TENURED employees of the National Food Authority (NFA) are mulling over their legal options following the enactment of the rice trade liberalization law, which they claim could strip them of their jobs.
NFA Employees Association (NFAEA) Central Office President Maximo M. Torda said thousands of tenured employees could be displaced because of the deregulation of the NFA, as the food agency would need lesser manpower to fulfill its new role under Republic Act (RA) 11203.
Torda said they see the deregulation of the NFA as a stepping- stone to eventually abolish the food agency, since the majority of its main functions have already been stripped away.
“Almost all of the main functions of the NFA have been removed and this would mean job losses for the employees,” he said in a news briefing on February 18, after various rice industry stakeholders staged a “Black Monday” protest in front of the agency’s office.
“The NFA union nationwide right now is contemplating to file a case before the Supreme Court on the grounds of violating our security of tenure rights. Because a lot of us—almost 100 percent of us are permanent and career government officials—would forcefully lose our jobs due to this law,” he added.
Torda explained that they were never consulted by lawmakers on the detrimental consequences of the law for their employment.
Torda said they are still consulting with lawyers on, among others, whether the lawsuit would be a class suit or individual case.
The case, he added, could be against the government since it was the one that approved the law that led to their possible displacement.
Under RA 11203, the NFA has been limited to just maintaining a buffer stock through local palay procurement.
The law no longer allows the NFA to import rice and regulate the trade of the staple from importation down to its commercial sale in the market.
The NFAEA’s plan to explore its legal options on the issue came after various rice industry stakeholders revealed that they are considering to secure a temporary restraining order (TRO) on RA 11203 from the courts.
“If we find a way to secure a TRO, then we will do it. Because I think we have sufficient evidence to file a TRO, such as we were not consulted in the legislative process,” Philippine Farmers Advisory Board Chairman Edwin Y. Paraluman said in the same news briefing.
“But if we could not find a way to file a TRO then what’s the point of doing such? We will just zipper our mouth then continue our fight through other recourse,” Paraluman added.