SC: Advance payment of OFWs’ SSS contributions unconstitutional
The Supreme Court has declared unconstitutional the requirement for land-based overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) to pay their Social Security System (SSS) contributions in advance before they can get their overseas employment certificate (OEC).
In a 39-page decision on G.R. No. 248680, the Supreme Court en banc ruled that Rule 14, Section 7(iii) of the implementing rules and regulations (IRR) of Republic Act No. 11199, or the Social Security Act of 2018, violated OFWs’ right to travel and exceeded the authority granted to the SSS, the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA), and the Department of Labor and Employment (Dole).
The high court permanently enjoined the SSS, Dole, and the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (now under the Department of Migrant Workers) from implementing the “unconstitutional provision” for being contrary to Sections 1 and 6 of Article I of the Constitution.
Ruling hailed
Overseas Filipino group Migrante International, which provided a copy of the ruling it received on Tuesday, called the decision “a win for OFWs” and a “victory gained through collective action” against what they described as state extortion.
The case stemmed from a petition filed in 2019 by Migrante, along with several individual OFWs and lawmakers from progressive party lists, including Bayan Muna, Gabriela Women’s Party, ACT Teachers and Kabataan.
They sought to nullify several provisions of RA 11199 and challenged the compulsory SSS contributions for land-based OFWs, arguing that it deprives them of property without due process and restricts their right to work.
They also claimed that the SSS lacked authority to enforce this requirement through the OEC issuance, calling it oppressive and discriminatory.
Undue burden
While the high tribunal acknowledged that social security protection is particularly beneficial to OFWs, who leave their families behind to work abroad, and that the State has the authority to make reasonable distinctions among workers to ensure comprehensive SSS coverage, it emphasized that the government must not “unduly burden” OFWs when enforcing the collection of SSS contributions.
“Unfortunately, the assailed provision of the IRR… requires land-based OFWs to pay SSS contributions before receiving their OEC. This measure unjustly deprives land-based OFWs of their right to work and places an inordinate restraint on their right to travel,” the Supreme Court said in the decision promulgated in November 2024 and written by Associate Justice Maria Filomena Singh.
“To truly honor the sacrifices of our OFWs, often hailed as modern-day heroes, it is crucial to refrain from oppressive policies that unfairly burden them,” it added.
The IRR provision mandates that for land-based OFWs in countries without social security or bilateral labor agreements with the Philippines, enforcement measures include collecting contributions through the POEA or relevant DOLE agencies via documentation and deployment processes such as the OEC, which is a requirement before they can work abroad.
Compulsory coverage
In partially granting the petition, the Supreme Court agreed with the petitioners that using OECs for enforcement does not fit the “other measures” provision of the IRR.
“As correctly pointed out by Migrante International et al., this exceeds the rule-making power delegated by the legislature to the SSS, DFA, and DOLE. Section 9-B(e) of Republic Act No. 11199 mandates these agencies to ensure compulsory coverage of OFWs through bilateral social security and labor agreements and other enforcement measures,” the high court noted.
Right to travel
Enforcing the compulsory coverage of land-based OFWs through the issuance of OECs is also “unduly oppressive, unreasonable, and repugnant to the Constitution,” the Supreme Court ruled, stating that it “undermines the mandate of the Constitution to protect the rights of overseas workers and promote their welfare.”
The Supreme Court also affirmed the petitioners’ assertion that the provision violated their right to travel.
“Since the primary purpose of a land-based OFW’s travel abroad is to work, requiring them to pay their SSS contributions in advance as a condition for obtaining their OEC effectively deprives them of their right to travel and, consequently, their livelihood,” the high court said.
Meanwhile, the high tribunal upheld the constitutionality of the other provisions of RA 11199 being assailed by Migrante, which include subsections (a), (c) and (e) of Section 9-B.
Under those provisions, SSS coverage is compulsory on all sea- and land-based OFWs, to be enforced by the DFA, Dole and the SSS. —WITH A REPORT FROM GILLIAN VILLANUEVA
