STUDY ON THE OVERSEAS FILIPINO WORKER: A GENERAL PROFILE

By

Shirley Marie B. Cosalan

THESIS

Submitted to
KDI School of Public Policy and Management
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF PUBLIC POLICY

2010
STUDY ON THE OVERSEAS FILIPINO WORKER: A GENERAL PROFILE

By

Shirley Marie B. Cosalan

THESIS

Submitted to
KDI School of Public Policy and Management
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF PUBLIC POLICY

2010

Professor Younguck KANG

 ABSTRACT

STUDY ON THE OVERSEAS FILIPINO WORKER: A GENERAL PROFILE

By

Shirley Marie B. Cosalan

The Philippines has been an interesting topic of studies on migration.

Philippine migration is largely economically motivated and temporary, thereby, the
term “Overseas Filipino Worker (OFW)” is used to describe those who are employed
in foreign countries through a contract with their employers. However, only a few
researches involve the survey of workers in the destination countries, in this case,
Korea. The researcher thought that it would be best for the study if she had primary
data, thereby, conducted the survey while in Korea. This study sought to generate
sufficient data on migrant workers in South Korea through interviews and
questionnaires and these data were used in the descriptive analysis. The analysis on
the causes of, consequences and concerns about international labor migration used
data from various government agencies as well as findings from related studies. What
is particularly relevant and unique about the study is that the survey has included
illegal workers, most of who were personally interviewed by the researcher. Illegal or
undocumented workers are those who do not have the proper or valid working visa as
against the legal or documented workers. Among the several findings from this study,
the researcher opted to highlight that all the respondents to the survey have entered
South Korea legally but more than half of them are illegal workers. Further, most of
the respondents have jobs in the Philippines before migrating to Korea. A more
detailed narration and analysis of the research findings as well as policy
recommendations have been discussed in this paper.

i
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. PHILIPPINE LABOR MIGRATION……………………………………….1

Historical Background of Philippine Labor Migration

Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs): A Profile

Causes of International Migration

Unemployment and Underemployment

Low Domestic Wages and

International Wage Differentials

Population Growth

Consequences of Migration

1.4.1 Recruitment and Employment Promotion

1.4.2 Remittances
1.4.3 Return and Skills Transfer

Concerns of Migration

II. FILIPINO WORKERS IN SOUTH KOREA………………………………20

III. CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION…………………………………...29

IV. APPENDIX A : SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE..…………………………..32

V. REFERENCES………………………………………………………………..38

ii
 LIST OF TABLES

1. Filipino Emigrants and Temporary Workers 4

2. Number of Workers Deployed 4

3. Deployment of temporary contract workers 6

4. Number of Welfare Cases, January to September 6

5. Deployment of OFWs by Top Ten Destinations 7

(2006-2007)

6. Overseas Filipinos’ Remittances by Source 8

(in‘000 US$)

7. Overseas Filipinos’ cash remittances coursed 8

through formal and informal channels

8. Total remittances and average remittances per year, 9

2003 to 2007 Survey on Overseas Filipinos

9. Top Five OFWs Regions of Origin 9

10. Labor Force for Selected Years 12

11. Results from July 2009 Labor Force Survey (LFS) 13

12. Population Census 15

13. Summary of Population Projections by Year 16

2008-2010

14. Country Data 16

15. Matrix of Respondents by Age, Gender,Status 22

16. Matrix of Respondents by Household Size/Position 23

17. Matrix on Education of OFW Respondents 23

18. Matrix on Respondents by Regions of Origin 24

19. Matrix on Entry Visa and Status of Residence 25

iii
 LIST OF FIGURES

1. Overseas Filipino Workers by Occupational Type Abroad 5

iv
 CHAPTER 1

PHILIPPINE LABOR MIGRATION

This study discusses a profile of Filipino migrant workers and a descriptive analysis of the

causes of, consequences and concerns about international labor migration using data from

various government agencies as well as findings from related studies. The study of the

Overseas Filipino Worker (OFW) is of relevance due to their growing number which is about

10% of the country’s total population and the social and economic effects this has brought to

the Philippines. Further, a survey among OFWs in South Korea is particularly interesting in

the sense that the current Employment Permit System (EPS) being implemented between

both governments of South Korea and the Philippines is considered one of the more favorable

arrangements struck by the Philippines with its partnering labor host countries.

1.1 Historical Background of Philippine Labor Migration

Researchers divide the history of Filipino migration into waves, each possessing a

distinct character from the others. The First Wave of labor migration was in 1900’s, when

thousands fled due to poverty brought about by the Philippine-American war to work in

Hawaiian plantations. By 1934, there were about 120,000 Filipino workers employed in

Hawaiian plantations. The First Wave was characterized by migration to the US with the

option to stay there for good or to return to the country. The Second Wave is characterized

by an outflow of professionals, mostly doctors, dentists, and mechanical technicians to the

US. Migration was primarily induced by the desire to “look for greener pastures”. By 1975,

more than 250,000 Filipinos have migrated to the US. The economic boom brought about by

the dramatic increase in oil prices enabled oil-rich countries in the Middle East to pursue

development projects for their countries. Scarce of manpower, the Middle East turned to the

Philippines as a source of labor in the 70’s. The Philippines, in turn, was more than willing

1
to grab this employment opportunity, ushering the Third Wave of labor migration. Labor

migration during the Third Wave is characterized by short-term contractual relationships

between the worker and the foreign employer. Different from the other waves, the Third

Wave saw the geometrical growth in the number of labor migrants. Seeing the high potential

to increase the country’s dollar revenues, the Marcos Administration pursued a policy of

encouraging deployment. During his term, the late President Marcos set-up several offices

under the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) to regulate overseas employment.

Eventually, the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) was established as

a processing and regulatory body for the deployment.

During the term of President Aquino, a more vigorous marketing strategy for Filipino

Overseas employment was pursued. Working abroad was made more accessible. Marketing

missions were sent abroad to look for more employers of Filipino labor. The target then was

to deploy half a million Filipino workers every year.

Reports of abuses and the consequent public outrage on the exploitation of Filipino workers

abroad made the Ramos Administration to rethink its policies on overseas employment. The

concern for protection became more apparent. Bans were imposed and laws were passed

with the objective to providing more protection for the worker. President Ramos issued a

statement on May 1, 1995 saying “It is not the policy of my administration to export workers

to foreign lands.” However, deployment in large numbers still continued. With this, the

Medium-Term Development Plan for 1993-1998 provided as a policy and strategy for

poverty alleviation and employment generation, to “Continue the overseas employment

program as an alternative source of employment opportunities, provided that this does not

result in an undue drain in scientific/technical expertise and locally needed and middle-level

skills. The program should be strengthened through adequate strategies to ensure the dignity

2
and welfare of workers and their families.” President Ramos also reiterated that working

overseas should be an option and not out of need.

President Estrada simply upheld the policies of his predecessor. However, a more

aggressive move for overseas jobs has been adopted under president Arroyo’s administration

targeting one million overseas jobs every year. In 2006, a total of 1,062,567 Filipinos have

been deployed abroad, hitting that target of the current administration of deploying 1 million

Filipino workers for jobs abroad. This figure is expected to continue increasing despite the

economic recession being experienced globally.

1.2 Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs): A Profile

Overseas Filipino workers or OFWs are Filipinos who are employed in foreign countries.

They travel abroad to seek better opportunities in order to provide for the needs of their

families in the Philippines. They are also known as “Overseas Contract Workers”(OCWs),

since they work abroad through a contract with their employers. The term OFWs was

officially adopted under the President Fidel Ramos administration to give recognition to

millions of Filipinos who sacrifice by working in other countries. The change, replacing

‘Contract’ with ‘Filipino’ – honors these Filipino workers by pledging the Philippine

government’s commitment to their welfare wherever they may be, and removing the pre-

condition of possession of contract in order for Philippine consulates to come to their aid,

under the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995 (Republic Act 8042).

There are two kinds of overseas Filipino workers, those who leave the country for temporary

or contractual work and those who settle permanently in the country of destination. The term

Overseas Filipino Workers refer to temporary migrant workers who are classified as either

land-based or sea-based workers whereas permanent migrants are called emigrants.

Although a large number of Filipinos abroad are permanent emigrants (most of them

settling in the Americas), majority of them are OFWs or temporary workers (Table 1).

3
Table 1: Filipino Emigrants and Temporary Workers
(2006-2007)

Year Registered Emigrants Temporary (OFWs)

2006 82,967 1,062,567
2007 80,599 1,077,623
Note: Data are based on the report of POEA's Labor Assistance Center (LAC) on the actual
departures of overseas workers at international airports.
Source: Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (2008)

Further, jobs of the OFWs have also been categorized as either land-based or sea-based.

The occupations of land-based workers cover almost all skill areas from service workers like

cooks, domestic helpers or factory workers to administrative and executive workers. Sea-

based work involves ship operations although a variety of occupations can be found in large

passenger vessels. Table 2 shows the Philippines Overseas Employment Administration

(POEA) reports that of the 1,062,567 workers deployed in 2007, 75.26% were land-based

workers numbering to 811,070.

Table 2: Number of Workers Deployed (2006-2007)

Type 2006 % share to 2007 % share to

total total
Land-based 788,070 74.17 811,070 75.26
New Hires 317,680 29.90 313,260 29.07
Rehires 470,390 44.27 497,810 46.20
Sea-based 274,497 25.83 266,553 24.74
Total 1,077,623 100.00 1,062,567 100.00
Note: Data are based on the report of POEA's Labor Assistance Center (LAC) on the actual
departures of overseas workers at international airports.

Figure 1 shows an overview of the fast growth of land-based and sea-based OFWs from 1974

when the government under President Marcos initiated its labor-export policy to be able to

cope with the financial crisis, to 2006. Almost half of them have college degrees. Through

the years, there was a notably shift from labor export of professionals such as nurses and

engineers to caregivers, domestic helpers, factory workers and construction workers. A shift

in the international demand for Philippine labor took place in the 1980s, indicated by a

decline in the number of workers in production processes and an increase in the demand for

4
service workers. In the Philippines, this led to more women going abroad, mainly to work as

domestic helpers or factory workers.

Figure 1:OFWs by Occupational Type Abroad

Note:
Type 1 includes professional, technical, and related workers (as well as entertainers).
Type 2 includes managerial, executive, and administrative workers; sales workers; and
agricultural, husbandry, and forestry workers, and fishermen.
Type 3 includes clerical workers.
Type 4 includes service workers.
Type 5 includes production process workers, transport equipment operators, and laborers.
Source: Philippine Statistical Yearbooks, various years as cited in Neil G. Ruiz, "Made for
Export: Labor
Migration, State Power, and Higher Education in a Developing Society," Ph.D. dissertation,
Massachusetts,Institute of Technology, 2007.

It is also observed that deployment has steadily increased through the years except in 1995

whereby there was a significant decrease in number of OFWs (Table 3).

5
Table 3: Deployment of temporary contract workers
(1989-2007)

Land-based Sea-based
Year Total
Workers workers
1989 355,346 103,280 458,626
1990 334,883 111,212 446,095
1991 489,260 125,759 615,019
1992 549,655 136,806 686,461
1993 550,872 145,758 696,630
1994 564,031 154,376 718,407
1995 488,173 165,401 653,574
1996 484,653 175,469 660,122
1997 559,227 188,469 747,696
1998 638,343 193,300 831,643
1999 640,331 196,689 837,020
2000 643,304 198,324 841,628
2001r 662,648 204,951 867,599
2002 682,315 209,593 891,908
2003 651,938 216,031 867,969
2004 704,586 229,002 933,588
2005 740,632 247,983 988,615
2006 788,070 274,497 1,062,567
2007 811,070 266,553 1,077,623
Source: Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (2008)

This sudden drop was caused by the policies of the Ramos administration where

stricter regulations have been formulated and implemented in ensuring the welfare of the

workers. Such an action came about due to grievances that have been aired by a significant

number of OFWs regarding problems of maltreatment, terrible working and living conditions,

lower pay being received by them in contrast to what has been stated in their work contracts,

passports being illegally held by employers and even increasing cases of unexplained deaths

while at the work place (Table 4).

6
Table 4: Number of Welfare Cases, January to September
(1994)
Nature Total Male Female Female/M
ale ratio
Overall (number) 9,368 3,021 6,347 2.1
Overall (percent) 100% 32% 68%
Maltreatment 1,419 546 873 1.6
Delayed or non-payment of 1,272 565 707 1.2
salaries
Contract violations 1,373 691 682 0.9
Physical abuse 187 6 181 30.0
Rape and sexual abuse 15 0 15 N/a
Sexual harassment 330 0 330 N/a
Health problems 42 13 29 2.2
Mental Illness 6 0 6 N/a
Other 3,769 694 3,075 4.4
Source: Overseas Welfare Administration, as cited in “Filipino Women Migrants: A
Statistical Factbook,” National Commission on the Role of Filipino Women and the Asian
Development Bank.

In Asia, the favorite OFW destinations were Hongkong and Taiwan where Korea has

followed close by (Table 5).

Table 5: Deployment of OFWs by Top Ten Destinations

(2006-2007)
Destinations 2006 % share to 2007 % share to
total total
1. Saudi Arabia 223,459 28.4 238,419 29.4
2. United Arab 99,212 12.6 120,657 14.9
Emirates
3. Hong Kong 96,929 12.3 59,169 7.3
4. Qatar 45,795 5.8 56,277 6.9
5. Singapore 28,369 3.6 49.431 6.1
6. Taiwan 39,025 5.0 37,136 4.6
7. Kuwait 47,917 6.1 37,080 4.6
8. Italy 25,413 3.2 17,855 2.2
9. Brunei 9,461 1.2 14,667 1.8
10. Korea 13,984 1.8 14,265 1.8
11. Others 172,490 21.9 180,379 22.2
Land-based Total 788,070 811,070
Source: Philippine Overseas Employment Administration,2008

7
Italy is also a favored country destination by the OFWs in the European region. In the past,

Japan was a top favorite destination in Asia. Noticeably though, it has not been listed in the

recent years. This must be due to the strict entry policies and a more rigid crackdown on

illegal workers.

Although the Middle East remains to be the top country of destination, the USA, was

consistently the main source of remittances (Table 6). In 2007, US$ 8,244,349,000 were

received in remittances from the USA.

Table 6: Overseas Filipinos’Remittances by Source (in‘000 US$)

Source 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Asia 894,310 918,329 1,172,373 1,496,120 1,543,180
Americas 4,370,705 5,023,803 6,605,231 7,198,212 8,244,349
Oceania 44,470 42,600 54,573 85,610 121,418
Europe 1,040,562 1,286,130 1,433,904 2,061,067 2,351,691
Middle East 1,166,376 1,232,069 1,417,491 1,909,208 2,172,417
Africa 11,371 3,439 4,546 10,272 16,027
Others 50,664 44,001 887 819 846
Source: DES-Banko Sentral ng Pilipinas (2008)

Remittances were sent through formal channels such as banks and non-formal

channels such as the door-to-door system (Table 7). The data shows that OFWs prefer to

send their remittances through the formal channels.

Table 8 shows that male workers remit more than female workers. For male workers,

the overall average remittance in 2007 was 96,000 pesos while that for females was 51,000

pesos.

Table 7: Overseas Filipinos’ cash remittances coursed

through formal and informal channels
Through Through Global total
Year banks non-banks (banks plus
(formal or informal non-banks)
channels) 1/ channels 2/

2001 6,031 1,690 7,721

2002 6,886 1,721 8,607
2003 7,579 1,514 9,093
2004 8,551 1,710 10,261
2005 10,689 1,603 12,292
2006 12,761 1,276 14,037
2007 14,450 506 14,956

8
1/
Refers to cash remittances coursed through the formal financial channels, including
commercial banks, thrift banks, foreign exchange corporations, and offshore banking units.
2/
Refers to cash remittances coursed through formal and informal channels.
Source: Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (2008)

Table 8: Total remittances and average remittances per year 2003 to 2007 Survey on

Overseas Filipinos

2007 2006 2005 2004 2003

Male
No.of OFWs 890 751 667 450 456
(in 1,000)
Total Remittances 74,158 66,063 54,731 42,159 46,379
(in million pesos)
Average remittance 96 99 96 93 101
(in thousand pesos)

Female
No. of OFWs 857 764 660 439 402
(in 1,000)
Total remittances 35,648 35,901 30,684 22,553 24,019
(in million pesos)
Average remittance 51 57 58 51 59
(in thousand pesos)
Details may not add up due to rounding off.
Source: National Statistics Office–Survey on Overseas Filipinos (various years)

With regard to the geographic distribution of OFWs, the latest data showed that

overseas workers came disproportionately from the National Capital Region and the Southern

Tagalog Region which are adjacent to Metro Manila, the center of recruitment activities

(Table 9). The Ilocos Region, which is a “traditional” migrant sending region due to the

Ilocanos recognized as first official overseas workers, has remained to be on the top five

regions of origin for OFWs.

Table 9: Top Five OFWs Regions of Origin

Philippine Region Temporary Migrants
(2007 only)
1. National Capital Region (NCR) 76,916
2. Southern Tagalog (CALABARZON and MIMAROPA) 72,011
3. Central Luzon 46,321
4. Western Visayas 43,332
5. Ilocos Region 28,740
Source: Philippine Overseas Employment Administration and Overseas Workers Welfare
Administration(2008)

9
1.3 Causes of International Migration

The factors underlying economically motivated international migration are: demand-

pull factors like demand for expatriate labor arising from the oil boom in the Gulf region;

supply-push factors such as demographic transition; and network of friends and relatives

already settled in destination countries who serve as sources of information and anchor

communities for newcomers. Migration is also influenced by the dynamic interplay of socio-

economic, political and historical factors and globalization. These emphasize global trade,

economic expansion and the forging of economic links between nations, as well as the close

relationships between flows of people, and capital, commodities and technology (Martin,

UNCRD, 1994; Sassen, 1994; Castles, 1994).

In Asia, a factor causing the expansion of labor mobility is the widening disparity

among groups of Asian countries. Labor sending countries are characterized by high rates of

population and labor force growth (e.g. Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Philippines), whereas labor

receiving countries have undergone demographic transition and are experiencing serious

labor shortages exacerbated by aging (Wickramasekara:OECD 1996).

The Philippines is one of the largest suppliers of a variety of workers for overseas

employment. The economy deploys professionals and technical worker including doctors,

engineers, nurses, teachers, and IT specialists all over the world. On the other hand, semi-

skilled workers are also deployed including technicians, production workers, caregivers,

entertainers, domestic workers, and many others. Inadequate domestic employment

opportunities as well as the higher compensation package abroad exert a pull on many of

educated workers to seek overseas employment (Macaraeg, 2005).

Most Filipinos go abroad with the hope of getting ahead economically and socially.

Several studies have identified the factors contributing to the overseas exodus of Filipino

workers. Among these factors are: rapid population growth, geographic distribution in urban

10
areas, unemployment and underemployment, uneven development among regions in the

country, labor oversupply, sparse and depressed industrialization, social class reasons,

inflation, income disparity and international wage disparities (Go, 1996; Madigan and

Pagtolun-an, 1990; Gonzalez, 1998; Carino, 1992; Vasquez, 1992).

In this section, the primary causes of Filipino migration that will be discussed will be

limited to unemployment and underemployment, high population growth rate, and low

domestic wages and international wage differentials.

1.3.1 Unemployment and Underemployment

“The number of unemployed people in the globe has now reached a record-high of

more than 200 million, compared to 150 million 12 years ago. Underemployment, now

reaches more than 1.5 billion even as the global crisis threatens to slash more livelihood from

both labor-exporting and labor-importing countries.” (Labog, 2008).

There is a strong push from developing countries to further liberalize the labour

market for many beneficial economic reasons. Vietnam Prime Minister Pham Van Khai said

that “Sending laborers to work abroad is one of Vietnam's major efforts to settle issues of

employment, especially for young people,” It is young, largely unskilled laborers that the

government is targeting for export. Joblessness is becoming an increasing concern for this

country of 77 million people. MOLISA says that unemployment rose to 7.4 percent last year,

from 6.8 percent in 1998 (Asian Times, 2000).

11
Table 10: Labor Force for Selected Years

Year Labor Force Total Labor Force Employed Unemployed

Participation Rate (in ‘000) (%) (%)
(%)
1960 - 08,539 93.7 6.3
1965 - 10,322 92.8 7.2
1970 - 11,358 92.4 7.6
1975 - 14,142 96.1 3.9
1980 - 15,900 92.1 7.9
1985 63.4 21,329 88.9 11.1
1990 64.5 24,525 91.9 8.1
1995 65.6 28,040 91.6 8.4
2000 64.3 30,908 89.9 10.1
2001 67.5 33,361 90.2 9.8
2002 66.2 33,674 89.8 10.2
2003 67.1 35,120 89.8 10.2
2004 66.5 35,629 89.1 10.9
2005 64.8 35,494 92.6 7.4
2006 64.0 33,185 92.7 7.3
Source: National Statistics Office

In Table 10, unemployment rate of the Philippines was at its lowest in 1975 with

3.9%. This was the year after the implementation of the 1974 Labor Code under President

Marcos’ administration. However, the unemployment rate reached its peak at 11.1% after ten

years in 1985. As of 2006, this remained to be the highest unemployment rate so far since

1960. The double-digit unemployment rate again came about only in 2000, after the Asian

financial crisis in 1997. Latest data show that unemployment rate in 2006 is at 7.3%.

The country’s labor force is also highly underutilized. Employed persons who express the

desire to have additional hours of work in their present job or to have additional job, or to

have a new job with longer work hours are considered underemployed. Although the

underemployment rate as of July 2009 is lower at 19.8% compared to that of July 2008 at

21%, the rate remains high; that is, one out of five employed workers is underemployed

(Table 11).

12
Table 11: Results from July 2009 Labor Force Survey (LFS)

Philippines July July

2009 2008
Population 15 years and over 59,512 58,119
(in ’000)
Labor Force Participation Rate 64.6 64.3
Employment rate (%) 92.4 92.6
Unemployment Rate (%) 7.6 7.4
Underemployment Rate (%) 19.8 21.0
1/
Notes: Estimates for July 2009 are preliminary and may change.
2/
Population 15 years and over is from the 2000 Census-based population projections.
Source: National Statistics office

Since the domestic economy cannot absorb the increasing number of new entrants to

the labor force, this created a large amount of surplus labor. Some of these unemployed and

underemployed workers join the large number of Filipinos who search for jobs abroad. This

also explains why even professionals and college degree holders such as nurses and teachers

end up working as entertainers, domestic helpers or factory workers abroad.

1.3.2 Low Domestic Wages and Wage Differentials

Most international migrants in Asia are motivated by the prospect of earning higher

wages overseas (Smart et al. 1986). As long as potential foreign earnings exceed local wages

(after subtracting costs of movement and job placement), workers are likely to respond to

higher foreign wage rates by engaging in labour migration to one of the region’s core

migrant-receiving countries (Abella, 1988). Low earning capacity and unemployment

contribute to the widening income gap between the rich and the poor. The Philippines has

one of the worst income disparity records in Asia where the rich are very rich and the poor

are very poor. According to a World Bank report in 1998, there was a significant increase in

income inequality in the mid-1990’s with the Gini coefficient increasing from 0.45 to 0.5 in

inequality in three years. The factors underlying these increases are: first, the incomes of the

richest ten percent of the population grew faster than the incomes of the rest of the

population; second, “core” poverty in rural areas appear to have been largely untouched (six

13
rural regions accounted for about 60% or rural poverty in 1991); and third, urban-rural

differences in standard of living have widened. In the Philippines, it is estimated that the

richest families control 30% of GNP (Gonzalez, 1998). The old landed elite (Spanish and

mestizo families) has both political and economic power while the Filipino-Chinese control

about 30% of the top 50 corporations in the country although they make up only about 1% of

the population. Most of the Filipinos therefore, are motivated to go abroad with the hope of

financial gains and social upgrade (Pinches, 1996; Tiglao, 1993).

1.3.3 Population Growth

Rapid population growth is one of the factors contributing to emigration pressures.

The population of the Philippines is one of the highest in Southeast Asia and is projected to

consistently remain among the bracket of having the highest population rate for a long time.

(Table 12 and Table 14). At present, the Philippine population stands at 88 million and is

projected to grow to 94 million in 2010 (Table 13). The current population growth rate is

2.04% which is relatively high considering the labor absorptive capacity of the economy.

From 1995 to 2000, the Philippine population grew at an annual rate of 2.36% which

was reduced to 2.04% from 2000 to 2007 due mainly to serious government-sponsored birth

control and responsible parenthood programs. However, the opposition of the Catholic

Church, the lack of political will and cultural factors have hindered successful

implementation of population control programs.

14
Table 12: Population Census

This frame on POPCEN 2007 versus projections shows that 2007 actual population count and
2007 PGR are close to the projected estimates. 2007 Population Projection count at the
national level is lower than the projected estimate (medium assumption) by a few hundreds.
11 of 17 regions reported lower count in the 2007 POPCEN than the projected estimates and
the difference is a few hundreds except ARMM.
Source: Commission on Population

15
Table 13: Summary of Population Projections by Year
2008-2010

Since the 2007 POPCEN results show proximity to the projected population estimates,
medium assumption, POPCOM has prepared population projections in single year interval for
the period 2008-2015.
This summary of population projections are lifted from the 2000 Census-based Population
Projections prepared by NSO and approved by NSCB Resolution No. 7 on February 8, 2006
for use in planning and programming purposes.

Table 14: Country Data

Country Area (km2) Population Density

(2009est.) (/km2)
Brunei 5,765 400,000 69.4
Burma 676,578 50,020,000 73.9
Cambodia 181,035 14,805,000 81.8
East Timor 14,874 1,134,000 76.2
Indonesia 1,904,569 229,965,000 120.7
Laos 236,800 6,320,000 26.7
Malaysia 329,847 27,468,000 83.3
Philippines 300,000 91,983,000 306.6
Singapore 697 4,737,000 6,796.3
Thailand 513,120 67,764,000 132.1
Vietnam 331,210 88,069,000 265.0
Source: Wikipedia.org

16
 With regard to regional distribution, about 19 million or 22% of the total population is

concentrated in the National Capital Region (NCR) and the provinces near Metro Manila

(Regions 3 and 4). Many Filipinos have been flocking urban areas particularly the NCR in

search for job opportunities but this has worsened the employment situation and has

contributed to the problems of overcrowding, traffic congestion, inadequate housing,

environmental concerns, inadequate health services and the presence of squatters and slum

areas. According to the World Bank, the absolute size of annual increase in the Philippine

population and the labor force will remain very large for a long time and the poor capacity of

the economy to absorb is likely to guarantee the continued outflow of workers.

1.4 Consequences of Migration

1.4.1 Recruitment and Employment Promotion

Contract migration is seen as a mechanism to help break the vicious cycle of

underdevelopment in which poverty is both cause and effect, through employment and

foreign exchange earnings. Increased employment leads to greater income, which generate

higher savings for investments whereas increased foreign exchange earnings lead to better

access to investment funds and assets for capital expenditures and thus more employment

opportunities (Vasquez,2002). It appears that rate of employment generation from contract

migration has been substantial. However, overseas contract migration and emigration may

not be enough to curb high unemployment rates. Nonetheless, without contract migration,

unemployment levels will be much higher.

On the other hand, high unemployment figures indicate that labor shortages will not

be a problem even if the present rate of contract migration increases, except maybe for highly

specialized and professional occupations that are lacking in the country. However, the

recruitment process for migrations is highly selective of workers who are younger, better

17
 educated, more experienced and highly skilled. Some studies reveal that majority of migrant

workers were employed in the Philippines prior to departure.

1.4.2 Remittances

Remittances contribute largely to the country’s foreign exchange. In 2008, the total

remittances reported was US$ 16.4 Billion which was an increase of 13.7% from the previous

year. These amounts are underestimated considering that many workers remit through

unofficial channels.

Foreign exchange earnings from overseas contract workers have contributed greatly in

the balance of payments of the country and have helped to cushion the impact of deficits in

the trade balance. This is not to mention the already obvious increase in family income

bringing about increased social status in the community and greater educational and health

benefits it gives member of the family recipients.

1.4.3 Return and Skills Transfer

It is commonly assumed that migration facilitates skills and technology transfer as

workers move from lower to higher technology levels. Further, emigration is believed to

positively influence education through teachers and other educators who have studied abroad.

However, in the Philippines, many workers are actually being de-skilled. Highly educated

OFWs increasingly seek long term contracts and extension, returning to the Philippines only

for retirement. Many Filipino professionals who migrated to the USA, Australia and Canada

settle there permanently.

1.5 Concerns of Migration

Abuses and exploitation, undocumented migration, high migration costs being

charged by agencies and other individuals who act as brokers for foreign employers are just

some of the problems that beset migrant workers. This is aside from the homesickness,

18
broken families, and many other social problems that come about from absence of guidance

from parents.

19
 CHAPTER 2 : FILIPINO WORKERS IN SOUTH KOREA

2.1 A SURVEY ON FILIPINO WORKERS IN SOUTH KOREA

This survey was conducted with the aim of assessing the economic and social

situation of Filipino workers in Korea. Although there are some research papers on Filipino

migrants in Korea, very few studies and surveys of the so-called undocumented workers have

been undertaken. The initial target respondents of this survey were illegal workers living at

the countryside. However, the pilot area was later expanded to include workers with visas

including those with spouses of Korean nationals. This survey questionnaire (Appendix A)

was floated to respondents in late 2006 to January of 2007 while the researcher was about to

finish her academic classes and has even used the same collected data in a couple of school

case studies. An in-depth interview of key informants was also done to verify some of the

information and data gathered. Not included in the survey were those who live far from the

main residential areas and those not personally known by the contact persons.

Because of the small sample size of this survey relative to the total number of Filipino

workers, general conclusions cannot be drawn from the results. However, the findings may

serve as input for future studies and may be useful to government and non-government

organizations responsible in implementing policies and programs for the welfare of Filipino

workers in Korea.

There are two groups of respondents in this study; the legal workers and the illegal

workers. The main difference between the two groups lies in the validity of their visas while

working abroad. Legal workers are those who hold a proper working visa or have valid status

of residence. The illegal workers are those who do not have the proper visa or status of

residence, or who have overstayed their entry visa.

20
2.2 Areas Covered by the Survey Questionnaire

A. Demographic Characteristics

1. Age

2. Civil Status

3. Gender

4. Education

5. Household Size

6. Distribution by Region

B. The Motivation to Migrate

1. Decision to Work Overseas

2. Presence of Relatives Abroad

3. Countries Where Family Members are Located

4. Employment Status Prior to Migration

5. Occupation in the Philippines

6. Reasons for Migration

C. The Migration Process

1. Manner in which Overseas Job was Obtained

2. Status of Residence upon Entry

3. Current Status of Residence

D. Work Situation in Korea

1. Occupation in Korea

2. Length of Stay in Korea

3. Wages and Working Hours

4. Job Mobility/ Change in Employer

5. Reasons for Change in Employer

21
 6. Work Problems

E. Economic Benefits

1. Remittances

2. Skill Acquisition

F. Others

1. Perception about Life in Korea

2. Worker’s Awareness of Government and Non-Government Programs

3. Worker’s Availment of Government and NGO Programs

4. Respondent’s Comments and Suggestions Regarding the Survey

2.3 A Profile of the Respondents

1. Age, Gender, Marital Status

Most of the migrant workers in this survey are young and of prime working age. It is

relevant to note that all respondents are beyond the age of 21 years which is generally the age

when a person obtains a college degree in the Philippines. Further, a college degree holder is

more likely to land a white-collared job as against one who holds a blue-collared job. In a

way, this situation supports other similar studies that many OFWs are professionals. With

regard to marital status, more than half (61%) of the respondents were married (Table 15).

Table 15: Matrix of Respondents by Age, Gender, Status

Total # of AGE (years) Gender Status

OFWs 25-34 35-44 45&up Male Female Single Married
28 26 2 1 20 8 10 18
It has also been noted that all male workers except one (1) belonged to the age group 25-34

years of age. This means that almost all male workers are at their productive years.

2. Household Size and Position

The average family size in the Philippines is 5.1 according to estimates by the National

Statistics office.

22
Table 16: Matrix of Respondents Household Size/Position
Total # of Household Size(people) Household Position
OFW 1-5 5-up Head Spouse Child
28 25 3 9 10 9

In this survey, 89% of the respondents have a household size falling under the 1-5 size

bracket. (Table 16) Extended families are still common in the Philippines especially in the

rural areas where children continue to live with their parents even after marriage.

3. Educational Attainment

Generally, Filipino overseas workers are highly educated. Many Filipino domestic

helpers in Hongkong and Singapore have college degrees and are generally better educated

than their counterparts from other Asian countries. A comparison of demographic

characteristics of different national-origin groups of migrants in the USA in 1980 showed that

36.5% of migrants in the Philippines had a schooling of 16 years or more, which is higher

than immigrants from the United Kingdom, Korea, Canada and Mexico (Borjas, 1990).

In a country with large income differentials as the Philippines, education and

migration are seen as vehicles for getting ahead economically and socially. Past studies on

migration have shown that remittances have been spent primarily on basic necessities and

education.

Table 17: Matrix on Education of OFW Respondents

Total No.of Education
Respondents High School Vocational/Some College College
28 5 8 15

In table 17, more than half (54%) of the respondents were college graduates, 29%

have finished vocational courses, while 17% were high school graduates. It has been learned

that some of these workers are teachers or accountants, while others were working as drivers,

cashiers, sales managers, or even office workers while in the Philippines.

23
 However, due to economic constraints such as low salaries, these employed workers

still decide on finding jobs in Korea. Also, the decision to leave the country is said to be a

personal decision by the majority of the respondents although some of them say that their

families are aware and have been consulted of their choices to work in Korea.

5. Distribution of Workers by Region

A survey by the Overseas Filipinos by the NSO showed that most migrants come

from the National Capital Region (NCR), Regions 3 and 4. The urban provinces of Regions

3 and 4 are located near the capital, Metro Manila, which is the center of recruitment

activities. Interestingly, all three regions are high-income regions in the Philippines, which

also have high unemployment rates. The movement from rural to urban areas have

contributed to the high unemployment rates in Metro Manila and the surrounding areas.

Consequently, workers who cannot find jobs in the cities leave for work overseas.

Table 18 : Matrix on Respondents by Regions of Origin

Total Number Region of Origin

of Cordillera Administrative 1 2 3 4 National Capital Region
Respondents Region (CAR) (NCR)
28 11 5 1 4 4 3

The highest proportion of respondents to this survey however, come from the

Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR), a predominantly agricultural region in the northern

Philippine highlands. Compared to the main source regions cited above, the CAR has a

relatively low unemployment rate although many farmers are underemployed because of low

productivity in agriculture. The Cordillera, however, is one of the high-income regions in the

country.

24
6. Entry Visa and Status of Residence

The survey shows that all workers (100%) entered Korea legally either as tourists or

with trainee visas under the Employment Permit System (EPS). Only one of the respondents

entered Korea legally as a spouse to a Korean national.

Table 19: Matrix on Entry Visa and Status of Residence

Number of OFW Entry Visa Residence

Respondents Status
Tourist Trainee Others Legal Illegal
28 9 18 1 15 13

However, the current status of residence of almost half of the respondents (46%) is

illegal since most of the respondents overstayed their visas. Since majority of the

respondents came as trainees and worked as factory workers, they were allowed a maximum

of three years in accordance with the Korean government’s directive on hiring Filipino

workers. Probably because of fear of not being re-hired, most of these trainees end up

overstaying their visas or find other employers prior to the expiration of their visas. Some of

the respondents however claim that they have been victims of abuse by their employers such

as withholding their passports and other documents so when they are exploited and

eventually decide to ran away from their employers, they end up without their legal

documents.

7. Turnover rate and Mobility

There is a high turnover rate among the respondents especially the illegal workers

since all of them have changed employers at least more than three times during their tenure.

Obviously, this may have been because of their illegal status. Only 3 or 11% of the total

respondents have stayed in their jobs as stated in their contracts. Of the 15 legal workers,

about 87% have also changed employers for at least three times. Work related problems such

as low salary, overtime work and long working hours, racial discrimination, and bad

25
relationship with co-workers were common reasons among the legal workers to change their

employers. Illegal workers encounter problems such as delayed or unpaid salaries, terrible

working and/or living conditions, overtime work and long working hours.

8. Remittances

All the respondents said that they send remittances to their families regularly, the

largest portion of which is for family support or the purchase of basic necessities.

Remittances are also intended for savings, education of children or siblings, for the purchase

of a house, lot, or car and for setting up a business.

Results of the survey showed that the workers send remittances from 50% to 80% of their

total monthly salaries. Apparently, males send money in larger proportions compared to the

females. One reason for this may be due to the Filipino custom of men being responsible for

fending for their families, whether they be married or single.

Filipinos are family-centered and children who are economically well-off can be

depended on by their parents to help augment the family income or finance the schooling of

their siblings. In the case of the survey respondents, some of them even said during the

interviews that they are married with families of their own and yet remit to their parents as

well since they are the eldest child. Traditionally, the eldest child or elder children who are

better educated and economically better off are responsible for helping parents in educating

their younger siblings. Since most of the migrant workers come from big families with low

incomes, it is understandable that they feel obliged and responsible in supporting their

families in the Philippines and in helping other family members come to Korea. The value of

“utang na loob” or reciprocal obligation is not limited to kinship relationships but pervades

Filipino society (Schlegel, 1964). As pointed out by Kaut (1961 in Trager, 1988), “Life is an

unsolicited gift and thus the basis of a debt which cannot be repaid. Parents expect that their

children will support them in their old age.”

26
 The most common method of remittance is through the bank. Although some workers

send money through the post office, through friends, or through other informal channels.

9. Skill Acquisition

Several respondents feel that their educational background and work experience in the

Philippines is not matched to their present occupation in Korea. However, migration to

Korea has provided the opportunity for some to undergo Korean Language lessons and for

others, learn skills on how to operate machines or do some embroidery craft while being on

the job. Initially however, the workers had difficulties adjusting because of the language

barrier and cultural differences.

When asked if they acquired new skills from their employment in Korea, 68% of the

workers responded positively although the other 32% feel that they have not learned any

useful or relevant skill from their jobs. Some of the skills that the workers have acquired in

Korea are: carpentry, machine equipment operation, language skills, steelworks and welding,

packaging, and embroidery. Although these are common in the Philippines, the respondents

claim that these are new skills learned from their jobs because most of the respondents do not

have experiences related to their jobs in Korea. Most of the workers have differing

educational backgrounds from their jobs in Korea. This is where mismatch between jobs and

educational or professional backgrounds are evident.

10. Perception about Life in Korea

Despite all the problems that the migrants encountered at work, 96% of the

respondents still believe that their life in Korea is generally good because of high salary, the

country’s convenient transportation system, good services, the presence of family and friends.

Only one respondent answered negative since she feels homesick even if already married to a

Korean national.

27
 11. Awareness and Availment of Government/NGO Programs

About 68% of the respondents are aware of government and non-government

organization (NGO) programs and projects for overseas workers but only 7% claim to have

availed of these programs. Some either claim the lack of time away from work to be able to

avail of government projects or programs for the OFWs or plainly because they prefer to

work and be paid than take a day-off from work to avail of the programs. Understandably, for

the illegal workers, they may have been hesitant to seek assistance because of their status.

They fear of being caught and reprimanded or worse, deported.

12.Monthly Wage:

The amount of remittances is related to monthly wage. Workers who receive higher wages

are expected to send more remittances to the Philippines. The survey results show that most

workers send from 70% to 80% of their monthly wages to their families back home. Also,

household positions somehow influence the degree of responsibility and the likelihood of

remittance. For instance, a head of the family is more likely to remit bulk of his wages to his

family for financial support as compared to an unmarried worker who may or may not remit

back home.

28
 CHAPTER III: CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATIONS

The primary causes of migration discussed in the paper are unemployment and

underemployment, high population growth rate and international wage differentials.

Employment promotion is one of the economic benefits of migration. Data gathered from

various sources showed that employment generation from overseas contract work has been

substantial. Meanwhile, remittances have contributed substantially to the foreign exchange

earnings and balance of payments of the country. Migrant workers remittances as reported

are being underestimated because many workers send remittances through informal channels

although this survey shows that remittances are being coursed through formal channels such

as the banks by the majority of the respondents. Remittances have also improved the

economic and social standing of recipient households. However, studies have not shown

significant skills upgrading from overseas employment, instead, it appears that many

Filipinos are being de-skilled due to their employment for menial work abroad. Also, there

are many concerns and problems encountered by workers abroad. These include unpaid

salaries, passports being withheld by employers, long working hours, and terrible working

conditions.

Economic migration remains a major source of alternative employment and foreign

exchange in the Philippines. Emigration appears to be indispensable and will continue in the

future considering the country’s high unemployment rate and the dependency of families on

remittances from abroad. However, economic migration is not a short cut to development.

Emigration can only offer a temporary solution to the problem of employment generation.

Many Filipinos who leave for work overseas do not come from the pool of the unemployed;

instead, many were already employed at home but they leave to seek higher wages abroad.

Others were “encouraged workers” like housewives who were initially not in the labor force

29
but who were motivated to join the overseas labor market. Since the labor force of major

labor exporting countries such as China are expected to increase in the coming decades, the

Philippines faces increasing competition for workers. Some major labor importing countries

such as Japan have also started tightening their already rigid visa requirements and started

deporting illegal workers. It is therefore not realistic to be dependent on emigration to solve

unemployment. In the long term, it is important to find ways and means of reducing the

dependence on emigraton.

With regard to skills transfer from overseas employment, Filipinos are actually being

de-skilled. For instance, college graduates work as domestic helpers in Hongkong, engineers

and government employees are employed as construction workers while highly educated

females work as domestic helpers. Further, even if workers learn new skills while abroad,

work experience and skills acquired are not necessarily well matched to local needs.

Meanwhile, return migration is difficult especially if the economy cannot reabsorb

workers or if wage levels cannot match overseas wages. Therefore, many migrants who

return after completing their overseas contracts return to the Philippines and then re-apply for

jobs in other countries.

Many serious problems and concerns have cropped up from the export for Filipino

labor. The government should provide adequate support and assistance to migrant workers

especially to victims of abuse and exploitation. Even if a large number of migrants are aware

of government projects for migrant workers, few only avail such for the reason that they get

disappointed from much delayed results or no results at all.

Also, illegal workers despite their status should also be provided the necessary

support considering that they are vulnerable to abuse.

Individual migrants and their families benefit from overseas employment through

remittances. Remittances increase enrolment at schools since most migrant workers allocate

30
some amount for the education of their children and siblings. However, remittances and the

savings of returning migrants are not automatically converted into economic development.

Previous studies have shown that remittances are normally used for conspicuous consumption

such as housing, real estate, and the like and are not usually invested in job-creating

enterprises. Hence, policies should support small-scale production activities that are within

the reach of migrants’ families and programs on helping remittance recipients invest

profitably should be strengthened. These recipients should be “educated” more on long-term

benefits.

Further, it is suggested that government support from both the Philippines and South

Korea for OFW returnees be offered. This may come in forms of technical trainings for

business and employment which may be conducted during days-off. Also, since there are

several Philippine-based Korean companies that are labor-intensive, it might be possible that

the employers of the OFWs in Korea refer these OFW returnees to those Korean companies

located in the Philippines for possible absorption in their manpower pool.

Improved economic conditions in the source country like the Philippines will increase

the opportunity cost of migration and thus slow down the flow of migrants. However, it

might decrease the constraints on the capacity to finance migration and will instead increase

the inflow of migrants.

The government’s macroeconomic policies need to be revised to stimulate faster

growth and employment generation and curb emigration pressures like promoting foreign

direct investments.

31
 APPENDIX A

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

Dear Respondent,

I’m a Filipino exchange student conducting a survey of overseas workers in South Korea

for my research entitled: “Study on the Filipino Overseas Worker: A General Profile".

Through this survey, I hope to gather sufficient primary data on the characteristics of

migrants, their working conditions, the benefits of overseas employment, as well as

problems that workers encounter in South Korea.

May I then request your kind assistance by answering this questionnaire as honestly,

frankly and completely as you can. Please be assured that your identity will be kept

CONFIDENTIAL and all information will be used solely for the purposes of this study.

You may answer in English, Tagalog, Ilokano, or Kankanaey.

Thank you very much. Maraming salamat po.

Shirley Marie B. Cosalan

Graduate Student – MPP

Korea Development Insitute

32
A. GENERAL INFORMATION

Nickname or Alias: _____________ Age: ______________

Gender/ Sex (please check): ____male ____female

Civil Status (please check):

_____single
_____married
_____others (please specify)_________________________________

Address in the Philippines (Province and Region only):______

Household Size (please indicate number of household members including yourself):____

How many household members are employed? ___________________
Please specify (example: husband, father, myself): _________

Educational Attainment (please check):

____ Some Elementary
____ Elementary Graduate
____ Some High School
____ High School Graduate
____ Technical/Vocational Course
____ College/ University Graduate
____ Medicine/ Law Graduate
____ Some Graduate School
____ Master’s Degree
____ Doctor’s Degree (PhD)
____ Some College/University
____ Others (please specify)

Total number of years of schooling: _______ years

Household Position (please check):

____ household head
____ spouse
____ child (son/daughter)

B. MIGRATION DECISION and MIGRATION PROCESS

Your coming to Korea was a ____ family decision
____ personal decision

Number of family members or close relatives working or living abroad

_____________
- Please specify (e.g. brother, uncle, mother, etc.) _______
- What countries? (e.g.Korea, Japan, USA, Saudi Arabia, etc.)
Who assisted you in coming to Korea? (please check)
___scholarship
___husband/wife working/studying in Korea
___business partner

33
___company
___Korean husband/ wife
___job agent
___relatives
___friends
___others (please specify) ___________________

How much was your total placement fee and other pre-departure
expenses?
(estimate-please indicate if in won, pesos or US dollars)

Did you have a job in the Philippines before you came to Korea?
___ yes (What was your job in the Philippines?_____________)
___no

How much was your gross monthly salary in your last job in the Philippines? estimate
in pesos)_________________

Why did you come to Korea? (please check)

___economic reasons
___no job in the Philippines
___higher salary
___better working conditions
___others (please specify) __________________________
___to earn more money and upgrade my social status in
the Philippines
___to study
___to get married with a Korean
___to be with my family
___others (please specify)_________________________________

When did you come to Korea? month __________ year ________

How long have you been here? _____ year(s) ______ month(s)

What was your visa when you entered Korea? _________________

What is your visa now? __________________

Have you had your visa extended after it expired?

__yes Why?(please check)
___to continue working
___to continue my studies/research
___to save enough money
___to be with my family
___to stay longer in Korea
___no job opportunities in the Philippines
___others (please specify)________________
___no Why not? ____________________________________________

34
How long do you intend to stay in Korea from now? ______years

C. EMPLOYMENT/OCCUPATION

Status/ Present Occupation (please check):

___diplomat, official
___professor, artist, church/religious missionary, journalist
___investor/businessman, lawyer, accountant
___medical researcher, instructor, engineer
___specialist in humanities and international services
___intra-company transferee
___skilled laborer
___company trainee
___artist
___temporary visitor (tourist)
___visiting relative
___athlete
___dependent (Who is your sponsor? ___________________?
___construction, transport industry, stockyard worker
___factory worker
___entertainer
___student (If you checked this portion, please indicate if):
___Philippine government scholarship
___Korean government scholarship
___company scholarship
___financed with own money/funds
___financed through parents/relatives
___others (please specify)____________________________
___Others (please specify) __________________________________

Company/School or Place of Work :____________________________

Please check if: _____ full-time worker

_____ part-time worker

Number of years in current job: __________

How much is your gross monthly salary in Korea?

(estimate in won)
Starting salary ________________Year _________
Salary in second job _______________ Year _________
Salary in third job _______________ Year _________
Salary in fourth job _______________ Year _________
Present salary _______________

How much is your hourly wage in your current job? (in won)__

How many hours do you work in a month? (estimate) ___________

How many jobs do you have now?_______ (please specify_______)

35
How many times have you changed your employer? ______ times
Why? ________________________________________________________

Have you encountered some problems at work?_

___ yes
___ no

Problems encountered (please check):

___low salary
___unpaid salary
___overtime work or long working hours
___withholding of salary
___withholding of passport, alien registration card, etc.
___imposition of fines for job violations (coming late for
work, getting absent. etc.)
___doing jobs not indicated in contract (please specify_____)
___organized crime (gangsters)
___arranged marriages
___tax
___sexual harassment, sexual abuse
___racial discrimination
___bad working conditions
___bad relations with co-employees
___problems with agent (please specify _____________________)
___others (please specify)__________________________________

Have you ever visited the Philippines after you came here? __yes ___no

When was the last time you visited the Philippines?_________

D. BENEFITS OF OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT

Do you remit money to the Philippines?

___yes ( How much per month? ___won;about__ % of my salary)
___no (Why not?___________________________________________)

Why do you send money to the Philippines?

___family support
___buy a house, land, car
___set up a business
___save money for future use (please specify _______________)
___invest in stocks/bonds
___pay off debts (pambayad ng utang)
___send my children/siblings to school
___others (please specify) __________________________________

How do you send money to the Philippines?

___post office
___friends

36
 ___bank
___others (please specify)___________________________________

Do you have a savings account in Korea? ____ yes ____ no

Have you acquired or learned some new skills from your work
in Korea?
___yes (What skills?______________________________________)
___no (Why not? __________________________________________)

How did you learn these new skills?

___ through my work (experience)
___ through the guidance of my boss/ supervisor/ co-workers
___ through company-sponsored training
___ through books
___ through lessons at school
___ self-study
___ others (please specify) _________________________________

E. OTHERS

Are you enjoying your life in Korea? ____ yes ____no

If yes, why? (please check)
___convenient transportation system
___good services
___high salary
___many friends
___many entertainment centers
___family is here
___others (please specify)____________________________
If no, why not? (please check)
___high cost of living
___homesick
___problems with employers
___personal problems
___others (please specify)____________________________

Are you aware of programs being undertaken by the government and non-government
organizations (NGOs) to help overseas workers? ___ yes ___ no

What are these programs?____________________________________

Have you availed yourself of these programs while you were working in Koea?_yes __no

Do you have any suggestions for the improvement of the situation of overseas workers
in Korea?______________________

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MARAMING SALAMAT PO

37
 REFERENCES

Abella,M “International Migration and Development”, in Philippine Labor Migration: Impact

and Policy, G. Battistella and A. Paganoni, editors, Scalibrini Migration Center, Quezon City,
Philippines.

Asian Times, 2000

Banko Sentral ng Pilipinas, Manila, Philippines

Borjas, G. Friends or Strangers: The Impact of Immigrants on the U.S. Economy, Basic
Books, Inc., New York, USA

Cheng, M. (1999), “Out of the frying Pan”, in Time Magazine (August 16, 1999), Vol.154,
No.6

Department of Labor and Employment, Manila, Philippines

Go, 1996; Madigan and Pagtolun-an, 1990; Gonzalez, 1998; Carino, 1992; Vasquez, 1992

Kanlungan Center Foundation, Inc.,Manila, Philippines

korea.wikia.com/wiki/Korean_visa_types

National Statistics Census Board (NSCB), Manila, Philippines

National Statistics Office, Manila, Philippines

OECD, Trends in International Migration, France

Pinches, M. (1996), “The Philippines’ New Rich: Capitalist Transformation Amidst

Economic Gloom”, in the New Rich in Asia, Asia Research Center (Murdoch University),
Western Australia

Pinches, 1996; Tiglao, 1993

Martin, United Nations Centre for Regional Development, 1994; Sassen, 1994; Castles, 1994

Philippine Overseas Employment Agency, 2008 (POEA)

Wickramasekara: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development 1996

Schlegel, 1964

Smart et al. 1986

Vasquez,2002

1961 in Trager, 1988

38
www.worldbank.org

www.visasintl.com/korea-visa.aspx

www.dfa.gov.ph

www.adb.org

39