Embassy News: Speech delivered by Ambassador Luis T. Cruz

Speech delivered by Ambassador Luis T. Cruz during a round table seminar on ROK’s Immigration Policy Viewed from Inside and Outside : Transition to Multicultural Society, Jeju Island, 3 December 2011.

By: Philippine Embassy

Distinguished guests, Friends, Ladies and Gentlemen, Let me, at the outset, congratulate the CIFAL Jeju for organizing this seminar. Immigration policy is a matter that, I believe, needs to be treated with both urgency and care given the sensitivity of issues attendant to migration.
I also wish to express my sincerest thanks for inviting me to be one of the speakers today. Yesterday’s session was very candid and informative, and I hope to be able to add to the wealth of ideas that has already given us greater platform upon which to pursue our respective migration-related goals.

I will divide my 30-minute presentation into two main topics: first, I will talk about my impressions of South Korea’s immigration policy in general, after which I will discuss some of my thoughts on how we can better protect our respective citizens while ensuring the integrity of our borders.

To provide context into these two topics, I will focus on the two sectors in South Korea that are most crucial in our formulation of relevant policies and work programs: workers under the Employment Permit System, which for the Philippines account for roughly 53% of Filipinos in South Korea; and foreign spouses of Korean nationals, whose growing number has forced an introspection by the Korean society on the impact that such multicultural families will have on its immediate future.

Allow me to begin.

I. Impressions of Korea’s general immigration policy

A. Workers, particularly those under the EPS

I will start by categorically stating that the Employment Permit System is among the best government-to-government arrangements on labor that I have encountered. Since the Ministry of Employment and Labor (MOEL) and the HRD-Korea began the EPS seven years ago, thousands have benefited from its orderly, accessible and systematic implementation.

It therefore comes as no surprise that the EPS was selected as the 1st place winner of the UN Public Service Awards on June 23, 2011, in the category of “Preventing and Combating Corruption in the Public Service.”

As an EPS sending country, the Philippines has approximately 26,000 EPS workers throughout South Korea. The EPS is so efficient and holistic as to include all processes from selection and deployment to feedback, skills upgrading, and contract termination; and yet it is so accessible and open-minded as to be able to adjust to, and improve with, the demands of the times.

The EPS, I therefore believe, deserves emulation. Let me elaborate:

With the entry of foreign workers come various issues related to immigration. Adjustments are made not just by the worker, but also by the employer and the community that shelters the foreign worker. The adjustment, in fact, is not made just by the workforce alone but by the entire Korean society. The presence of both locals and foreigners leads to a dynamic interaction that inevitably shapes the way of life and thinking of the people. Multiculturalism is a societal trend that is made possible not only by foreign spouses and expatriates, but also by the thousands of EPS workers who have found a second home in South Korea – no matter how short their stay is.

Through all these, the EPS makes sure that the foreign worker is able to adjust as smoothly as possible.

 For instance, EPS workers are required to study Korean prior to deployment. This makes sure that they hit the ground running as language skills help minimize communication gaps.

 The workplace is not a perfect setting, and anywhere in the world, there are problems related to possible worker maltreatment, abuse or discontent. In South Korea, common complaints we receive from EPS workers pertain to delayed salaries, misrepresented contracts, and physically or verbally abusive sajangnim or colleagues. It is important that we become aware of these issues but it is even more important that we address these issues. The EPS is unique in that the system has established several centers nationwide that are specifically tasked to handle the grievances of workers. For example, an EPS worker can get his or her delayed salary and transfer to a better workplace through MOEL Job Centers and HRD branch offices. South Korea helps make the job of embassies to protect the rights and welfare of their workers easier, because South Korea itself has placed labor contact points in strategic places nationwide, in areas that are far from where embassies are located.

 The EPS is not only concerned about the stay of the workers here, but also about the future of the workers once their tenure ends. The HRD offers various training programs to current workers that will help them gain employment in their home countries or start a business. Such reintegration programs are essential, because their focus on capacity-building gives workers greater confidence to pursue other exploits.

Towards these ends, the policies of South Korea as a receiving country and the Philippines as a sending country are in perfect harmony. The Philippines understands very well the need for reintegration programs. There are more than eight million Filipinos working abroad, and it is our desire to continually strengthen our economy to generate, in turn, more local employment. We want our nationals to bring back their experience abroad and share their skills in the Philippines. At the same time, we want to give them every reason and opportunity to return.

Here in South Korea, the Philippine Embassy, through the Philippine Overseas Labor Office, regularly conducts regular sessions on skills and knowledge enhancement for Filipino workers. Last year, for example, the embassy conducted one course on PC assembly; six seminars on financial management; two three-weekend classes on entrepreneurship; one seminar each on franchising and the business climate in the Philippines; and one forum about housing options for foreign workers. All in all, around 800 workers have taken part in our reintegration programs.

In the Philippines, workers and their families can take advantage of various similar reintegration programs. The Philippine Overseas Workers Welfare Administration, for example, has several other skills and knowledge programs that range from SME development to scholarship opportunities for talented but needy children. The Philippine Department of Labor has recently announced the availability of non-collateralized loans for those who wish to start a business. Budgeted at around US$47 million, the loan includes a program for business matching and entrepreneurship training.

Perhaps the reason why EPS workers are in a position of greater flexibility and decision-making compared to foreign workers in other countries is because the EPS has inherent processes that do not restrict themselves with sole deployment; the system oversees and prepares for the stay and eventual return of the worker. South Korea and the Philippines definitely share a common goal: the rights and welfare of the workers.

B. Multicultural Families

We received substantial information yesterday regarding multicultural families. For the Philippines, the rate of Filipinos marrying South Korea is steadily increasing. There are now 8,000 Filipinos married to Korean nationals and living in South Korea, many of whom are in rural areas.

For the sake of brevity, I will no longer belabor the point on the increasing number of interracial marriages – the fact that 10% of marriages in South Korea last year involved a foreign spouse is adequate to support this claim – and will instead focus on my perceptions about South Korea’s policy on multiculturalism.

The Korean government started implementing multicultural policies in April 2006 when the government announced the Social Integration Support Measures for Marriage Migrant Families. In 2007, the Basic Act for Treatment of Foreigner Residents was passed, followed by the Multicultural Family Support Act in 2007.

Several types of support are given to multicultural families. For instance, the law covers the following:
 Measures against social discrimination and bigotry;
 Social adaptation and vocational training;
 Family counseling, marriage education, parenting education, and family life education;
 Prevention of domestic violence, in cases of which the government MAY provide translation, legal counseling, and administrative support services;
 Childcare support;
 Language services; and
 Support centers, among others.

I find that the policies have a very wide range and are implemented in all levels, from the national government to the local government. The Korean National Police, for example, has a Mentoring Program whereby police officers establish networks with foreign spouses in an effort to reach out to them and prevent instances of domestic violence.

Flexibility is also inherent in the law. Recent amendments expand the term of “multicultural family” to include families by nationalized Koreans. The fact that multicultural policies are revised regularly shows how responsive the Korean government is. I therefore look forward to the full-scale implementation of the F-6 visa, which will give more reliable statistics about foreign spouses, all of which are now lumped together with other dependents under the F-2 visa.

It is noteworthy that such programs do not focus on the foreign spouse alone – the families of the foreign spouses are also invited to South Korea by various institutions so they can better appreciate the new role that the spouse has assumed in South Korean society.


II. Areas for Improvement

A. Workers

No system is, however, perfect. This is why forums like this are important, because they provide opportunities to further improve existing programs.

In the case of EPS, there are recurring issues that are raised not only by the Philippines, but also by other EPS-sending countries. For instance:

 For workers who have completed their sojourn, it may be best if they no longer have to retake the Korean Language Test and other exams. These are people who already passed the tests once and who have lived in South Korea as EPS workers. Requiring them to take the same test to be included anew in the roster is a redundant process that only consumes time and resources. This requirement can be waived without damaging the reason behind the exams, which is to ensure that the workers are able to adjust to Korean society and perform their jobs. Returning workers have already proven that.

 The waiting period of six months for EPS workers who have completed their sojourn translates to a period when productivity risks a dip. Employers who wish to retain the same people have to deal with the costs of retraining and adjustment while waiting for the period to lapse, while EPS workers who are still qualified to apply have to contend with half a year of untapped potential.

 Attention can perhaps be given to further improvements in the agricultural and construction sectors, which appear to have less defined parameters of operation than the manufacturing sector.

 I am very pleased to note that South Korea has begun implementing a computer-based exam for re-hired workers from Vietnam and Thailand. This is certainly a positive step forward and will greatly contribute to the convenience of returning workers from Vietnam and Thailand. It does not, however, address the basic issues of continuity and stalled productivity.

It is my understanding that the EPS is developed in such a way that it prioritizes the infusion of new blood – meaning that workers can only stay up to a certain period and up to a certain age. The idea is that they will go back to their home countries and they will be replaced by other individuals, thereby giving others a chance to become part of the system. Now may be a good time to re-examine this arrangement.

The bond between an employer and an employee who have developed mutual trust and confidence is sacred. Such a relationship needs time and nurture. It is a relationship that can be viewed as a long-term investment because it leads to greater productivity and can expand operations.

The current system only allows up to a maximum of four years and ten months of sojourn for the EPS worker. The worker then has to wait out six months in the home country. Upon return, he or she can only work up to around 38 years old. An EPS worker who joins now at the age of 22, for instance, can only work three times or a total of approximately 14 years with six-month breaks in between.

Assuming that the worker goes to the same employer each time, the bond between them will have to be broken once the worker’s age ceiling is reached. In a typical workplace, the benefits of 14 years of experience are immeasurable.

I respectfully wish to propose a system where, for as long as the employer is willing to take in the worker, the worker can be allowed to stay legally. The employer is in the best position to judge the skills and resourcefulness of the worker. Once either employer or worker wishes out of the contract, the worker can find employment elsewhere – assuming that another SME is willing to receive the transfer.

We are not even talking about permanent residence. We are talking about giving the employer and the employee who have formed a bond the opportunity to let the working relationship flourish – such bonds cannot be aptly captured or maximized by designations of age ceilings. Short-term employment visas that have to be periodically renewed can be used.

Under this arrangement, the worker will still be under the EPS and will still be counted in the quota. In the long term, this arrangement may be more feasible than a regular turnover of workers. It will also be cost-effective for the MOEL / HRD when handling its operations. We can expect more workers to violate the provisions of their visa for every turnover that takes place. Over time, the number of undocumented workers may increase. The age ceiling may thus be counterproductive in the long run if one overriding purpose is to encourage workers to stay legally.

I wish to highlight the importance of the employer in this set up. Oftentimes, when we talk about the EPS, we think about the foreign worker. In reality, several other stakeholders exist, such as the government and, of course, the employer.

And many employers themselves like to retain their workers regardless of their age. Employers, in fact, are among those who signed a petition last year requesting improvements in the EPS, which the Philippine Embassy positively endorsed to the Ministry of Employment and Labor and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. I believe that their voices should also be heard in forums like this, because they are the ones who directly deal with the foreign workers.

By abolishing the age ceiling, workers can have the opportunity to stay legally. Certain conditions should of course be put in place, first and foremost of which is what I have discussed regarding the willingness of the registered employer.

This leads me to my next point. In the Philippines, we do not call workers who have violated the terms of their visa as “illegal” workers. Instead, we call them “irregular” workers for a number of reasons.

The term “illegal” is such a loaded word that connotes crime and even violence. To be branded as “illegal” is to be labeled in the most negative sense. It minimizes the person and practically puts him or her in the same league as others who have committed arson, rape, murder or white-collar crimes.

Irregular workers, however, have done none of the above. In fact, irregular workers are the ones who choose to lie low and not be involved in any dangerous activities because their only goal is to send remittances to their families. Irregular workers are not criminals, and they should not be treated or labeled as such. Calling them “illegal” is one step closer to completely pushing them out of the boundaries of society and away from social safety nets.

Irregular workers are honest people who have decided to violate the terms of their visas for economic or humanitarian reasons – they must not be subjected to the same stigma that accompanies those who have committed arson, rape, murder or white-collar crimes. Acknowledging this fact is the first step towards a more open-minded immigration policy.

On this note, I humbly state my hope that, at an opportune time, the Korean Government can also study the possibility of providing amnesty to overstaying workers and find a way for them to become eligible to apply to the EPS. This is a proposal that may warrant serious attention given the implications of South Korea’s ageing society, which will one day need more and more human resources to drive its dynamic industries. The EPS is such an excellent system to deny, and I sincerely hope that it will cover as many workers as possible. It is a system that I sincerely believe should be emulated by other countries and in other sectors.

B. Multicultural families

A question that South Korea must confront is whether it plans to have an assimilative or an acculturative immigration policy. Foreigners can either become assimilated into Korean culture, or they can play a greater role in further opening the cultural mindsets of a country that proclaims homogeneity like South Korea.

I have noticed a tendency towards assimilation in many multicultural programs. Many are about how the foreign spouse can learn and be accustomed to Korean culture. I happen to believe that the relationship has to be two-way: the foreign spouse should learn Korean culture, but the Korean spouse and the Korean in-laws should also be receptive to the foreign spouse’s culture. This ensures that the benefits of a multicultural family – a family that is naturally predisposed to the wealth of cultures of the two nationalities involved – are fully harnessed. More often than not, I meet families where the child is allowed to only learn Korean and not the native language of the foreign mother. It is sad to know that the child is deprived of an ability to become multilingual at an early age and to have a mindset that is naturally global in outlook.

This interaction – an “exchange” in its truest sense – will also mean that the foreign spouse is never alienated. No matter how much people learn another culture, they cannot fully suppress their own. A healthy relationship is one that allows both spouses to grow and mature in their own terms and styles, and this need is more pronounced in the case of interracial couples.

This question not only has practical implications but legal ones as well. For example, the dual citizenship law of South Korea stipulates that those married in the latter half of 2010 are eligible to gain dual citizenship – but not those married before. The law is not retroactive, which then leads me to thinking: why cannot those who became Korean citizens in 2009 be given the same rights and privileges that those married in 2011 possess? What’s the difference between a previously naturalized Korean and a recently naturalized Korean? Why cannot the law be more comprehensive?

It is my hope that South Korean immigration policy will allow dual citizenship even for those who were naturalized before the cut-off date of July 2010 prescribed by the dual citizenship law.

Having said that, there are still many areas that our governments can cooperate to assist multicultural families. For instance:

 Those who are separated or divorced need a more comprehensive support system from the Korean Government, especially if they are victims of domestic violence. They should be given free legal services. Counseling services offered by multicultural centers often focus on the reconciliation by the husband and wife; room must be given for marriages that are truly problematic.

 Many shelters for women have able staff. Unfortunately, not everyone can speak English. Language barriers must be addressed if these shelters are to be truly effective. In addition, the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family should consider putting up additional shelters to accommodate the growing number of marriage migrants in need of help.

 Children from multicultural families tend to be economically vulnerable. They are also prone to teases and taunts, to discrimination and alienation. This affects their learning curve, as they tend to be weighed down by the stresses that come from simply being different. The Ministry of Education, Science and Technology is doing an excellent job of helping these students, and I hope that other agencies can follow suit.

To close my presentation, let me take this opportunity to reiterate some of the recommendations of the International Forum on Multicultural Policies in the Global Era, held in Daegu on 28 October 2011. These are recommendations that came from the migrants themselves and are therefore worth noting:

 Increase in the number of multicultural centers and emergency support centers with foreign counselors and staff;
 Working opportunities for foreign spouses, including lower interest loans;
 Marriage counseling also for the Korean nationals;
 Multicultural education that is more geared towards second-generation multicultural children. Some schools organize separate classes to accommodate them, but the effect is that they feel more excluded from the other students. A program on Korean as a Second Language (KSL) may be effective;
 Children who are allowed to communicate to their mothers in the mothers’ native language; and
 Medical insurance for young marriage migrants, especially when the Korean husband cannot afford the cost of insurance.

The issue of immigration is a very vast and difficult topic, and I hope that my presentation has somehow helped shed light on the issues that we face. We are, I am sure, only scratching the surface of this challenging but interesting subject made more relevant by today’s freer borders.

Thank you very much. I hope to answer your questions during the open forum.

maraming salamt chairman sana pakingan ng labor office ang speech at actionan nila habang on the process pa ang lahat na mag tatapos ng sojurn nila... either uwi or mag tnt