Allotment / Remittances of Filipino seafarers

 The seabased sector’s remittance comprise at least 22% of the total dollar remittances of Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs). These remittances help spur domestic consumption in the  Philippines  and a key ingredient in the country’s drive to achieve higher but sustainable growth. 

Under the  POEA Standard Employment Contract,  the Filipino seafarer is required to make an allotment which shall be payable once a month to his designated allottee in the Philippines. 

The agency shall provide the seafarer with facilities to do so at no expense to the seafarer. The allotments shall be paid to the designated allottee in Philippine currency at the rate of exchange indicated in the credit advice of the local authorized Philippine bank. Their “allotments” do not go directly to their beneficiaries but are coursed through their manning agencies as middlemen, who disburse in pesos the seafarer’s monthly earnings to the allottee-family.

The allotment shall be at least eighty percent (80%) of the seafarer’s monthly basic salary through the formal channel.  In most instances for the remaining twenty percent  (20%), , generally, there are two modes of sending remittances available to seafarers, through formal (banking)  and informal (door-to-door) channels. 

 A significant new provision in the Migrant and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995, R.A. 8042 ( as amended by R.A. 10022)   is its provision stating that the remittances of  Filipino seafarers  , shall be exempt from the payment of documentary stamp tax. The removal of the documentary stamp tax or DST on all funds wired home by seafarers would help drive down money transfer charges, and put more cash in the pockets of those receiving remittance.

      

A common problem in connection with remittance is the issue on who will be his allottee. An allottee  is any person named or designated by the  seafarer as the recipient of his/her remittances to the Philippines

The employment contract is the bilateral agreement between the seafarer and his principal, as represented by the manning agency Like any personal property he can freely dispose or give to anybody without other limitations than those provided by law. The law requires the inward remittance of the 80 % of his basic salary to the country, for it contribute to the economy. But not the manner or as to how he will divide nor dispose it. His right to dispose his wage remains in his discretion. 

Under this concept, a wife of a contract worker cannot force the agency to remit to her account more than what is allowed by the worker. What is required by law is to implement and enforce the required inward remittance of the workers’ salaries to the Philippines and not to see whether or not the full amount of the remittance is received by the dependents of its workers. The mandatory remittance required by law does not divest the right of an overseas worker over his hard earned money or earnings. A worker earned salary or wage is his exclusive property; the matter of its disposition is his alone and his employer cannot interfere on how salary should be divided and to whom the salary should go.  

           Nevertheless, one legal recourse of the wife is the filing of a civil case for support. Once the court grants the petition, the said court order should be given to the manning agency and attached to each POEA standard employment contract.  This will serve as a notice to the seafarer that failure to comply will have legal consequence. The manning agency is likewise bound to abide by said order for the allocation in favor of the wife. 

    Moreover, a Filipino seafarer can be  held criminally liable and be subjected to sanctions due to the act of abandoning his  financial obligation to persons to which he is  obliged by law to support. Under the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act , which was promulgated March 08, 2004, “economic abuse”  can be committed against a woman who is his wife, former wife, or against a woman with whom the person has or had a sexual or dating relationship, or with whom he has a common child, or against her child whether legitimate or illegitimate, within or without the family abode.”

        
Popularly known as VAWC, the said law defined "Economic abuse" as any act that makes or attempts to make a woman financially dependent which includes, but is not limited to the following: 

1. withdrawal of financial support or preventing the victim from engaging in any legitimate profession, occupation, business or activity, except in cases wherein the other spouse/partner objects on valid, serious and moral grounds as defined in

2. deprivation or threat of deprivation of financial resources and the right to the use and enjoyment of the conjugal, community or property owned in common;

If convicted under this law, the seafarer shall be punished by prision mayor, or imprisonment of a minimum of  six years  and one day to a maximum of twelve years.  He shall also shall pay a fine in the amount of not less than One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) but not more than three hundred thousand pesos (300,000.00).   The court may likewise  expedite the process of issuance of a hold departure order once the case is filed.