster," Balladares concluded.

OFWs in HK assail government neglect, call to save life of OFW in death row

Press Release
7 June 2007

On the occasion of Migrant Workers Day
OFWs in HK assail government neglect, call to save life of OFW in death row and for services to all OFWs

While the life of OFW Rey Cortez hangs in the balance, while the government's responsibility for services and protection to Filipino migrants is denied, while dereliction of duty for Filipinos abroad of government officials in the Philippines and abroad persists - the government-declared Migrant Worker's Day shall remain shallow, hypocritical and pointless.

This was declared today by the United Filipinos in Hong Kong (UNIFIL-HK) and Migrante Sectoral Party - HK Chapter (MSP-HK) in a picket protest commemorating the 10th anniversary of the Migrant Workers Day in the Philippines. The said occasion started in 1995 upon the passing into law of RA 8042 the Migrants Acts of 1995 which followed the death of Flor Contemplacion in Singapore and the massive protests that ensued.

According to Eman Villanueva, UNIFIL-HK secretary general, the action was held as a part of the International Day of Protest to Save the Life of OFW Rey Cortez, scheduled to be executed in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), called by Migrante International.

Cortez was given the death sentence by the Riyadh Grand Court for killing a Pakistani taxi cab driver. The said decision came on the heels of two other sentences previously given wherein the initial 15 years imprisonment and 1,000 lashes were reduced to 10 years jail term.

"OFW Cortez, reported MSP-HK chairperson Vicky Cabantac, "was denied assistance by the Philippine Embassy in KSA. On his last hearing, it was reported that the Philippine Embassy did not provide him with a lawyer nor an interpreter for the whole proceeding."

The groups assailed the Philippine government's inaction on the case of Cortez. They said that his case reflects the sorry state of distressed overseas Filipinos in the hands of the government.

"Ten years after, the Philippine government continues to neglect the plight of OFWs and their families. Thousands of OFWs continue to languish in jails all over the world and many are in death row. Meanwhile, those who need immediate medical attention end up waiting until they die," said Cabantac.

Villanueva stated that the lack of services and protection from the Philippine government can be traced to its policies for OFWs such as the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA) Omnibus Policy. This, he said, was even revealed in a leaders' forum organized by the Philippine Consulate General on Sunday, June 5, where OWWA Administrator Marianito Roque was a guest.

"How can the Philippine government claim of services to OFWs when in the OWWA Omnibus Policy they have decided that only those paying the OWWA fees can avail of the OWWA programs? Even this contradicts the Migrants Act of 1995 that explicitly stated the duty of the government to provide services and protection to ALL overseas Filipinos," he furthered.

Additionally, Villanueva said that they were not impressed by Administrator Roque's positive picture of his plans for the OWWA.

"The real benefits to all OFWs of the plans he presented are still in question. Also, these are just coming soon. How about the now? What are they going to do with Cortez and the numerous more who are in need of direct and on-site services? Will they just wait until they die while the government comes up with more hullabaloo schemes, or worse, continue to squander the OFW money in the OWWA on corruption and anomalous investments?," he said.

Villanueva also raised the issue of transparency of the OWWA Fund. He reported that government moves such as the transfer of the OWWA Medicare to PhilHealth or the transfer of the OWWA money to the Landbank even without prior consultation nor information have been criticized by OFWs. Under the OWWA Omnibus Policy, he said that such secret deals are sanctioned.

Cabantac reported that MSP and its allied groups are still actively lobbying to scrap the OWWA Omnibus Policy. She urged OFWs who have been denied assistance to come out in order to make stronger the case against the said policy.

"The OWWA Omnibus Policy is a bane for all migrant workers and our families. What we need is fast and comprehensive services for all. What we demand is total protection of rights and wellbeing. Until then, the Migrant Workers Day shall only be an exercise in futility," Villanueva concluded.#

A celebration of militancy, a commitment to fight

For Immediate Release
Please circulate widely
30 May 2005

Click the link bellow to see pictures

UNIFIL-HK Photo archive
http://www.unifil.org.hk/20th_anniversary/

Photos courtesy of Azon Amaya-Canete
http://kisapmata.com/unifil20/


For reference:
Dolores Balladares
Chairperson
Tel. No.: 28104379

A celebration of militancy, a commitment to fight
Thousands join UNIFIL’s 20th anniversary, commit to oust GMA


I was invited here to give the keynote speech. But when I saw your cultural presentations, how you carried your issues, and how multitalented the OFWs are – I think that each of you are the keynote speakers of this event.

Thus said Cong. Satur Ocampo of Bayan Muna partylist before a jam-packed crowd of 3,000 Filipino migrant workers who celebrated the 20th anniversary of the United Filipinos in Hong Kong (UNIFIL-HK) yesterday, May 29 at Chater Road. Congressman Ocampo was guest speaker for the said event.

Under the theme, “Sahod, serbisyo, proteksyon, karapatan – Ipaglaban! Kalayaan at Demokrasya para sa Inang Bayan” (Struggle for wage, services, protection and rights. Freedom and democracy for the Motherland), members and allies of the UNIFIL filled the dayoff of Filipinos in Hong Kong, mostly domestic workers, with cultural presentations that include songs, dances, choral recitation (sabayang bigkas), skits and live bands.

The audience heartily applauded the Balagtasan, a traditional cultural form in the Philippines where two contending parties hurl arguments against each other facilitated by a Lakambini – all done in a poetic style. The Balagtasan showed a comprehensive view of the sentiments of Filipino migrant workers in Hong Kong. The character Billion Dollar Woman represented the defenders and cohorts of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo while Bayang Barya Lamang epitomized the poor majority. The presentation ended with a call to oust GMA that was met by the resounding support of the crowd.

“This day was a showcase of the cultural talents of Filipino migrant workers. This day highlighted the continuing struggle of overseas Filipinos for wage increase, services, protection and rights. This day was an affirmation of our conviction to fight for national freedom and genuine democracy for our Motherland,” said Dolores Balladares, UNIFIL chairperson.

More than 20 presentations were featured in the migrants cultural festival held from 11 am to 1pm. Different OFW groups from the northern to the southern provinces of the Philippines presented songs and dances that include, among others, the war dance Sakuting from Abra, the traditional Bicolano dance Pantomina, Kini-Kini of Mindanao and a hilarious puppet-style dance number of Yoyoy Vilame’s Butsikik.

Afterwards, the launching of the CD “Songs of Love and Struggle – from Andres Bonifacio to Jose Maria Sison” was held. Bruce Van Voorhis spoke in behalf of the DEFEND Committee in HK. The DEFEND-HK is part of an international campaign to remove the terrorist tagging of Prof. Jose Maria Sison by the US, Canada, Australia, and the Netherlands governments. It also advocates for the defense of the rights of Filipino progressives overseas.

The main program, which was also a cultural extravaganza, was opened by Balladares.

“Filipino overseas and our families in the Philippines are being attacked at all fronts both by the Philippine and the Hong Kong governments. Our wage is relentlessly depressed by the periodic wage cuts, additional taxes in the Philippines and the meteoric rise of prices of basic commodities,” she stated, “The HK government even insulted us by giving us a measly HK$50 wage increase after cutting our wage by almost HK$600 since 1999. We are denied of services and protection and our comprehensive rights are violated.”

Congressman Ocampo, meanwhile, exhorted the crowd to join the campaign against the rampant violations of political and civil rights in the Philippines. He urged the UNIFIL and the other groups present to fight the growing fascism in the country as shown by the killings of activists and critics of the government from different groups such as Bayan Muna, the media, and human rights advocates including priests and lawyers.

According to him, Bayan Muna and other progressive party lists and activist groups are now in the process of building international support to the campaign to stop the killings of activists. He rallied the support of migrant workers who, he said, also played significant roles in the past movement against Martial Law and even with the issues during the succeeding governments.

In the main event, members and friends of the UNIFIL combined and cooperated with each other to come out with a creative and innovative program that highlighted the various concerns of the Filipino migrant workers. The issues of Filipino migrants and their families were effectively shown in different cultural forms.

Binibining OWWA 2005, a parody of the traditional beauty pageants, presented the issues of OFWs regarding government services and the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA). With candidates called Miss (mis)Information, Miss (mis)Allocation and Miss (mis)Management, the said presentation from the Filipino Migrant Workers Union (FMWU) conveyed the problems that besiege the OWWA including the widely-criticized OWWA Omnibus Policy.

The Mission Volunteers (MOVERS), meanwhile, tackled the issue of excessive government fees charged by the Philippine government to the OFWs through the choral recitation (sabayang bigkas) entitled “Huwag nyo kaming pagkakitaan! Kami’y tao hindi kalakal!” (Do not commodify us! We are human beings and not commodities!).

Friends of Bethune House (FBH) lambasted the Value Added Tax in a comic presentation of OFWs in an airplane called flight VAT 12% captained by US President George Bush and President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as the flight stewardess. The skit also showed how the tax will unevenly impact the few who are rich and the majority of the Filipinos who are poor. The group also used the popular “Bulagaan” of the Philippine noontime show Eat Bulaga, with their VAT Bulagaan that further drove their point on the said regressive tax.

Meanwhile, groups from Abra and the Cordilleras showed the impacts of the Philippine Mining Act of 1995 in their presentation called “Didigra!” (Destruction!). It illustrated how the law endangers the national patrimony of the Philippines, the tradition and culture of indigenous peoples, and the livelihood of those living in mining communities.

A joint cultural presentation of different UNIFIL member groups on the World Trade Organization (WTO) featured a description of the WTO, its policies and impacts to the Filipino people. It also called for the massive participation of OFWs in the upcoming protest against the 6th WTO ministerial conference in Hong Kong in December.

Apo Leung of the HK People’s Alliance on the WTO (HKPA) congratulated the UNIFIL and rallied the crowd for the coming anti-WTO events.

The audiences were also led to a mass singing of the songs created by Likha that used popular tunes such as the Beatle’s “Help” and dealt with issues of misuse of OWWA funds and the US War on Terror.

Two bands, “The Rascals” and “Onstage”, composed of Filipino residents capped the celebration while the audience danced with jubilation.

“The 20th anniversary of the UNIFIL showed the migrant worker’s commitment to fight. We are prepared to fight for our rights and wellbeing in Hong Kong. We are prepared to fight against the policies of the Arroyo government that plunge the Filipino people to heightened poverty, unemployment and forced migration. We are prepared to kick out GMA. We are prepared to confront imperialist plunder and aggression to the Filipino people and of the world,” concluded Balladres.

The UNIFIL is the oldest-existing alliance of Filipino migrant workers in Hong Kong. It is considered as the leading Filipino activist group in Hong Kong and also played a major role in the formation of the Asian Migrants Coordinating (AMCB) who led the thousands-strong marches against the wage cut and other imposition of the HK government to foreign domestic workers since 1997. #

Candle Light Vigil (02) 

Candle Light Vigil (01) 

UNIFIL Logo 

AMCB Labour Day Statement (English & Chinese)

Fight for Wage Increase and Protection of Rights

Our Demands are What Unite Us Workers!

保衛權益；爭取合理工資提升；

工人團結起來爭取我們所需！

In the face of relentless attacks to our wage, deterioration of working conditions, grave threats to our livelihood, denial of basic social services and violation of our rights, workers of Hong Kong, migrants and locals alike, are called to unite.

面對無休止的薪酬下調、工作環境質素不斷下降、生計受到嚴重的威脅、不斷削減的基本福利甚至連個人的權益亦受到侵犯時應如何自處,團結起來吧!香港的工人們!不論你們是本地勞工與否，一同站起來、爭取屬於自己的權益。

There is no other momentous day to do so than today, the International Labour Day. Thus we, the Asian Migrants Coordinating Body (AMCB) who has led thousands of migrant workers in our fight for wage, livelihood and rights, unite with the local workers of Hong Kong in confronting the various issues that face the working people.

國際勞動節是一個何等重要的日子，亞洲移工鬥陣基地(AMCB)曾帶領數以千計的外勞去爭取他們應有的待遇、權益，是一個由香港多個外勞聯盟共同組成的大聯盟，為香港的工人爭取他們應有的待遇、提醒大眾對基層勞工的關注。

Working people of Hong Kong must unite to fight for just wage for all. This is always a rightful struggle of workers because our wage is always not commensurate to the amount of work that we do and the length of working hours we are made to keep. This fight has even become more legitimate for local and migrant workers of Hong Kong for the past years. As workers, we have both suffered from drastic wage cuts and policies that make our wage and jobs insecure.

香港的工人應該團結一致，爭取自己應有的薪酬。你們的要求是合理的，工作的量應與薪酬成正比，並且要制訂最高工時去保障自己的權益。過去數年這爭取在本地及外地勞工是越來越理所當然。香港工人所面對的不單是薪酬的大幅度下降，而且是一些不合理、不人道的制度，令他們失去了工作與薪金方面的保障。

Working people of Hong Kong must unite to fight against the imposition of regressive taxes to those who are already in dire economic condition such as the levy imposed to employers of Foreign Domestic Helpers (FDHs) but practically paid for by FDHs. To tax the FDH is plainly unjust, immoral and illegal

香港的工人要團結起來，推翻向那些經濟狀況惡劣的外籍傭工僱主徵收回歸稅的政策。在這項政策下，最終的受害者只有傭工本身，向低收入外籍傭工徵收稅項是如此不公平、不人道的行為，一定要加以阻止，保障外籍傭工的權益。

However, to tax employers of FDH is also unjust. FDH employers are mainly not the elite people of Hong Kong but the ordinary workers and employees whose salary has already been cut. They are the parents who are both forced to work to make ends meet and thus have the need, not the luxury, to hire domestic help. They are the workers who, in the long run, shall always be burdened by the levy.

對外傭僱主收取稅項也不合理。大多數外傭僱主不是香港的精英，而是普通的工人及僱員，他們的工資已左刪右減；他們是孩子的父母，只是被迫去工作及有需要而不是奢侈的去僱用傭工。他們同是打工仔，最終也會被這項徵程所負累。

Working people of Hong Kong must unite to fight the reduction and privatization of social services in Hong Kong. Services from the government are a right of all people of any country. To reduce the services and subject them to private businesses is to make them hostages to profit and more inaccessible to the ordinary people.

香港工人定要團結起來，對抗政府將其社會服務減縮及私營化，這是世界上所有人民的權利。縮減服務而令其私營化化，使之和利潤掛勾，結果遠離一般人民的需要。

Working people of Hong Kong must unite against neoliberalism and its impacts to the workers and the people. Policies of privatization, deregulation and liberalization have wrought havoc on workers of developed and developing countries. Rates of unemployment and underemployment rise up, labour flexibilization becomes rampant, and wages are depressed while the interests and profits of big multinational and transnational corporations remain protected.

香港工人定要團結對抗後自由主義及其對勞工和人民的影響。私營化、非秩序他及自由化等政策已對發展及發展中國家工人造成浩刧。失業及不充份就業率的上升，勞工被迫的柔順日益惡化，工資被下壓，反之跨國企業的利潤則得到保障。

This is the future that the World Trade Organization (WTO), set to meet here in December, has in store for the workers of Hong Kong. This is the future that we must resist. This is the future that we must reject and fight against together with other workers and peoples of the world.

這是世界貿易組織的未來，在今年十二月在此的會議，即將來臨到香港工人。這是我們要起來對抗的將來。是和世界各地的工人及人民共同反抗及爭取的將來。

Let us learn from those who in 1886 fought for the same issues that we are all fighting for now. Although varying in degree and magnitude, our situations, our demands and our goals for just wages, equality of treatment, protection of our rights and rejection of neoliberalism are what unite us.

就讓我們學習1886年的前人，以作為我們今天爭取的經驗。雖有時空的不同，但就我們的處境，我們的要求，我們要求合理的工資，公平的對待，保障我們的權益及反對後自由主義，這都是聯合團結我們的因素。

As we unite on our demands, we also unite in our action. Let not any effort of the government and big businesses to divide the working people of Hong Kong succeed. For only in the unity of the working people of Hong Kong – migrants and locals – shall we find our victory.

團結在我們共同的要求，團結在我們的行動。不要讓大財團及政府分化我們香港工人的力量。只要香港的工人能團結在一起---無論是本地及外籍工人---定必爭取到我們的勝利。

Asia Migrant Coordinating Body (AMCB)

亞洲移居人士聯盟

01-05-05

Stop the killings of activists and progressives.

Press Statement

7 April 2005

Reference:
Dolores T. Balladares
Chairperson

Our sympathy bridges distance! Our sympathy is a cry for justice!
Stop the killings of activists and progressives.

As we gather today outside the doors of the Philippine Consulate General in Hong Kong to condemn the spate of killings of Filipino progressives, Church people and journalists, we, migrant workers, Church people, human rights advocates and civil libertarians, call on the government of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to immediately stop its killing frenzy of advocates for peace, justice, human rights and democracy.

Since mid-January 2005, 32 people identified with activist political parties and organizations, have been systematically gunned down or abducted in a series of incidents across the country. In Central Luzon alone, the center of the Hacienda Luisita dispute, 13 people have been summarily executed and five more have been forcibly taken and are still missing.

The murders and forced disappearances were reported to have been perpetuated by elements of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), Philippine National Police (PNP) and paramilitary groups.

We may be far from our country. Still, we sympathize with our fellow Filipinos whose only crime is to want what is rightful and just. We sympathize, for Filipinos abroad also dream of a country to come back to where peace and social justice reigns.

If activists and progressives are felled by bullets, migrant workers are slowly killed by government neglect and inaction.

There are at least 5,168 OFWs languishing behind bars, including 673 women and 50 minors, worldwide. On death row are at least 5 Filipinos in Malaysia, one in the US and 13 in Saudi Arabia. Robert Tarongoy remains a captive in war-torn Iraq. Four OFWs have been beheaded recently in the Saudi Arabian city of Taif.

In Jordan at least 50 abused Filipina workers continue to languish at the Philippine post in Amman. Their requests for repatriation are being delayed by the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA); that at the same time pressures the families of these workers to shoulder the expenses of their deployment, fines and repatriation.

The same goes for more than 100 stranded workers in the cities of Jeddah and Al-Khobar in Saudi Arabia. The unsolved murders of two Filipinas in The Netherlands have not gotten any attention from Malacanang.

The inaction of Pres. Arroyo on the continuing assassination, summary execution and forced disappearance of Filipino progressives and journalists is in effect an approval if not an endorsement of these atrocities and murders.

Like our fellow Filipinos back home – whose plea for wage increase and stable jobs where answered by live bullets, gunned down because their faith brought them to serve the exploited peasants of Hacienda Luisita, silenced because they criticize the corruption and other wrong doings of the government in their articles and statements in the news papers and radio program – abused and exploited overseas Filipino workers’ plight fall on deaf ears and are left to suffer their unbearable condition. If this is not state terrorism, then what is?

Distance can never impede us from extending our solidarity and sympathy to the parents, wives, husbands, sons and daughters of our modern Filipino martyrs.

Because our sympathy bridges distance... our sympathy is a cry for justice.

Stop the Killings, Uphold Human Rights! Justice for the victims of state terrorism! Respect Civil Liberties, Oppose State Terrorism! Bring the perpetrators to justice! Scrap all policies and measures that curtail civil liberties and human rights!

On the Two Opposing Views on the Wage Struggle of Foreign Domestic Workers in Hong Kong

On the Two Opposing Views on the Wage Struggle of Foreign Domestic Workers in Hong Kong

A Critique of the Joint Position Paper of the Coalition for Migrants’ Rights and their Allied Groups entitled “Wage Protection for Foreign Domestic Workers in HK!”

17 March 2005

Last March 13, the Coalition for Migrants Rights (CMR) and their allied groups launched their “FDW Wage Protection Campaign”. The said campaign, its analyses and calls, were expressed in a joint position paper signed by the CMR, the HK Coalition of Indonesian Migrant Workers Organization (KOTKIHO), Asian Migrant Centre (AMC), Migrant Forum in Asia (MFA), Akbayan-HK, and the Alliance of Progressive Labor-HK.

We do not know if this joint position has been deeply discussed and analyzed by the signatories. Nevertheless, we are issuing this critique to clarify our position among our members and other networks that may have received the said joint position paper. For purposes of brevity, we used “CMR and its allies” to refer to the signatories whether or not they actually agree to the entire paper.

The United Filipinos in Hong Kong (UNIFIL-HK) has chosen to issue this critique because we are disturbed by the said analysis and calls. We are disturbed because the line that the campaign carries, though at first glance may appear really for the migrant workers, will reveal otherwise with further analysis. Not only are we disturbed but we are also alarmed that their analyses and calls may spread without being challenged, sow confusion among the ranks of migrant organizations, and also create a rift between migrants and the workers and local peoples of Hong Kong.

“Wage protection” is the rallying call of this campaign. They said: “In 2005, CMR and partners are reviving the campaign on “FDW Wage Protection”. This wants to focus the campaign back on the real issues faced by FDWs, and promote FDW (not employers’) interests.”

Under the banner of wage protection, the campaign includes: 1. Stamping out underpayment and overcharging of recruitment agencies; 2. Converting the levy into a “Protection Fund for FDWs; 3. A two-step wage increase in two years – 6% in 2005 and 12% in 2006. Thrown in for good measures are FDW social security protection, a call for consultation with registered FDW trade unions in policy changes and “related demands” that includes the abolition of the two-week rule or the New Conditions of Stay (NCS).

The campaign’s centerpiece is the call to convert the levy for hiring FDWs implemented by the Hong Kong government in October 2003, into a “Protection Fund for FDWs” supposedly to solve “factors that erode our wages (e.g. underpayment, high recruitment fees). Even though they claimed that the “CMR’s primary campaign is wage protection and wage increase”, the wage hike campaign for them will “simply recover the 2 wage cuts (1999 and 2003), and bring back FDW MAW to 1998 levels”.

For the CMR and the other groups, the call “to abolish the employers’ levy only serves the employers’, not FDWs’, interests.” Obviously, they want to say that the campaign to abolish the levy, which the Asian Migrants Coordinating Body (AMCB) to which UNIFIL is a member of, is a pro-employer campaign. They want to say that the 12,000 FDWs who marched with AMCB on February 2003 against the levy are pro-employers. Even the local workers and trade unions who called to abolish the levy are pro-employers. In short, they claim that their “levy as a protection fund campaign” is the one that is really pro-FDWs.

I. How did they arrive with such an analysis?

The position paper immediately placed the issues of underpayment and overcharging to build their justification. They said that “underpayment is one of the most widespread forms of abuse against FDWs in Hong Kong… is linked to the excessive fees charged by recruitment agencies”. Thus, “for these FDWs, any wage hike is meaningless, and only serves to intensify the underpayment that they suffer”. For them, solving the underpayment and overcharging problem is “one of the first and most immediate steps needed to raise the actual wages of FDWs”. This they said is possible if only the HK authorities were more efficient.

From here, the CMR and the signatories proceeded to say that the the levy was implemented “to generate at least HK$1 billion every year” for the HK government. They clarified that their opposition to the wage cut and levy in 2003 was from their “principled opposition … not on the employers’ levy itself – our protests were against the INTENDED USE of the levy, and the PROCESS by which it was implemented (government selling-off the FDWs to lessen employers’ resistance to the levy).”

Furthermore, the levy, for them, is an issue of employers. Therefore, “the employers should defend their own interests, not the FDWs.”

For them, FDW opposition to the levy means a campaign to ” DECLARE & USE THE LEVY AS A PROTECTION FUND TO COMPENSATE AND PROTECT FDWs AGAINST EMPLOYERS’ ABUSES.” The levy for them is “one powerful weapon that is now available to FDWs – a financial bond/guarantee, already paid by the employers and readily available – to make them pay/responsible if they commit any underpayment or violation of the FDW contract”.

In relation to their other demands, they further believed that social security like the MPF is part of wage protection because it “can also be a used to detect and stamp out underpayment/illegal employment”.

Tempting calls and demands if one will not make a deeper analysis.

II. But what do they really mean and what do we say about it?

A. “Give up the wage increase fight as immediate struggle of workers”

1. The CMR and their allies’ call for a wage increase is incidental and a lipservice. They put this demand as no. 3 in their list. It is not a primary call for them because, as they said, it is to “simply (a very revealing choice of word) recover the two wage cuts”. For them, the primary problems of FDWs are underpayment and overcharging and not the fact that the wage of FDWs is basically exploitative.

2. Their placing of the demand to stamp out underpayment and overcharging as a top demand is a reminder of the line peddled by Mr. James Tien – chairman of the Liberal Party and one of the main proponents of the HK$400 wage cut in 2003.

That time, Mr. Tien used as a springboard the issues of underpayment and overcharging of recruitment agencies in order to deflect the issue of the wage cut. Simply, what he wanted to say then was overcharging and underpayment were the main problems of FDWs and not the actual wage level. Isn’t this what the CMR and their allies want to say now?

Have they forgotten this fact? Haven’t they realized that this line can be used by the Hong Kong government, has already been used in fact, to veer away from the main issue of just wage increase for all FDWs? This makes the CMR analysis even more dangerous.

3. Nobody can deny that overcharging and underpayment are two of the most prevalent problems of FDWs in Hong Kong. These problems should indeed be addressed. It is, however, misleading to say that stamping out underpayment and overcharging will increase the wages of FDWs. This is deceitful and illusory!

The fight for a wage increase is a fight to increase the MAW. Resolving underpayment and overcharging will only increase the take home pay of a specific section, those who are victims of underpayment and overcharging. It does not address the current low and exploitative MAW. So what happens then to the rest of the FDWs?

The demand for a wage hike thus remains to be the main struggle of FDWs. It is in the interest of all FDWs. This also includes those victimized by overcharging and underpayment who, if they win their cases against their employers, will receive more than the current HK$3,270. That is a real wage increase.

4. The CMR and its allies call for a two-step wage hike. They opted to lower the wage hike demand to HK$200 (6% this 2005) and tried to make it acceptable by injecting a demand for a 12% increase in 2006.

We wonder, why not 18% now? Is it because for the CMR, a wage hike of more than 6% is out of the capacity of the HK government to implement? If this is so, isn’t the CMR becoming an apologist for the HK government? Or this time, the CMR suddenly shifted to become pro-employer, thinking that the employers may not be able to afford the salary to HK$3670 now?

Even in any negotiation, one primarily holds on to the just and reasonable maximum demand. To lower the demand without fighting for it in the first place is nothing but a sellout.

5. They failed to provide a distinction that is even used in the legal arena between wages and benefits. Thus they fell into the trap of misrepresenting social security protection like the MPF as “effectively” giving “a 5% wage hike to FDWs”. Wages, employment and social benefits are three different issues. To confuse the expansion of employment and social benefits as a wage increase is false and practically reduces and sidelines the fight for the actual worker’s wages.

B. “Yes to the levy! Anyway, the employers are the ones paying for it.”

1. For the HK government, hiring of FDWs is a privilege. Thus, employers should pay a tax to hire them. As a further refinement though, the HK government justified it under the existing Employee’s Retraining Ordinance. Now, the CMR and its allies, like the HK government, want the FDWs, the workers and the local peoples to accept the levy.

What they don’t want to recognize is the fact that the levy is actually regressive taxation towards ordinary working people in Hong Kong that are made to suffer the burden of the HK economic crisis.

To transform the levy into a “protection fund” is just trying to make pretty the form of an essentially stinking policy and make it more acceptable.

From the onset, it has been clear that the levy will benefit only the Hong Kong government because its main aim is to generate revenues (which incidentally, they did admit in their paper. We wonder what for?). It was implemented to resolve Hong Kong’s budget deficit by raising money formally from the employers of FDWs and practically from the FDWs themselves through the HK$400 wage cut.

2. Regressive taxation is a prescription of neo-liberal policies. It has been the experience in many countries that whenever an economic crisis hits, the governments automatically push through with taxation that targets the workers and ordinary people. It does not matter that the crisis itself was brought about by the implementation of neoliberal policies.

If this is so, aren’t the CMR and its allies subscribing to neoliberalism by agreeing to regressive taxation? Considering that the World Trade Organization is the main vehicle for advancing neoliberal policies, doesn’t it translate to support of the WTO? And we thought that they were against WTO!

3. The CMR and its allies also gives false hopes that the proposed “Protection Fund for FDWs” can serve as a “powerful weapon” to distressed FDWs. They claim that it would be “readily available” compensation for FDWs with cases against their employers.

But don’t they know that even compensation follows from due process? No system gives compensation just because one claimed of underpayment or any other violation. Compensation is given only AFTER the case has already been resolved. Once this happens, abusive employers are obliged to pay.

So this means that the said protection fund is NOT readily available as they want us to believe. More so, wouldn’t this protection fund, if established, suffer the same bureaucratic problems as that with the current Labor Department’s grievance mechanisms?

4. We are wondering why they seem to be so excited about this formula as if it was something new and exciting. Haven’t they heard of the Wage Insolvency Fund which supposedly guarantees salary claims of aggrieved FDWs/employees whenever employers declare bankruptcy? This approaches, if not already mirrors, some of the functions of their proposed “Protection Fund”.

5. More than these, they overblow the “Protection Fund” as a “deterrent”, if not the solution, to the problem of underpaid FDWs. We beg to disagree.

On the contrary, the existence of the levy as a “protection fund”, only gives license to unscrupulous and abusive employers to further violate the rights of FDWs . Since they have already paid the levy, these abusive and unscrupulous employers would think that they can continue abusing FDWs because anyway, the abused worker can get “compensation” and “protection” from the fund which they paid already. The proposal reduces the legal responsibilities of unscrupulous employers. It potentially exposes the FDWs to more abuses.

6. For them to simplistically say that underpayment and overcharging can be stamped out by the Hong Kong government and that their proposed “protection fund” would “finally end the sufferings” of those underpaid and overcharged FDWs, is exaggerated and messiahnic.

For example, how can an underpaid or overcharged Indonesian migrant’s suffering be finally ended with just receiving her claim from the so-called protection fund while not addressing the reality that the Transmigration Decree of the Indonesian government is still in effect? The potential for these violations to be repeated is still there.

The problem of underpayment and overcharging is systemic and is not simply between FDWs, their employers and the recruitment agencies. This is a by-product of deregulation and privatization of overseas placement. Prevailing policies of both sending and receiving countries affect the incidence of these problems as well.

Without addressing the root causes of the problems of forced migration and the labor export-import industry, these sufferings cannot be finally ended.

C. “Employers are the enemies”: Threatening locals’ and migrants’ solidarity

1. The proposal to transform the levy into a “Protection Fund” threatens the solidarity of local workers and people and migrant workers. It puts us into the hands of the government’s agenda of pitting the workers against each other. Isn’t this a sabotage of worker’s and people’s solidarity?

Even local domestic workers – the supposed beneficiary of the levy – through the local Hong Kong Domestic Workers General Union, did not support the move. It has always been clear that neither the local workers nor the FDWs will benefit from the said regressive tax. The local domestic workers even said that they were used as scapegoats by the government to implement the levy. Now here are the CMR and its allies throwing their support to the levy with their own version of refining the policy. Isn’t this ironic?

And why is it that they say that retraining of local domestic workers should be the responsibility of the Hong Kong government while saying at the same time that the “protection” for FDWs should not be the responsibility of the HK government and should be borne by the employers through the levy?

2. Of course it is obvious that we need to fight against unscrupulous and abusive employers. However, majority of employers of FDWs are not the Tung Chee Hwas, Donald Tsangs, Li Ka Shings and Stanley Hos of Hong Kong. Many employers of FDWs are the civil servants, teachers, ordinary employees and service workers. They are the ones who are members of trade unions, worker’s organizations, and community associations. These are the people whose wages were also cut and were also burdened by the past years’ economic problems. These are the same people who are also seeking wage hikes and social services from the government. For them, having FDWs is not a privilege but a necessity because it frees other members of the household to work for added income.

The CMR and its allies misrepresent the employers as one class. They even went to the absurd belief that the official Employer’s Association led by Joseph Law speaks in behalf of ALL employers in Hong Kong and from there branded ALL employers as anti-migrant. What will those employers who are members of the civil servants union, for example, say about this? There are even migrants who have become residents here and employ domestic helpers. How could the CMR and its allies face them and say that it’s alright for them to pay the levy?

Their support to the collection of the levy from the employers endangers the unity that the migrant workers and the local workers and people can achieve to struggle against this regressive taxation policy brought by neoliberalism.

3. Because the CMR and its allies narrow down the issues into an employer-FDW conflict of interests without analyzing the class composition of FDW employers, they deny some commonalities of the migrant worker’s and the local worker’s struggles for just wage, jobs and worker’s rights. They try to limit the interests of the migrant workers to only those that benefit the sector. They are saying: “It’s alright that others suffer as long as we benefit.” Where is solidarity in that?

D. “You are pro-employers; We are pro-workers”: Dividing the ranks of migrants

The analyses and line of the CMR and its allies, we believe, can be used by the Hong Kong government to counter the FDW demands to bring back the HK$3670 MAW and to abolish the levy. It will sabotage the struggle because it will give an excuse to the Hong Kong government not to give in to the demand by using the reason that not all FDW organizations want the wage to be brought back to HK$3670 and that the levy should be scrapped.

The whole line that they carry is like cold water poured over the burning calls for wage hike and against the levy. By accepting the levy and putting the wage hike demand into the sidelines, they appear to tell the FDWs that the fight could not be won. This is the defeatist attitude that will gravely affect the strength of the ranks of the migrant workers not only in the current fight but also against future policies that will again attack our rights and wellbeing.

III. What are the real issues?

The two opposing views are reflected in the conflict of calls and demands. Will it be wage protection and transformation of the levy as a protection fund? Or should it be “Bring back HK$3670 and Abolish the Levy”?

But underneath this struggle of demands within the sector are two opposing lines and principles regarding the issues and demands of the sector and the course of struggle that has to be taken.

From our perspective, and as we have explained in the critique, the CMR and its allies have viewed the issues of migrant workers from a purely economic point of view. Having this view means:

• Misrepresenting an increase in take home pay, expansion of employment and social benefits, and resolving cases of underpayment and overcharging as actual wage increases and thus giving up the fight for wage increases as secondary
• Claiming that having a protection fund will “finally end the sufferings” of underpaid and overcharged FDWs
• Accepting the levy and taxation because it does not come from the pockets of the migrant worker and especially if it will benefit them even at the expense of the ordinary local people
• Reducing the issues as between FDW on one side and employers and the recruitment agencies on the other while failing to understand and address the systemic roots of the issues
• Agreeing to neoliberal regressive taxation policies of the Hong Kong government
• Creating the false hope that through consultation and policy advocacy to governments alone, we can effectively stamp out the problems especially that of underpayment and overcharging which in effect passes the solution to government and diminishes the role of the migrant movement as lobbyists and consultants of governments

We should never forget that the wage of workers is always not commensurate to his or her work. Thus, the fight for a wage increase of workers is inherent, ever-present, urgent and just.

Our struggle for wage increase will not, however, end even when we are able to bring back the HK$400 that was slashed from our wage. The struggle for a just wage is a continuing fight of all workers.

While we strive for a wage hike, we should also never let go of our call to abolish the levy. Not only because it was practically charged to FDWs, but also because, in itself, the levy is regressive taxation of the workers and ordinary employees in Hong Kong that are made to suffer the burden of the economic crisis.

The two demands though distinct from each other are not separate. First and foremost, the levy was shouldered by FDWs through the HK$400. This is the argument that the Hong Kong government wishes to destroy. To admit that this is so is to make the levy and the wage cut not only unjust and immoral but also illegal. Thus, Judge Hartmann, in his decision in favor of the HK government on the judicial review of the levy, tried to highlight the distinction between the two.

To abolish the levy serves the interest of employers the majority of whom are ordinary working people in HK. It helps to rally and educate the local working peoples against regressive taxation and neoliberal policies. And it indirectly benefits the immediate demand of the FDWs because it pre-empts potential opposition to the call to at least bring back the MAW to HK$3,670.

We must understand that wage cuts and regressive taxation are both instruments of neoliberal policies. The migrant workers and local peoples both experienced wage cuts during the financial crisis. While the levy was imposed on the local people, the migrant workers practically shouldered it for now. In this sense, we have been both victimized by regressive taxation. In effect, migrant workers and majority of local peoples have both been targeted by neoliberal policies. And that is our common enemy.

In this continuing campaign, the unified ranks of the migrant workers are crucial. We shall hold on to the lesson that only through unified actions can we achieve our demands. Also, we shall always strive to stand in solidarity with the local peoples in Hong Kong for we are essentially both victimized by policies that only serve a few and deny the rights of many.

The UNIFIL is steadfast in our immediate twin demands to bring back the HK$3670 MAW for FDWs and the abolition of the levy. We shall continue to pursue this campaign alongside the rest of the issues that violate the rights and wellbeing of migrant workers.

We welcome comments from the signatories and hope that this critique may urge them to consider reviewing the position they have taken. Having in mind the interest of the migrant workers and their movement, we look forward to your response. #