THE REINTEGRATION OF RETURNING OVERSEAS WORKERS

THE REINTEGRATION OF RETURNING OVERSEAS WORKERS

When an Overseas Filipino Worker (OFW) comes home for good, we often celebrate it as a happy ending. But in reality, the return is not the end of a journey. It is the beginning of another struggle.

In government language, “reintegration” is a multidimensional process meant to ensure a productive and sustainable transition back into Philippine society. It has two pillars: economic and psychosocial.

On paper, the structure looks impressive.

Economic reintegration includes a ₱2-billion Reintegration Fund for business loans, the “Balik Pinas! Balik Hanapbuhay!” (BPBH) livelihood grant of up to ₱20,000, skills retraining through TESDA, and even programs like “Sa Pinas, Ikaw ang Ma’am/Sir” for returning teachers. There is also a push for Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL), so skilled workers abroad do not start from zero when they return.

Psychosocial reintegration focuses on family counseling, stress debriefing, and OFW Family Circles to help repair strained relationships after years of separation.

If you read the brochures, you would think we have mastered reintegration.

But ask many returning OFWs, and you will hear a different story: “Hindi namin alam ‘yan.” They either do not know about these programs or have never accessed them.

So what is the problem? Is it a weak implementation? Poor information dissemination? Or inadequate reporting?

The Department of Migrant Workers (DMW) is now the lead agency. Yet the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA) remains central because it manages the welfare fund contributed by OFWs themselves.

This is where the issue becomes sensitive.

OWWA is funded by membership contributions—traditionally US$25 per contract. That money, in principle, belongs to the members. It is not general government revenue.

If that is so, should not the governance of OWWA reflect member ownership? Should its chairman and board be elected, at least partly, by OFW members rather than appointed entirely by the President? And should there not be stronger safeguards to ensure that OWWA funds are used strictly for the benefit of members?

There have been persistent public questions in the past about whether OWWA funds were tapped for purposes not directly benefiting contributing members, including the payment of “blood money” in certain cases. Whether justified or not, such controversies highlight the need for transparency. If the fund belongs to OFWs, accountability must run directly to them.

Meanwhile, the deeper reintegration challenge remains economic reality.

The Philippines deploys over two million OFWs annually, and remittances reach more than US$35 billion a year—roughly 8–9% of GDP. That money props up our economy. But when workers return, they confront a painful wage gap. A technician earning the equivalent of ₱80,000 a month abroad may find only ₱20,000–₱25,000 locally.

No livelihood seminar can erase that gap overnight.

That is why many reintegration stories end in “circular migration”—returning home, exhausting savings, and leaving again.

Even the BPBH grant of ₱20,000, while helpful, is modest. A sari-sari store or small poultry project may start with that amount, but sustainability requires market access, mentoring, and ongoing support—not just a one-day Entrepreneurial Development Training.

To its credit, the government is modernizing. The DMW has centralized services into a digital “Single System” app, and there is talk of a proposed “Bagong Balikbayan Act” that would require reintegration planning even before the worker leaves the host country. That is a step in the right direction. Reintegration should not begin at NAIA. It should begin abroad.

Still, we must ask a fundamental question: Why is reintegration so difficult?

Perhaps because our development model still depends heavily on labor export. As long as overseas employment remains more attractive than domestic opportunity, reintegration will always be uphill.

Reintegration is not just about loans or counseling. It is about building an economy where coming home is not a financial downgrade.

Until we create quality jobs, protect OFW-owned welfare funds with full transparency, and truly empower returnees as investors and entrepreneurs—not just beneficiaries—reintegration will remain more a promise than reality.

Our OFWs deserve more than applause at the airport. They deserve a country worth coming home to.

RAMON IKE V. SENERES


www.facebook.com/ike.seneres iseneres@yahoo.com senseneres.blogspot.com 09088877282/04-03-2027

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

HOW IS THE CRIME RATE COMPUTED IN THE PHILIPPINES?

HOW IS THE CRIME RATE COMPUTED IN THE PHILIPPINES? When we talk about the crime rate in the Philippines, we often assume that the figures we see are accurate reflections of reality. But have we ever paused to ask—how exactly is the crime rate computed? Where does this data come from, and how reliable is it? The computation of the crime rate in the Philippines is officially handled by the Philippine National Police (PNP). The formula itself is straightforward: Crime Rate = (Total Reported Crimes / Total Population) x 100,000 This simple equation gives us the number of crimes per 100,000 people, allowing for fair comparison across regions and time periods. However, the reality behind these numbers is more complex than it appears. Data from the Ground The foundation of our national crime rate is empirical data collected at the grassroots level—from individual police stations scattered across the country. Every reported crime is logged in local police blotters, forming the buil...
Read more

GREY AREAS IN GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS

GREY AREAS IN GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS Dear Mr. President: May I ask who is going to be the arbiter or referee whenever there are overlaps in functions between two or more government agencies? I imagine that there would be no problem if these agencies would just cooperate and collaborate with each other, but what if they are unable to settle their differences and they would just end up throwing blame at each other or finger pointing at each other? Allow me to cite some examples. Who is supposed to take the lead in waste to energy projects? Is it supposed to be the DENR that is supposed to handle waste? Or is it supposed to be the DOE that is supposed to handle energy generation? Or is it supposed to be the DILG since it is the one that could direct or influence the waste to energy projects of LGUs? Who is supposed to take the lead in producing and promoting the use of biofuels? Is it supposed to be the DA, since the production of biofuels is supposed to be all about planting biofuel ...
Read more

BATTLING A MENTAL HEALTH EPIDEMIC

BATTLING A MENTAL HEALTH EPIDEMIC It is already a well-established fact that the Covid-19 pandemic also triggered what could be called a mental health pandemic. It does not mean however that since the Covid-19 pandemic has practically slowed down, that the mental health pandemic has also slowed down. For the record, no one has officially declared the mental health problem is already a pandemic, but I suggest that we already make that declaration, so that we could respond to the problem with the attention that it needs. As far as I know, no one has declared that the Covid-19 pandemic is officially over, with most governments merely saying that it is now reduced to being a manageable epidemic, whatever that means. What is clear however, is that no one has also declared that the mental health pandemic is also over, in fact many governments would even hesitate to call it an epidemic. The fact remains however that globally, 1 out of 8 are affected according to the WHO, and locally, at least...
Read more