As chairman of the Federation of Philippine Industries (FPI), I am perplexed, if not amused, of the bicameral conference committee vote approving the bill that seeks to extend the maternity leave on both the government and private sector to 105 days, plus another 15 days for solo working mothers, from the current 60-day maternity leave.
While some women’s groups are already rejoicing over the bicameral vote, I am, however, confused if the members of the bicameral committee from both the Senate and House of Representatives undertook comprehensive consultations with employers on this regard, and deliberated extensively the impact of the bill on the country’s business sector.
The bill, once enacted into law, would result in employers paying for the salaries of their unproductive women workers on maternity leave for at least 105 days to 120 days for solo working mothers, up by another 60 days from the current 60-day paid maternity leave of working women. The impact of this bill on the business community will definitely be profound, if not serious, as this is practically one-third of the entire number of working days in a year.
And if we factor in the total number of regular and special nonworking holidays in the country, that would even translate to barely over seven months of productive work for women workers on maternity leave, which employers will have to pay their entire 12-month salary plus the other mandatory bonuses.
Moreover, with the four months availment cap on maternity leave for working mothers under the old rules removed, the Expanded Maternity Leave Bill will run counter to the Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act, which encourages various methods of birth control to improve the Filipino family’s way of life, as this might entice some working mothers to have more children, if only to avail themselves of the expanded maternity benefits. And who knows if there are families whose number of children would grow to unmanageable levels, leaving them practically dependent on government help at the least, or mendicants at the worst.
I am also amused at the timing of the bill’s approval by the bicameral committee, which is just seven months away from the 2019 midterm election. Is it coincidental? Is it planned ? Or is it the call of times? This makes me wonder why bills with mass appeal, like the Expanded Maternity Leave Bill, are usually filed and approved during election years. For instance, four congressmen also filed a bill making the 14th- month pay mandatory.
From an employer’s perspective, this could be a double whammy. Not only would employers be losing productive hours for their workers on maternity leave, but they will also continually pay the salaries of their unproductive workers on maternity leave.
Perhaps, some members of the bicameral conference committee do not understand how hard it is to run a business at these most challenging times. And for reasons of sustainability, and as a practical business decision, if the Expanded Maternity Leave Bill is enacted into law, many employers will now be prudent in hiring women employees to avoid paying the expanded maternity leave benefits, especially women applicants who are still in their fertility years.
Thus, while the authors of the Expanded Maternity Leave Bill may have good intentions, its downside effect on the business community may, however, far outweigh its good purpose. This might even ostracize women in the job market. Therefore, will the Expanded Maternity Leave Bill not be a disservice to working women and the female labor force?
And while production lines in the country’s various factories are now mostly lined with women workers, will the Expanded Maternity Leave Bill not change the industry’s
labor landscape?
Already, the Social Security System (SSS) aired its concern about the bill, saying that its enactment would prompt them to collect higher contributions from members to cover the additional cost for maternity leave benefits of its members, which, under the new law, could reach up to P6 billion.
And should the SSS implement its only course of action, even the male workers, both single and married, would have to carry the burden of paying for their monthly SSS contributions to cover this added cost. Isn’t this bill unfair? Were this labor force sector consulted for their comments and suggestions during the bicameral deliberations of the Expanded Maternity Leave Bill?
It is on this light that I am appealing to President Rodrigo Roa Duterte to have the bill reviewed further for its impact on the business sector, before he signs it into law.
Like any other parent, I am also in favor of improving the quality of life of Filipino families. And, indeed, quality time between a mother and her newborn child is crucial, especially for lactating mothers. But we’ve seen it for decades that the current 60-day maternity leave is enough.
I believe that the business sector is not yet ready for the expanded maternity leave benefits at this time, when it is still struggling with inflation and the rising cost of production. And most important, while some are claiming the bill to be an early Christmas bonus for women workers, on the contrary, it might make their Christmas gloomy.