Ra10911 Report
Ra10911 Report
Ra10911 Report
Anasario
Before her term ended, then-Senator Pia Cayetano authored a bill that
prohibits companies from discriminating against job applicants and employees
on the basis of their age. It has lapsed into law on July 21, 2016, by virtue of
Article VI, Section 27 of the 1987 Constitution where bills lapse into law if it was
not vetoed by the President though he did not sign it.
The law was a result from the complaints of the citizens against companies
refusing to hire applicants because they do not meet given age requirements in
job hiring. This is very evident in job advertisements where companies have
preference for people of a certain age bracket. Usually, the highest acceptable
age that can be hired is 35.
At the same time, companies are not allowed to dismiss employees who have
reached a certain age. One such industry said to be practicing this is the airline
industry in what insiders would call the “beerhouse mentality.” Those mainly
affected are flight attendants. The company would force into retirement anyone
who has reached the age of 40.
No company has given reasons why they would not accept “overaged”
applicants or why they force employees to leave even if they have not reached
the retirement age of 60 or 65. According to the opinions of those opposed to
age discrimination, companies wanted the energy and enthusiasm of youth and
are more driven due to their ambitions. They think younger people are more
trainable than older people. They suspect in some companies that the reason
they prefer younger employees is they can easily be intimidated or coerced by
seniors as opposed to older people who are more experienced and resistant to
such practice.
However, not all employers are warm to this law. The Employers
Confederation of the Philippines (ECOP) feel this law is unjust in the sense it
takes away their prerogative in determining the status of an applicant or
employee based on other factors. What can be gleaned here is anyone who
might not agree with them might invoke this law which will put them in a bad
light.
RA 10911 is very timely because it dovetails into the platform of the Duterte
Administration which promises to reduce unemployment, and to anyone
planning to work abroad, it will be a matter of choice and not a necessity.
Although OFW’s have contributed greatly in their remittances, the Philippines
continues to suffer from “brain drain” because the country’s talented
professionals are forced to seek opportunities abroad because there are none
here, and age discrimination is one of those reasons. It is hoped that meritocracy
shall be practiced in the workplace and there must be no discrimination in any
shape or form.
Definition of Terms
(b) Employer refers to any person, natural or juridical, employing the services of
an employee or worker and shall include the government and all its branches,
subdivisions and instrumentalities, all government-owned and -controlled
corporations, and government financial institutions, as well as nonprofit private
institutions or organizations;
(d) Labor contractor refers to any person or an agent of that person who
regularly undertakes, with or without compensation, the procurement of
employees or workers for an employer, or the procurement for employees' or
workers' opportunities to work for an employer;
(g) Worker refers to a person who performs manual labor involving skilled or
unskilled work, and is paid wages by the employer as compensation for services
rendered.
Important Points
Section 5 (a) of the law provides that it shall be unlawful for an employer to
do the following:
b) Require the declaration of age or birth date during the application process;
Penalty (Section 7)
For violating the law, an individual or entity shall be meted the penalty of fine of
not less than fifty thousand pesos (P50,000) but not more than five hundred
thousand pesos (P500,000) or imprisonment of not less than three (3) months
but not more than two (2) years, or both at the discretion of the court. If the
offense is committed by a corporation, trust, firm, partnership or association or
other entity, the penalty shall be imposed upon the guilty officer or officers of
such corporation, trust, firm, partnership or association or entity.