Citizens of the Republic of the Philippines, Honorable Panel of Adjudicators, Colleagues from

the Affirmative side and to our esteemed opponents from the Negative side, Good day! The
topic to either not or to abolish contractualization had been the subject of discourse in our
beloved country. Ladies and Gentlemen, in this August academic discourse, allow me to elicit
our primary reasons why it is beneficial to abolish Contractualization.

Exhibit A: Contractual employee’s status shall be deemed regular.

There are two fundamental reasons why workers should become regular employees. (1) Regular
workers are entitled to certain benefits such as state insurance funds that contractual employees
don’t have. (2) Regular workers can only be dismissed for lawful or authorized cause and with
observance of due process.
It is stated inArticle 294, Sec. 3 of the Labor Code of the Philippines, “A dismissal without just
or authorized cause or without observance of procedural due process is illegal”. In relation to
this, under Article 296, Sec. 5 of the Labor Code of the Philippines. The provision states:
Probationary employment shall not exceed six months from the date the employee started
working, unless it is covered by an apprenticeship agreement stipulating a longer period. The
services of an employee who has been engaged on a probationary basis may be terminated for a
just cause or when he fails to qualify as a regular employee in accordance with reasonable
standards made known by the employer to the employee at the time of his engagement. An
employee who is allowed to work after probationary period shall be considered a regular
employee.
So some employers resort to early termination of the contract to avoid adverse
consequences on their business which is clearly an illegal act and because of this illegal practice
of contractualization the employer would terminate the contract within 5 months or lesser. It
does not matter either you qualify or not to become a regular employee. It will just result for the
termination of contract since it is cheaper for the employer to keep the employees contractualized
rather than regularized, which is why these companies creatively interpret the law to assert that
they can do that. Hence, a clear violation to Article 281 of the Labor Code. This was elicited in
the case of:
a. BANKARD, INC. vs.NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION- FIRST
DIVISION, PAULO BUENCONSEJO,BANKARD EMPLOYEES UNION-AWATU
The respondentfiled before the National Conciliation and Mediation Board (NCMB) alleging
commission of unfair labor practices by petitioner Bankard, Inc. (Bankard), to wit: 1) job
contractualization; 2) outsourcing/contracting-out jobs; 3) manpower rationalizing program; and
4) discrimination.

On May 31, 2001, the NLRC issued its Resolutiondeclaring that the management committed acts
considered as unfair labor practice (ULP) under Article 248(c) of the Labor Code. It ruled that:

The act of management of reducing its number of employees thru application of the Manpower
Rationalization Program and subsequently contracting the same to other contractual employees
defeats the purpose or reason for streamlining the employees.

b. E. GANZON, INC. (EGI) and EULALIO GANZON vs.FORTUNATO B. ANDO,

JR.

On May 16, 2011, respondent Fortunato B. Ando, Jr.filed a complaint against petitioner E.
Ganzon, Inc. (EGI) and its President, EulalioGanzon, for illegal dismissal and money claims for:
underpayment of salary, overtime pay, and 13th month pay; non-payment of holiday pay and
service incentive leave; illegal deduction; and attorneys fees. He alleged that he was a regular
employee working as a finishing carpenter in the construction business of EGI; he was
repeatedly hired from January 21, 2010 until April 30, 2011 when he was terminated without
prior notice and hearing; his daily salary of ₱292.00 was below the amount required by law; and
wage deductions were made without his consent, such as rent for the barracks located in the job
site and payment for insurance premium.

Unfair labor practices violate the constitutional right of workers and employees to self-
organization, are inimical to the legitimate interests of both labor and management, and
otherwise deal with each other in an atmosphere of freedom and mutual respect, disrupt
industrial peace and hinder the promotion of healthy and stable labor-management relations.

TheContractuals should gain the benefits that being a regular employee entails.
All employees either regular or contractual should receive equal benefits as stated by the
government that it is to ensure that contractual employees are as protected by law. In 2011, the
Department of Labor and Employment issued Department Order 18-A, Series of 2011, which
lists the employees' rights (Section 8) that contractual employees are entitled to, as well as the
guidelines for the employment contract. It states that itreiterates the rights of the contractor’s
employees, whether deployed or assigned as reliever, seasonal, week-ender, temporary, or promo
jobbers, to all the rights and privileges as provided in the Labor Code, to include:(a) safe and
healthful working conditions;(b) labor standards such as service incentive leave, rest days,
overtime pay, holiday pay, 13th month pay; (c) separation pay as may be provided in the Service
Agreement or under the Labor Code;(d) retirement benefits under the SSS, or retirement plans of
the contractor, if there are any;(e) social security and welfare benefits;(f) self-organization,
collective bargaining and peaceful concerted activities; and(g) security of tenure. Unfortunately
this guidelines are not followed by the employers. Hence, the workers donot receive these
benefits.

Unlike regular employees, job order and contract of service workers do not enjoy
government benefits such as the midyear and yearend bonuses, performance bonus and
personnel economic relief allowance.

Contractual or “endo” (or end of contract) employees, whose employment often spans only five
months, do not enjoy security of tenure and are at the mercy of their employer.

Thus, when age, disability or poor health catch up with them, they have no social security or
retirement benefits to lean on for their sustenance. After giving the best years of their lives to
their employers, they become destitute and virtual burdens to our society.