one big file - Social Watch

Missing Targets: An alternative MDG midterm report
0.55
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
Gini Coefficients in the Philippines, 1985–2006
0.45 0.45
0.47
0.45
0.49 0.48
0.47
0.46
1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006
Sources: Distribution data: Philippine Statistical Yearbook 1996 for 1985–1994;
Philippine Statistical Yearbook 2003 for 1997–2000; NSO website for 2006 FIES
final results.
Figure 2
conducted by Claessens, et al. (1999). The study suggests
that as much as 52.5% of total market capitalization is
controlled by the country’s top 10 families. 13
In contrast, the majority of those in the Philippine
labor force are earning poverty level wages. 14 The
same study reveals that, using the data in the Malaluan
paper, the 12.1 million farmers and fisherfolk and the
ten million laborers and unskilled workers combined,
comprise 51% of the total labor force. In 2005 their
wages ranged from PhP5,000-PhP8,000 monthly, an
amount that hovers around the poverty threshold (or
which translates to PhP33/person/day at PhP5,000
and PhP53/person/day at PhP8,000 monthly income).
This does not yet include the informal workers in the
service sector who work as street vendors, pedicab drivers,
and the kasambahays (domestic helpers) employed
in private households.
It is ironic that around the time the NSCB announced
that the incidence of Philippine poverty has worsened,
news reports in media also came out bannering that the
Philippines had “contributed” three names to the annual
list of billionaires compiled by Forbes magazines: Jaime
Zobel de Ayala who tied with Henry Sy, at 349th place.,
both with a net worth of $2.6 billion each, and Lucio Tan,
at 407th place with a net worth of $2.3 billion.
In light of all the points mentioned above, the
problem of social inequality is paramount. That inequality
has remained high for decades is cause for concern.
Public intervention is obviously required to ensure redistribution,
through progressive taxation, asset reform
(e.g., genuine agrarian reform) and the like. Unless this
is done, social polarization becomes inevitable resulting
not only from worsening levels of absolute poverty, but
a high level of inequality as well.
Employment and the Filipino diaspora
That growth is not broad-based is one thing; that
is it a “jobless growth” is another dimension that has
often been publicly observed. It is lamentable that in
the MDG discourse, scant attention has been paid to
employment as a key strategy to combating poverty.
Unfortunately, the employment situation in the Philippines
leaves much to be desired. In fact, not a few
economists and social development advocates refer to
a crisis in income and employment in the Philippines.
Let us look at some of the figures.
Unemployment in the Philippines, as of 2007,
remains high with 4.1 million Filipinos 15 (or 7.3 percent
of the total labor force) looking for work, while
an alarmingly high number of 7.47 million Filipinos
are considered underemployed (or 13.4 percent of total
labor force). Despite the slight improvement from
2006 to 2007, the average annual unemployment rate
is still posted at 10.8 percent, just a little lower than
the previous year at 11 percent.
At the end of 2007, government crowed about the
creation of new jobs totaling to 861,000 which is only a
2.6 percent increase in employment from 2006 and is
the fourth slowest rate of job creation under the current
administration. A breakdown of these newly created
jobs would reveal the following: 142,000 household
helps or kasambahay, 116,000 jobs in transport, storage
and communication and 111,000 jobs in wholesale and
retail trade or the ambulant vendors. This was followed
by 103,000 employed in construction work and 34,000
unpaid family labor. It must be noted that these types
of work are characterized by low productivity, belowpoverty-level
wages (if at all, as in the case of unpaid
family workers), and insecure working conditions.
Indeed, anecdotal evidence tells us that these so-called
“newly-created jobs” came about as part of the coping
strategies of the poor to earn an income without any significant
and positive intervention from government. 16
14
GCAP-Philippines 2007 (unpublished) policy paper, “A Decent Life For All and Not for A Few”
15
According to Cielito Habito, this is based on the new definition of unemployment which was introduced in 2005. Under the old definition, the current number of
Filipinos unemployed is about 4 million.
16
GCAP-Philippines 2007 (unpublished) policy paper , “ A Decent Life For All and Not for A Few”
18 S O C I A L W A T C H P H I L I P P I N E S