The workers' plight during calamities

Now that the typhoons are over, it is time to pick up the pieces, assess the damages, prepare for the next disaster and educate ourselves on the law governing the plight of the most affected sector, the working class. What does the law provide about their work and pay during the days of calamities, and what are their entitlement in case of accidents resulting to injury, disease, disability or death. The recent typhoons and many others in the past have left too many unanswered questions on our country’s overall capability to manage natural disasters. We have been tested time and again and have been found wanting in many respects.

 The sector however that suffered most as a result of these “acts of God’’ is the labor sector, especially the marginalized minimum wage-earners, whose rates of pay are said to be much lower than the ever-rising cost of living. These poor people rely solely on their daily pay to buy food, pay for house rentals, electricity, water and education for their children, not to mention medicines for sick household members.  Since they are mostly daily-paid, the principle of NO WORK, NO PAY shall apply to them. Their monthly-paid counterparts maybe deemed to be on emergency or vacation leaves during disasters, and thus may not suffer diminution in pay during such natural disturbances. Even if their leave credits shall be diminished, their take-home-pay shall remain intact. Moreover, their employers and their unions, if any, in the exercise of compassion, may extend to them some welfare assistance, in the form of liberal loans and cash grants to tide them over the disaster period. But these are options, not legal compulsions nor contractual obligations.

 Apart from pay, there are issues that need to be addressed in relation to typhoons, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and other disasters, natural or man-made. May workers be compelled to work in such occasions or required to render overtime or rest day work? If they refuse or are unable are they subject to disciplinary action for insubordination. In case they die or become disabled, is the employer liable for such death or disability? Article 89 of the Labor Code precisely provides, by way of an exception to the rule, and that workers may be compelled to work overtime when it is necessary to prevent loss of life or property, or in case of imminent danger to public safety due to fire, flood, typhoon, earthquake, epidemic or other disaster or calamity. Under Article 92 of the Code, workers may even be required to give up their rest day, even on Sundays also for the same reasons.  But then again, they should be paid a much higher rate for that. If they refuse willfully and without reason, they may be disciplined under Article 282 for willful disobedience to a lawful order given by the employer in relation to work. Of course, they could interpose the defense that the floods or the strong winds prevented them to comply.

 The next issue is accidents resulting to disease, injury, disability or death, arising out of, and in the course of the workers’ performance of official duties. Of course, they are entitled to compensation under Book Four of the Labor Code, under the State Insurance Fund. The payor will not be the employer but the SSS, the GSIS or the Employees Compensation Commission as the case may be.  To be entitled, the claimant must be able to prove the following: First, the accident must have occurred at the place where his work requires him to be. Second, if it took place elsewhere, he must prove that he was doing an errand or a mission as instructed by the employer. Third, the employee must indeed be performing his official duties when the accident took place. The words “ARISING OUT OF’’ and “IN THE COURSE OF EMPLOYMENT’’ are two distinct and separate criteria, which must be both satisfied. “ARISING OUT OF’’ refers to the origin or cause of the accident. “IN THE COURSE OF” refers to the time and circumstances under which the accident occurred. As a general rule, applying these two tests, death, injuries, diseases and disability arising from acts of God are not compensable since they do not arise out of nor in the course of employment but caused by force majeure or fortuitous events. But we take exception to this rule.

 Based on American jurisprudence, which has persuasive effects on our legal and judicial systems, our laws having been patterned upon US legislations, there are exceptions to the rule. When, an employee, by reason of the required work during calamities, is exposed to a peculiarly additional risk or danger to his life and limb, and thereby meets an accident arising out of and in the course of doing his work, compensation should be paid. Under our state insurance system, it is the SSS or GSIS that is bound to pay to the claimants or his heirs and beneficiaries. In case of denial of such claims, the claimant can appeal to the Employees Compensation Commission.

These are basic laws that workers and their families must know to protect themselves as a result of disasters and natural calamities. Empowering our workers by giving them this information is the least we can do to help them.