More contractuals and casuals in the government

The president should also sign another executive order abolishing casual employment in the government. Those governing should lead by example.

On hindsight, President Rodrigo Duterte might have made a correct decision in signing Executive Order no. 51, abolishing only the illegal forms of contractualization. In not signing the draft abolishing all forms, of contractualization, the president might have been thinking of the 721,282 casuals, contractuals, projects, fixed-term, and job-order workers in government bureaucracy out of a total of 2,301,191 government employees. In the private sector there are only 282,536 non-regular workers. And yet, it is the private sector unions making a lot of noise about ''endo'' and ''5-5-5.'' Why don't they organize the government casuals and protests to promote their interests?

The problem with government is that its functionaries cannot walk their talk. They make it difficult for private sector management to make decisions on work arrangements, and yet government is the number one violator of labor laws. They pressure small- and mediumscale businesses to absorb as regular employees the workers who are already regular employees of contractors and cooperatives yet, inside their own agencies, they have casuals and contractuals. What gives government officials the moral authority to enforce security of tenure when they themselves are the top violators of labor and social legislations?

This is not just about President Duterte or Secretary Bello. They did not invent contractualization in government. Since the times of Marcos, Cory, FVR, Erap, GMA, and PNoy, hundreds of thousands temporary workers have been in the payroll of government. So, why don't these people start with their own organizations, and lead by example? They cannot demand compliance with stringent rules which they themselves are blatantly violating. If I were the business leaders or the officials of the chambers of industry and the employers' confederation, I would bring these people to court and challenge their unilateral, arbitrary, confiscatory, and unjust implementation of laws.

I would accuse them of violating the equal protection clause of the Constitution and also the private sectors' right to property without due process of law. I would challenge their discriminatory acts in court and refuse to comply with any order to regularize until all my legal remedies shall have been exhausted. I would also go to the court of public opinion, write articles and blogs denouncing their arbitrary acts. I will bring the issue to the people and let the people act. If, indeed, sovereignty resides in the people and all authority emanates from them, then the people should tell the government to respect the basic rights of employees, employers, and private sector. No ifs and no buts.