By Argyll Cyrus Geducos
Malacañang confirmed on Friday that President Duterte has decided to veto the Security of Tenure Bill before it lapses into law today, July 27.
President Rodrigo Duterte
(FILE PHOTO / TOTO LOZANO / PRESIDENTIAL PHOTO / MANILA BULLETIN)
Presidential spokesman Salvador Panelo made the statement after initially confirming Thursday night that the President vetoed the bill but retracted his statement a few minutes after.
"Security of Tenure Bill vetoed by President Duterte," Panelo said in a text message on Friday.
Panelo also confirmed that Duterte's veto message is the same as the one published by an online news website. The copy of Duterte's veto message said that the President vetoed the bill because it "unduly broadens the scope and definition of prohibited labor-only contracting, effectively proscribing forms of contractualization that are not particularly unfavorable to the employees involved."
The veto was met by disappointed reactions from the Senate, partylist representatives, Church and labor groups.
Veto message
In the veto message, Duterte said that while he stands by his firm commitment to protecting the workers' right to security of tenure by eradicating all forms of abusive employment practices, legitimate job contracting should be allowed, provided that the contractor is well capitalized, has sufficient investments, and affords its employees all the benefits provided for under the labor laws.
"Businesses should be allowed to determine whether they should outsource certain activities or not, especially when job-contracting will result in economy and efficiency in their operations, with no detriment to the workers, regardless of whether this is directly related to their business," the veto message read.
"This is especially critical since empirical data shows that the Philippines is currently at a disadvantage already in terms of cost and flexibility of labor use compared to its peers in the region," it added.
The veto message also said that while the Philippine Constitution provides that the State shall protect the rights of workers and promote their welfare, such constitutional policy is not intended to oppress or destroy capital and management, and a healthy balance between the conflicting interests of labor and management must be observed.
Delicate balance
"I believe the sweeping expansion of the definition of labor-only contracting destroys the delicate balance and will place capital and management at an impossibly difficult predicament with adverse consequences to the Filipino workers in the long term," it read.
In his Thursday press briefing, Panelo said that Duterte may veto the bill if he thinks it will not be good for both workers and employers.
"The President is always open to suggestion. He rationalizes. If he feels that signing the law will create not beneficial effects for the major players, he might consider vetoing it. But if he doesn’t feel that way, he will sign that into law," he said.
Panelo also said that it is up to Congress to find a win-win solution in case the President vetoed the bill.
"If you veto the bill, members of Congress can always introduce amendments or pass another bill for the signature of the President," he said Thursday.
Ending contractualization was one of President Duterte's campaign promises. However, he said that a mere executive order (EO) is not enough and Congress needs to pass a law for job security.
At the Senate
"I'm crestfallen but that's how democracy works," Senate President Vicente Sotto III said.
Sotto, however, said that the "Congress, being dynamic, can refile and repass the bill." He said the Senate will prioritize it once it is refiled in the chamber.
Senate Majority Leader Juan Miguel Zubiri said he was also saddened by Duterte's decision. He questioned the Palace's earlier pronouncements on the need for the bill's approval.
"It makes no sense to me why Malacañang would declare it a priority measure, then just to veto it after its approval. They put pressure pa on us on why we hadn’t acted on it after the House of Representatives passed it and the Palace came out with the certification that it was a priority measure and the Senate was sitting on it," Zubiri recalled.
"I'm totally bewildered on this new development. Does that mean that a certification from the Palace no longer means that it is a priority? That its passage is no longer needed?" he asked.
Sen. Joel Villanueva, sponsor of the Security of Tenure bill in the Senate, said: "We are always concerned over how much of our profit will be eroded by the SOT bill. Ang hiling po sana natin sa usapin ng SOT bill ay makiisa sa mga mangaggawa na ang iniisip ay pangtustos sa kanilang pamilya at pambili ng pagkain para sa mga kumakalam na sikmura tuwing ma e-ENDO (What we hoped for in pushing the Security of Tenure bill is to help our workers who are troubled with having to sustain and feed their families).
Unfortunately, profit wins again with the veto of the SOT bill," a dejected Villanueva said.
He said he worked for the measure which languished in the legislative mill for 20 years.
"Congress labored on this bill striving for fairness at every turn, considering every implication as we weaved words into provisions to protect workers from illegal forms of contractualization, and to ensure that businesses will not be at a disadvantage," he said.
Villanueva said he will refile and push for the passage of the Security of Tenure bill in the 18th Congress.
"We will persevere, until we see that no worker will involuntarily lose his or her job because of contractualization," he said.
‘Management lobby’
Makabayan lawmakers said the presidential veto of the SOT bill, notwithstanding its being watered down, has confirmed President Duterte’s loyalty to big businesses that lobbied for the rejection of the Congress-approved measure.
The Makabayan lawmakers reminded Duterte of his campaign promise to put an end to the allegedly unfair practice of employers denying workers security of tenure.
The TUCP Partylist, representing a conservative national labor union, likewise lamented the veto of the anti-endo or security of tenure bill and blamed a management lobby.
“The TUCP and its membership are ardent supporters of the President because he promised to stop endo,” said TUCP president Rep. Raymond Mendoza.
Bayan Muna Reps. Carlos Isagani Zarate and Ferdinand Gaite noted that Duterte thumbed down the bill despite certifying the “already watered down” bill as an urgent administration measure.
Gaite stated that the veto message confirmed that Duterte has “reneged on his campaign promise to stop labor-only contracting.
In a statement, the Gabriela Partylist represented in the House by Rep. Arlene Brosas vowed to file a “stronger anti-contractualization bill that ‘articulates the workers’ call to end all forms of contractualization and plug the loopholes in the law that allow businesses to engage in job contracting.”
Religious, labor groups
The head of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines Episcopal Commission on the Laity (CBCP-ECL) said President’s veto of the SOT bill showed that he was not pro-labor.
"By the veto, Duterte shows that he is more pro management than pro workers," Manila Auxiliary Bishop Broderick Pabillo said in an interview.
"The veto of the SOT bill is saddening. Many workers' groups are not happy with it because it does not really end ENDO, but it is already something to at least control labor contracting but the managers and capitalists do not want it because it threatens their labor contracting practices," said Pabillo.
"The vetoing of the SoT bill is a complete turnaround from his bold campaign promise to stop the endo practice once he assumes the presidency," Kilusang Mayo Uno chairman Elmer Labog said. (With reports from Vanne Terrazola, Ben Rosario, and Leslie Aquino)
READ MORE: Duterte vetoes Security of Tenure bill