Can a Filipino family live on 10,000 pesos per month?

Mouthing its typical anti-wage hike stance at a time of rising prices driven by the government’s inflationary tax “reform,” the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) recently reiterated its quite “matapobre” (very anti-poor) and ala-Marie-Antoinette declaration that a Filipino family of five can live decently on 10,000 pesos per month.

The said amount is the Philippine government’s outrageously outdated official poverty line. As per the government’s perspective, a family is deemed poor if it lives BELOW the poverty line – which means, according to the government, a Filipino family of 5 is only considered poor if it lives on amount below 10,000 pesos monthly. More outrageously, that also means that a Filipino family of 5 that lives on an amount within or above 10,000 pesos monthly IS NOT CONSIDERED POOR.

We can choose to forget the inconvenient fact that the NEDA Undersecretary who bravely babbled the aforementioned anti-poor insult receives a monthly salary of something between 96,354 to 175,184 pesos (from us poor taxpayers of course), and focus on what is obvious: A FILIPINO FAMILY OF 5 CAN’T LIVE DECENTLY ON 10,000 PESOS PER MONTH. The following segments are from a paper that I have co-authored, and will be presented in a conference this year.

I urge you to read and repost this to help counter the lies peddled by NEDA and other government agencies in the malevolent defense of their anti-wage hike  and anti-TRAIN 1 reversal stance

Critique of Official Philippine Poverty Statistics

Official Philippine poverty statistics should be subjected to a rigorous critique, if the real extent of poverty is to be revealed as a springboard for realizing the actual breadth and depth of poverty as a national and international problem, which is the first step towards genuinely resolving the problem.

At the outset, the critique could begin with backing up Chossudovsky’s (2018) straightforward way of describing official poverty figures in the Philippines as something that “have been manipulated” as the Philippine government only appears to have “adopted the one dollar a day World Bank criterion” while failing “to account for inflation in both the 2012 and 2015 estimates.” Such official Philippine poverty statistics focus too much on food poverty and fails to adequately encompass other essential people’s needs. Moreover, these statistics don’t consider the fact that families can be food-rich (with incomes deemed officially high enough to cover the minimum food threshold set by national authorities) and actually poor at the same time.

Even the official food poverty threshold cannot accurately measure real levels of food poverty, as it has been shockingly and significantly redefined in 2009. Such recalibration of the food poverty threshold imposed lower and thus cheaper dietary requirements for Filipino citizens, thereby artificially lowering down the official poverty statistics. The new food poverty threshold was so laughable that it was eloquently criticized even by a mainstream statistician who correctly spotted the wide gap between the old and the new methodology for measuring food poverty (Mangahas, 2011a). For example, Mangahas (2011b) notes that the new menu for the food threshold includes “no meat” for the poor (see Table 1), despite the Philippine government’s inclusion of meat in the country’s “Daily Nutritional Guide Pyramid” released by the Food and Nutrition Research Institute (see Figure 1).

Table 1. Old and New Menu in the Philipppines’ Official Food Poverty Threshold (Mangahas, 2011b)

Meal	Old Menu	New Menu	Changes
Breakfast	·         Tomato omelette ·         Coffee for adults ·         Milk for children ·         Fried rice	·         Scrambled egg ·         Coffee with milk ·         Boiled rice	·         Elimination of tomato ·         Elimination of milk for children ·         Substitution of fried rice with boiled rice
Lunch	·         Fried galunggong ·         Mongo guisado with malunggay leaves and small shrimps (mung beans sauted in garlic, onion, tomatoes, malunggay leaves and small shrimps) ·         Boiled rice ·         Banana latundan	·         Mongo guisado with malunggay leaves and dried dilis (mung beans sauted in garlic, onion, tomatoes, moringa leaves and dried anchovies) ·         Boiled rice ·         Banana latundan	·         Elimination of fish ·         Substitution of small shrimps with dried dilis
Dinner	·         Pork adobo (pork cooked in  vinegar, soy sauce, garlic, and black pepper) ·         Pechay guisado (sauted bok choy) ·         Boiled rice ·         Banana latundan	·         Fried tulingan (bullet tuna) ·         Boiled kangkong (swamp cabbage) ·         Boiled rice	·         Elimination of pork ·         Substitution of pork adobo with fried tulingan ·         Substitution of pechay guisado with boiled kangkong
Snacks	·         Pandesal (small common bread) with margarine	·         Plain pandesal	·         Elimination of margarine

Fig. 1 Daily Nutritional Guide Pyramid for Adults (Food and Nutrition Research Institute, c. 2018)

As per the latest (2015) official poverty statistics released by the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), “a family of 5 needed at least 9,064 pesos (US $174) to meet both basic food and non-food needs monthly” of which 6,329 pesos (US $122) is allotted “to meet basic food needs,” allowing only for a meager 2,735 pesos (US $ 53) for “non-food needs.” Such pitiful amount for the non-food needs won’t cover all the items enumerated by a 2007 resolution of the country’s National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB): 1) clothing and footwear; 2) housing; 3) fuel, light, water; 4) maintenance and minor repairs; 5) rental of occupied dwelling units; 6) medical care; 7) education; 8) transportation and communication; 9) non-durable furnishings; 10) household operations; and 11) personal care & effects.”  

At this point, we should emphasize that NEDA’s figure for the monthly food expenses of a family of 5 (a measly 3,834 pesos) is fantastical, if not downright fictional, and it also WAY BELOW the Philippine Statistics Authority’s own estimates (6,329 pesos, which is also fantastical, as explained above). Which makes us all wonder, is NEDA still serving our people’s interest, or it is now a fabricator of a genre which we can label as economic fiction?

Furthermore, it must be noted that the Philippine government’s categories of essential non-food items doesn’t include any item related to leisure/entertainment, despite the fact that the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights (for which the Philippines voted in favor) mentions “the right to rest and leisure…” in Article 24. Other entities such as the European Union’s Eurostat (2015) includes leisure in their “quality of life indicators.” This laudable inclusion is a reflection of the generally accepted idea that leisure is an essential human need (Leversen et al., 2012, and Veal, 2015). Thus, a genuinely holistic poverty threshold should certainly include leisure-related items in the essential non-food items. Establishing such holistic poverty threshold will certainly categorize most Filipinos as poor, contrary to the government’s claims.

Alternative Measures of Poverty

            Poverty thresholds should always include thresholds on essential non-food needs of the people. Poor citizens are those whose incomes are below the real cost of living.  To help present a better view of real poverty rates in the country, the current researchers made an updated (and still very conservative) estimate of the government’s categories of non-food items based on actual Metro Manila prices:

Table 2. Detailed Monthly Cost Estimate of Non-Food Items for A Family of 5 In the Philippines (2018)

Non-Food Item	Cost for a Family of 5	Assumption/Explanation	Source of Data
Clothing and footwear	192 pesos	Assuming the family needs only two sets of clothes and footwear per year and costs are spread per month   Cheapest price for t-shirt, blouse, skirt, shorts and jeans (only for the father) in the popular Divisoria Market   Cheapest price for shoes (only for mother and father) and slippers (for the whole family) in the popular Divisoria Market	Price watch of the government TV Channel, People’s Television/PTV (2016a and 2016b)
Housing or rental of occupied dwelling units	9,000 pesos	Cheapest monthly rent for unfurnished studio unit in Manila (apartment prices are definitely higher)	Researchers’ own canvassing of April 2018 rent prices in Manila (listed prices in online rent advertisements are higher)
Fuel	415 pesos (LPG)	7-kg. LPG tank	Department of Energy (2018)
Light	1,255 pesos (light and basic applicances)	3-hour daily use of one florescent lamp; daily use of small refrigerator; 15-hour/day use of ceiling fan; 8-hour/day use of small TV	Manila Electric Company (MERALCO) online app (2018)
Water	122 pesos (water, not for drinking)   140 pesos (drinking water)	10 cubic meters of water     20 gallons of drinking water/month (common brands)	Maynilad Bill Calculator (2018)   Researchers’ own canvassing of April 2018 prices in Manila
Maintenance and minor repairs	250 pesos	Monthly cost of low-cost plumbing repair service (assuming repair is only done once a year)	Gawin Group (2017)
Medical care	375 pesos	Monthly cost of QualiMed AKcess Card for the family, “an affordable primary care health card used to avail of free healthcare service inclusions and discounts on outpatient or ambulatory care needs”	QualiMed (c.2018)
Education	3,000 pesos	Covers only cheap school lunches for 3 children per month (assuming that children study in public schools where tuition is free and books are provided for by the government)	Researchers’ own canvassing of April 2018 prices in Manila
Transportation and communication	480 pesos             700 pesos	Covers only minimum jeepney fares per month for 1 person (assuming that the family lives in the town center and only the father commutes daily to work)   Covers only cellphone load for two people (one-month unlimited calls to the same network and unlimited text to all networks)	Fare price set by the government           Smart (2018)
Non-durable furnishings	0	Prices of covered tems are difficult to estimate; hence no estimates are given	N/A
Household operations	2,000 pesos	Cheap laundry expenses (for 80 kilos of laundry/month)   Actual costs for household operations are higher as prices of other covered items  and services are difficult to estimate; hence only estimates for laundry	Researchers’ own canvassing of April 2018 prices in Manila
Personal care & effects	162 pesos	Bath soap (family size) at 4 bars per month	Department of Trade and Industry (2018)
MONTHLY TOTAL FOR NON-FOOD ITEMS	18,091 pesos
PH GOVERNMENT’S COMPUTATION FOR FOOD ITEMS	6,329 pesos
TOTAL MONTHLY EXPENSES FOR A FAMILY OF 5	24,420 pesos

The researchers’ figures for a conservative but reliable poverty threshold is thus pegged at 24,420 pesos per month for a family of five. Such amount is more than double the government’s official poverty threshold, and a bit comparable with the 33,570-peso monthly living wage for a family of six as computed (albeit without available details on costs) by Ibon Databank (2017), an independent think tank. Websites such as numbeo.com  that produce statistics through crowdsourcing, can also help set the poverty threshold. As of April 2018, in what could be dubbed as the upper limit of cost of living in Manila for a four-person family, numbeo.com pegs the figure at 90,858.11 pesos without rent, while monthly rents for one-bedroom apartments range from 12,005.95 to 23,076.92 pesos. Such estimates are actually closer to another government agency’s statistics.  

The National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) did release its own statistics on what income is needed for a family of four to be able to live comfortably in the Philippines. Its 120,000-peso monthly figure impressively goes beyond the official poverty threshold, but the same agency downplayed the possibility of the government working towards the concretization of such ideal, emphasizing in its launch that it is just a “vision” and “not meant to be prescriptive. This is just saying where Filipinos want to go…” (Dela Paz, 2016). Nevertheless, NEDA also whimsically claims that the Philippines can attain upper middle-income status as early as 2019 (Leyco, 2018), despite the fact that the government is actually still in denial with regard to the breadth and depth of poverty in the Philippines.

Countless life stories of globalization’s discontents, life stories of marginalized citizens whose lives are not documented by the government’s limited statistics, life stories of poor citizens in one of Southeast Asia’s worst countries with regard to outward migration, poverty, and unemployment rates, could serve as counterpoints to the official narrative and reveal the hidden faces of poverty in the country.

BONUS SEGMENT: Here’s a list of our “favorite” DDS team members and their monthly incomes (just to see how much their incomes are, compared with the 10,000 pesos monthly income which they consider as decent for a family of 5).

 

Position	Current Occupant	Average Monthly Salary and Allowances (based on latest COA report unless otherwise specified)	Amount in Excess of 10,000 pesos monthly
President	Rodrigo Duterte	222,278 pesos	212,278 pesos
NEDA Director General	Ernesto Pernia	168,788 pesos	158,788 pesos
DBM Secretary	Benjamin Diokno	178,301 pesos	168,301 pesos
DOF Secretary	Carlos Dominguez III	174,112 pesos	164,112 pesos

 

Lest we forget, Pernia, Diokno and Dominguez released a joint statement yesterday opposing the popular clamor for TRAIN 1’s reversal. Pernia, Diokno, and Dominguez are also against a wage hike. Yep, the same people who say workers don’t deserve a wage hike are the same people who receive very good salaries from our taxes.

We should all clamor for their RESIGNATION NOW or THE REDUCTION OF THEIR SALARIES to merely 10,000 pesos monthly.

(P.S. In computing the average monthly salary and allowances for positions where there were multiple occupants for a year, the total salary and allowances received by the occupants were added and the combined amount is divided by 12.)  

 

Will Companies Go Bankrupt if Wage Rates Are Increased? (A Statistical Analysis)

This is Part 2 of this blog’s recent post entitled “Why Philippine Wage Rates Should Be QUADRUPLED (A Statistics-Based Analysis).”

As a positive contribution to workers’ demands for a significant wage hike, this post is aimed at answering the             question “CAN BIG CORPORATIONS AFFORD TO INCREASE THE MINIMUM WAGE BY AT LEAST 238 PESOS PER DAY?”

Contrary to the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE)’s claim that “hindi kaya ‘yan…” (“it can’t be done”), or the Employers Confederation of the Philippines (ECOP)’s pessimistic declaration that it’s “impossible,” WE EMPHASIZE THAT THE ANSWER IS YES. YES, BIG CORPORATIONS CAN AFFORD TO INCREASE THE MINIMUM WAGE, and it won’t even greatly affect their profits.

The Makabayan Bloc in Congress has filed a bill mandating a 750-peso minimum wage – equivalent to a 238-peso increase for Metro Manila workers, and statistics back the logic and feasibility of their legislative piece.

On a macro-economic level, a logical approach to determining the feasibility of a wage hike is to analyze figures from the “2015 Annual Survey of Philippine Business and Industry (ASPBI) – Economy Wide for Establishment with Total Employment of 20 and Over: Preliminary Results” released by the Philippine Statistics Authority just this April 2018.

As stated in the 2015 ASPBI, establishments with total employment of 20 and over accumulated incomes totalling 12.7 trillion pesos and expenses pegged at 11.0 trillion – resulting to a total profit of 1.7 trillion pesos. These businesses employ 4,507,301 workers. Hence, if these employees are given a 238-peso, across-the-board wage hike, the total annual cost (13 months, including the mandatory 13^th month pay) is just 418,367,678,820 pesos (418 billion pesos – not even half a trillion pesos). As per the 2015 ASPBI, these corporations will still have a whopping total profit of nearly 1.3 billion pesos (1,281,632,321,180 pesos to be exact).

IBON Databank made a similar computation in support of a meaningful wage hike as early as 2011, pointing out that “The total cost of the proposed wage hike will only be Php135.6 billion which, subtracted from total profits, will still leave establishments with Php759.6 billion in profits.”

At the level of each corporation, the DOLE, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) and other government agencies can right away prove the feasibility of a legislated wage hike, as they have a quick and unhampered access to corporate income data.

To help encourage DOLE and other agencies to do the aforementioned task, we provide a sample computation in this post. The computation below used the same flat rate for all the contractual workers of some firms, for lack of data on regional breakdowns of the number of workers per firm and considering that most if not all contractual workers are minimum wage earners. The companies listed are from the DOLE’s list of firms with the highest concentration of contractual workers. Companies with no publicly available data on profits as of this writing were not included. For firms with mother units, net profit of the mother units were utilized, as no other data is available publicly.

Company	Remaining Company Profits after 238-peso daily minimum wage increase	Number of Employees	Cost of salary increase (for 13 months @238 pesos per day/worker)	Company net profit in 2017 (unless otherwise specified)
34,740 Establishments in the 2015 ASPBI	1,281,632,321,180	4,507,301	4.18368E+11	1,700,000,000,000 (2015)
Jollibee	5,620,412,800	14,960	1,388,587,200	7,009,000,000
PLDT	12,628,665,800	8,310	771,334,200	13,400,000,000
General Tuna Corp. (subsidiary of Century Pacific Food)	2,065,850,880	5,216	484,149,120	2,550,000,000
Sumi Phils. Wiring Systems Corp. (owned by Sumitomo)	50,063,203,900	4,305	399,590,100	50,462,794,000 (2016)
Furukuwa (member of the Furukawa Electric Group,)	8,229,512,340	2,863	265,743,660	8,495,256,000
Magnolia Inc. (part of San Miguel Purefoods)	6,691,340,640	2,248	208,659,360	6,900,000,000
Hinatuan Mining Corp. (owned by Nickel Asia Corp.)	1,814,712,140	1,673	155,287,860	1,970,000,000 (2016)
Brother Industries Ph. (part of Brother Group)	22,778,392,595	1,582	146,841,240	22,925,233,835
DOLE-Stanfilco (part of DOLE Food Company)	2,153,595,580	1,131	104,979,420	2,258,575,000 (2016)

Sources:

Most sources are cited and/or hyperlinked in the article.

Other sources are listed below:

http://manilastandard.net/business/it-telecom/260479/pldt-s-profit-falls-a-third-on-big-investment-.html

http://business.inquirer.net/246002/jollibee-posts-15-growth-net-income

http://www.nwpc.dole.gov.ph/pages/statistics/stat_current_regional.html

http://business.inquirer.net/248569/century-pacific-food-nets-p2-55b

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8XPl2RQ_1U

http://global-sei.com/ir/library/pdf/ar2017.pdf

http://www.centurypacific.com.ph/investorpdf/Financial%20Reporting/GTC%20ISSF%20Final%20Compliance%20Report%20as%20of%20March%202017%20for%20activities%20in%202016.pdf

http://www.interaksyon.com/san-miguel-purefoods-consolidated-net-income-reaches-p6-9b-in-2017/

https://www.nickelasia.com/hinatuan-mining-corporation

https://www.nickelasia.com/application/files/7514/8955/1998/FY_2016_Results_-_FINAL.pdf

http://www.brother.com/en/corporate/network/asia/index.htm

http://rtvm.gov.ph/main/?p=15601

http://download.brother.com/pub/com/investor/accounts/2018/fy2018/2017e_con.pdf

https://investors.totalproduce.com/investors/news-and-events/investor-press-releases/2018/01-02-2018a

 

Why Philippine Wage Rates Should Be QUADRUPLED (A Statistics-Based Analysis)

This article is aimed at presenting STATISTICAL PROOF THAT THE CURRENT MINIMUM WAGE RATES IN THE PHILIPPINES SHOULD AT LEAST BE QUADRUPLED. YES, AT LEAST QUADRUPLED. (If you’re a big businessman, you have probably decided by now to ignore this post; BUT I BEG YOU TO READ ON. Statistics don’t lie.)

Kilusang Mayo Uno, Makabayan Bloc, Act Teachers Party-List and other groups calling for the doubling of the minimum wage rates ARE RIGHT and SHOULD BE VIGOROUSLY SUPPORTED IN THEIR JUST CAUSE, because minimum wage rates in the country should actually be quadrupled, not only doubled.

Of course, when I say “JUST,” I mean, within the constitutionally mandated social justice and human rights framework in which we ARE ALL REQUIRED TO DISCUSS wage matters. For starters, the 1987 Philippine Constitution says in Article XIII, Section 3 that the State (the Philippine government) is required  to “…guarantee the rights of all workers to self-organization, collective bargaining and negotiations, and peaceful concerted activities, including the right to strike in accordance with law. They shall be entitled to security of tenure, humane conditions of work, AND A LIVING WAGE.” (emphasis supplied)

Merriam-Webster defines living wage as “a wage sufficient to provide the necessities and comforts essential to an acceptable standard of living.” Meanwhile, Richard Anker’s International Labor Organization (ILO)-funded research further explains what a living wage is by emphasizing that “(t)he idea of a living wage is that workers and their FAMILIES SHOULD BE ABLE TO AFFORD A BASIC, BUT DECENT, LIFE STYLE that is considered acceptable by society at its current level of economic development. Workers and their families SHOULD BE ABLE TO LIVE ABOVE THE POVERTY LEVEL, AND BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN SOCIAL AND CULTURAL LIFE.” (emphasis supplied).

It is in this context that the ILO somehow semantically equates the minimum wage and the living wage, noting in an explainer entitled “How to define a minimum wage?” that “(t)he purpose of MINIMUM WAGES is to protect workers against unduly low pay. THEY HELP ENSURE a just and equitable share of the fruits of progress to all, and a MINIMUM LIVING WAGE to all who are employed and in need of such protection. Minimum wages can also be one element of a policy to overcome poverty and reduce inequality, including those between men and women.” (emphasis supplied)

With these things in mind, I have arrived at the idea of computing the minimum or low-tier wages as a percentage of cost of living.

Most – but not all – countries have minimum wages. For example, Indonesia has provincial minimum wages, and the Philippines have regional minimum wages, whereas countries such as Australia have national minimum wages. Meanwhile, as a British resident of Norway notes, “(c)ontrary to popular belief, there is no national minimum wage written into Norwegian law. Despite this, almost everyone receives a fair living wage. Why? Because Norway is heavily unionised and the vast majority of employees belong to a trade union. These unions come to collective agreements on salaries and working conditions with companies, which are then applied to all workers, not just union members. This general application of the collective agreements is in place partly to help prevent foreign workers from being taken advantage of.” In a nutsell, Norwegian wages are set by the capitalists and representatives of workers’ unions through negotiations that typically produce collective bargaining agreements.

For countries where there are no provincial, regional or national minimum wages, low-tier wages were instead culled.

For countries where there are only provincial or regional rates, the rate for the capital is chosen (if available).

For data on rents, cheaper rates for accomodations “outside of the city center” were favored.

Data for cost of living were culled (as of 30 May 2018) from Numbeo, “the world’s largest database of user contributed data about cities and countries” (whenever available). Cost of living either for the capital city or the biggest city (whenever availble) is utilized.

User-contributed data is way better than official statistics because official statistics for the cost of living are usually unreliable (if not downright ridiculous).

For example, as we note in an upcoming conference paper entitled “Poverty, Inequality, and Development in the Philippines: Official Statistics and Selected Life Stories”: “(a)s per the latest (2015) official poverty statistics released by the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), “a family of 5 needed at least 9,064 pesos (US $174) to meet both basic food and non-food needs monthly” of which 6,329 pesos (US $122) is allotted “to meet basic food needs,” allowing only for a meager 2,735 pesos (US $ 53) for “non-food needs.” Such pitiful amount for the non-food needs won’t cover all the items enumerated by a 2007 resolution of the country’s National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB): 1) clothing and footwear; 2) housing; 3) fuel, light, water; 4) maintenance and minor repairs; 5) rental of occupied dwelling units; 6) medical care; 7) education; 8) transportation and communication; 9) non-durable furnishings; 10) household operations; and 11) personal care & effects.” It must be noted that the Philippine government’s categories of essential non-food items doesn’t include any item related to leisure/entertainment, despite the fact that the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights (for which the Philippines voted in favor) mentions “the right to rest and leisure…” in Article 24. Other entities such as the European Union’s Eurostat (2015) includes leisure in their “quality of life indicators.” This laudable inclusion is a reflection of the generally accepted idea that leisure is an essential human need (Leversen et al., 2012, and Veal, 2015). Thus, a genuinely holistic poverty threshold should certainly include leisure-related items in the essential non-food items.”

Numbeo’s monthly cost of living statistics for a family of 4 in the Philippines (117,455 pesos) may “look” or “feel” high but it’s actually roughly equal to the 120,000-peso monthly figure favored by Filipino respondents interviewed by the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) for the Ambisyon Natin 2040 project, which “probed into how much it takes to have a simple and comfortable life based on the specific needs” such as “having a medium sized home, having enough earnings to support everyday needs, owning at least one car/vehicle, having the capacity to provide their children college education; and going on local trips for vacation.”

Country	Wage as % of Cost of Living for 1 Person Without Rent	Wage as % of Cost of Living for a Family of 4 Without Rent	Wage as % of Cost of Living for 1 Person With Rent	Wage as  % of Cost of Living for a Family of 4 With Rent	Monthly Minimum or Low-Tier Wage	Monthly Cost of Living for 1 Person	Cost of Living for Family of 4 Without Rent	Cost of Rent for a Family (3-bedroom apartment)	Cost of Rent for 1 Person (1-bedroom apartment)	Currency of Available Data
Norway	271.67921	75.52933449	144.0015	53.06851959	28,632	10,538.90	37,908.45	16,044.44	9,344.23	NOK
Brunei	68.728522	19.31378135	37.56362	12.93456082	400	582	2,071.06	1,021.43	482.86	USD
Cambodia	29.72028	8.403569045	19.87537	6.428728095	170	572	2,022.95	621.43	283.33	USD
Indonesia	51.098128	14.80968162	35.69504	11.24491857	265	518.61	1,789.37	567.25	223.79	USD
Laos	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	1,100,000	No Data	No Data	10,465,250	2,895,385.83	KIP
Malaysia	49.181276	13.87460621	29.94926	8.807894637	255	518.49	1,837.89	1,057.24	332.95	USD
Myanmar	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	108	No Data	No Data	940.00	350.00	USD
Philippines	53.210974	15.64707576	36.73993	12.13234111	14,250	26,780.19	91,071.33	26,383.33	12,005.95	PHP
Singapore	83.442885	22.93573019	33.80619	13.78879725	1,060	1,270.33	4,621.61	3,065.79	1,865.19	SGD
Thailand	47.358156	13.16239416	32.61044	9.562533415	9,900	20,904.53	75,214.28	28,314.77	9,453.85	TB
Timor Leste	No Data	No Data	No Data	8.214285714	115	No Data	No Data	1,400	466.67	USD
Vietnam	39.798199	11.03123358	24.97804	8.390181581	176	443.01	1,598.28	499.41	262.85	USD

In all aspects analyzed, Norwegian workers are in a relatively very good situation. For example, Norwegian workers need only roughly two (2) low-tier monthly incomes to afford the monthly cost of living for a family of 4 with rent. Meanwhile, Cambodian workers need nearly 15 minimum monthly wages to afford the monthly cost of living for a family of 4 with rent. Yes, Filipino workers are somehow relatively better off compared with Cambodian workers, as Filipino workers (in Metro Manila) need roughly 8 minimum monthly wages to finance the needs of a family of 4 with rent. In most aspects analyzed, Filipino minimum wage earners are just slightly in a better situation than Indonesian and Malaysian minimum wage earners but are also slightly behind Singaporean and Bruneian minimum wage earners.

Simply put, we are still in a shithole (perhaps not as shitty as we think, but it’s nevertheless shitty).

Considering that the Philippine government claims that under the Duterte administration, Philippine macroeconomic statistics are generally positive and very much improving, President Duterte should ensure that the minimum wage rate in our country is AT LEAST doubled.

Otherwise, all talk of macroeconomic growth under the Duterte administration will be deemed as fake news.

If the aforementioned statistics will be taken in consideration, PHILIPPINE MINIMUM WAGE RATES WILL HAVE TO BE QUADRUPLED IF WE WANT A FAMILY OF 4 TO LIVE WITH ONLY TWO MINIMUM WAGES.

Media firms in the Philippines GENERALLY DON’T CULL DATA FOR WAGES AS % OF COST OF LIVING. Most PH media firms limit their reports on wage rates and GDP per capita data – which is useless comparison because we all know GDP per capita is computed by averaging income groups in each country which means GDP per capita data is computed by averaging the income of Filipino billionaires, Filipino professionals and Filipino minimum wage earners; thus we can’t clearly see the connection between wage rates and GDP per capita, other than the fact that GDP per capita will always be way way ahead the minimum wage rate. Hence, it’s very useful to take the trouble of culling data for wages as % of the cost of living. This provides CLEAR proof that the government can no longer ignore calls for a wage hike in the country. Statistics don’t lie.

We will tackle other matters related to wage hikes (such as the inflation myth and the bankruptcy bogeyman peddled by neoliberal economists and capitalist groups in the country) on our next post.

UPDATE: Part 2 of this post is now available at: https://alternative2022.wordpress.com/2018/05/31/81/  

NOTE ON SOURCES:

Most sources are cited and/or hyperlinked in the article.

Sources for minimum wage rates are listed below:

Brunei: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/us400-monthly-minimum-wage-filipinos-brunei/

Norway: https://www.lifeinnorway.net/norway-minimum-wage/

Cambodia: https://www.reuters.com/article/cambodia-economy-garmentworkers-wages/cambodia-hikes-minimum-wage-for-textiles-workers-by-11-pct-from-2018-idUSL4N1MG1Q6

Indonesia: http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2017/11/01/jakarta-sets-2018-minimum-wage-at-rp-3-6-million.html

Laos: https://laotiantimes.com/2018/04/24/laos-government-approves-minimum-wage-increase/

Malaysia: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-malaysia-election-wages/malaysias-najib-dangles-minimum-wage-hike-other-benefits-ahead-of-vote-idUSKBN1I234S

Myanmar: https://www.mmtimes.com/news/government-sets-new-daily-minimum-wage-k4800.html

Singapore: https://www.bna.com/singapore-adopts-minimum-n73014452866/

Thailand: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/minimum-wage-rise-5-22-baht-effective-april-1/

Philippines and other countries:

http://www.nwpc.dole.gov.ph/pages/statistics/stat_comparative.html

http://www.nwpc.dole.gov.ph/pages/statistics/stat_current_regional.html

Timor Leste: https://www.minimum-wage.org/international/timor-leste

Vietnam: http://www.vietnam-briefing.com/news/vietnam-minimum-wages-on-the-rise-in-2018.html/

 

Open Letter to the PRC (RE: CPD Law)

24 May 2018

 

To the Honorable Commissioners

Professional Regulation Commission (PRC)

Sampaloc, Manila

Dear sirs/mesdames,

Greetings of peace!

I write to submit a win-win compromise solution to the Philippine government’s predicament with regard to the much-hated Continuing Professional Development (CPD) Law or Republic Act No. 10912.

As a co-author of the popular anti-CPD Law position paper, supported by more than 20,000 signatures (as of today) through a parallel online petition, I still believe the CPD Law is unnecessary and must be repealed.

Nevertheless, in the spirit of finding a doable solution, I hope that the PRC – the agency tasked with preparing and regularly revising the implementing rules and regulations for the CPD Law – will consider adopting the proposals below, which I have drafted based on my practical experiences as a president of a professional organization, and on the matters discussed in a dialogue between representatives of various teachers’ organizations led by the Alliance of Concerned Teachers-Philippines and ACT Teachers Partylist and officials of the Department of Education and PRC, last February 14, 2018.

Sincerely yours,

David Michael San Juan

~~~

PROPOSED REVISIONS on the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of the Continuing Professional Development/CPD Law (CPD Law) or Republic Act 10912 and other related documents such as Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) Resolution No. 1032, Series of 2017 – or the Implementing Rules and Regulations of the CPD Law – and Professional Regulatory Board for Professional Teachers (PRBPT) Resolution No. 11, Series of 2017

If the CPD Law is retained, its implementation must be smooth, painless, and without cost to professionals. This is a summary of proposed revisions to the IRR of the said law and other related documents.

• The processing fee/prescribed fee for the “APPLICATION FOR CREDITING OF SELF DIRECTED AND/OR LIFELONG LEARNING” which as of 14 February 2018 is 1,000 pesos[1] should be scrapped/waived. Application for crediting of self-directed and/or lifelong learning CPD activities must be free of any charge.
• The processing of CPD documents and PRC ID/license renewal should be in JUST ONE WINDOW. As of this writing, for the processing of the “APPLICATION FOR CREDITING OF SELF DIRECTED AND/OR LIFELONG LEARNING,” the professional needs to go to at least 3 windows[2].
• There should be no limitations on the creditable units for self-directed and/or lifelong learning CPD activities should be scrapped, as many teachers in far-flung areas rely heavily on self-directed activities, while teachers in higher educational institutions (HEIs) rely heavily on lifelong learning. As of this writing, the maximum creditable units for such tracks is just 10 CUs per compliance period[3].
• Participants in activities under the self-directed track should automatically be given 3 credit units per hour (as of this writing, participants in self-directed activities[4] don’t get automatic units and need to have their papers undergo PRC processing, which is a very tedious process as mentioned), provided that these activities are covered by a DepEd advisory and/or CHED endorsement letter. Almost all seminars, conferences, workshops etc. conducted in the Philippines undergo DepEd and/or CHED documentary scrutiny prior to the issuance of DepEd advisories and/or CHED endorsements. Among the requirements submitted by seminar organizers to the DepEd and CHED are the following: copy of SEC registration; company profile; year-end accomplishment report; 3-year Plan; list of officers/officials; report on the previous activity; seminar matrix; seminar program; and bionote of speakers. Hence, seminars etc. covered by DepEd advisories and/or CHED endorsements undergo a very stringent process, which should warrant the automatic granting of credit units to teachers who participated in such activities. The teacher will just have to write in the form for the PRC license renewal the DepEd advisory and/or CHED endorsement number or date, and submit a duplicate of the certificate of participation. These advisories and endorsements are archived and easily searchable in the DepEd and CHED websites, respectively. Thus, there is no fee needed for verification of the activity as the information is instantly available.
• Full credit units for two compliance periods must be awarded to graduates of masteral programs, while life-time compliance with CPD requirements should be automatically awarded to PhD/EdD graduates. As of this writing, such graduates are only given full credit units for one, and two compliance periods respectively[5]. This will certainly help us encourage professionals to pursue further studies.
• Full credit units for one compliance period must be given for each productive scholarship output produced by the professional. As of this writing, no full credit units are awarded except for “RECOGNITION/TITLE” at the “NATIONAL LEVEL.[6]”
• Full credit units for one compliance period must be given to public school teachers’ annual DepEd-initiated summer and term-break trainings. As of this writing, such activities are not given full credit units.
• The credit units for “RESOURCE SPEAKER/TRAINOR/DEMONSTRATION TEACHER”; “PANELIST/REACTOR,”; “FACILITATOR/MODERATOR/COACH” for both professional and self-directed tracks should be increased to 10 credit units per hour. As of this writing, only 1-3 credit units[7] are given to these roles.
• The credit units for “SOCIO-CIVIC ACTIVITIES USING PROFESSION” must be increased to 10 credit units per school-based activity, and 10 credit units per hour for every non-school based activity. As of this writing, each of such activities is given only 5 credit units per activity, and 5 credit units per hour, respectively.
• The major areas of the CPD activities must be shelved. All 45 credit units per compliance period should be completed with just one or a combination of any of the CPD tracks. At of this writing, only 40 credit units will come from the “TECHNICAL” area, while the remaining 5 credit units will come from what is vaguely labeled as “ETHICS, VALUES & ATTITUDE.[8]”
• Participation in teachers’ organizations and/or unions’ leadership training seminars should be given an automatic 3 credit units per hour. As of this writing, no automatic credit units are awarded to such activities.
• Full credit units for one compliance period must be awarded to participation in the sessions of the annual in-service trainings of one’s school. As of this writing, only 20 (for professional track) and 10 (for self-directed track) credit units are given to participants in such activities[9].
• Membership in each national professional and/or teachers’ organization must be awarded 5 credit units per year. As of this writing, no credit units are specifically awarded for membership in each organization.
• Leadership in each national professional and/or teachers’ organization must be awarded 10 credit units per year. As of this writing, no credit units are specifically awarded for leadershp in each organization.
• CPD Councils for each profession should regularly conduct consultative assemblies per year, so as to review the CPD guidelines and adjust them accordingly, in response to professionals’ needs.
• The Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) should issue a circular or a memorandum to require all private schools to fully finance their employees’ CPD requirements for every compliance period, in the manner that their employees choose.
• The Civil Service Commission and/or the Department of Education should issue a circular or a memorandum to require all public schools and SUCs to fully finance their employees’ CPD requirements for every compliance period, in the manner that their employees choose.
• Teachers in private and public schools should be allowed to process their PRC ID/license renewal and/or CPD crediting during weekdays, while being considered as under official time/business (hence, no amount should be deducted from their salary).
• The application for accreditation of organizations as CPD providers, and the application for accreditation of individuals as CPD providers, and the application for the accreditation of every activity, SHOULD BE FREE OF CHARGE because CPD is a right, and the documentary requirements for accreditation also entail a lot of expenses.

END NOTES: 

[1]In the “General Forms,” page 2 of the document “Application for Crediting of Self-Directed and/or Lifelong Learning”:  http://www.prc.gov.ph/page.aspx?id=3078

[2] In the “General Forms,” page 2 of the document “Application for Crediting of Self-Directed and/or Lifelong Learning”:  http://www.prc.gov.ph/page.aspx?id=3078

[3] Page 5 in Professional Regulatory Board for Professional Teachers (PRBPT) Resolution No. 11, Series of 2017: http://www.prc.gov.ph/uploaded/documents/resoProfTeachers2017-11.pdf

[4] Pages 3 of the document Professional Regulatory Board for Professional Teachers (PRBPT) Resolution No. 11, Series of 2017: http://www.prc.gov.ph/uploaded/documents/resoProfTeachers2017-11.pdf

[5] Page 2 in the document Professional Regulatory Board for Professional Teachers (PRBPT) Resolution No. 11, Series of 2017: http://www.prc.gov.ph/uploaded/documents/resoProfTeachers2017-11.pdf

[6] Page 4-5 in the document Professional Regulatory Board for Professional Teachers (PRBPT) Resolution No. 11, Series of 2017: http://www.prc.gov.ph/uploaded/documents/resoProfTeachers2017-11.pdf

[7] Page 2-4 in the document Professional Regulatory Board for Professional Teachers (PRBPT) Resolution No. 11, Series of 2017: http://www.prc.gov.ph/uploaded/documents/resoProfTeachers2017-11.pdf

[8] Page 5 in the document Professional Regulatory Board for Professional Teachers (PRBPT) Resolution No. 11, Series of 2017: http://www.prc.gov.ph/uploaded/documents/resoProfTeachers2017-11.pdf

[9] Page 2-3 in the document Professional Regulatory Board for Professional Teachers (PRBPT) Resolution No. 11, Series of 2017: http://www.prc.gov.ph/uploaded/documents/resoProfTeachers2017-11.pdf