SCUTTLEBUTT

SC slaps down SSS

The Supreme Court’s (SC) recent smackdown of the Social Security System’s (SSS) overzealous provision in the 2018 Social Security Act is a sharp reminder that even well-intentioned policies can stumble into unconstitutional territory.

Forcing overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) to fork over three months’ worth of SSS contributions in advance, plus their employer’s share, before they even set foot on a plane was a classic case of the pension fund pushing its luck too far, and the Court wasn’t having it.

In a 40-page decision, the SC en banc torched Rule 14, Section 7(iii) of Republic Act 11199’s Implementing Rules, declaring it a violation of Sections 1 and 6 of Article III of the Constitution.

It tramples on due process and the right to travel, two pillars of the Bill of Rights and lifelines for a workforce that’s long been hailed as the backbone of the economy.

The provision, born during the Duterte administration, mandated that land-based OFWs register as self-employed SSS members and front-load payments before securing their Overseas Employment Contracts. The intent might’ve been to secure their safety net, but the execution was a patent overreach.

The Court didn’t mince words, saying it was “unduly oppressive, unreasonable and repugnant.”

Imagine you’re an OFW, already juggling the stress of leaving your family behind, navigating foreign labor markets, and scraping together funds for the journey.

Now, the government slaps you with a pre-departure tax disguised as a welfare contribution — one that demands you pay not just your share but your phantom “employer’s” too.

The SC’s ruling zeroes in on a core contradiction: the Constitution mandates the state to protect OFWs and promote their welfare, not to fleece them at the gate. Tying their right to leave the country — a right enshrined in Article III, Section 6 of the Constitution — to an upfront payment isn’t protection, it’s punishment.

The Court’s axing of the provision doesn’t kill mandatory coverage; it just demands a smarter, less draconian way to enforce it.

OFWs can breathe a little easier, knowing their right to chase a better life abroad won’t come with an unconstitutional toll booth.

Chicken and egg situation

The demand for eggs has surged which retailers attributed to a significant increase in poultry prices in the first quarter.

According to the Philippine Egg Board Association (PEBA), economic factors are causing the shift in consumer preference.

“The price of pork significantly increased due to the African swine fever, prompting some consumers to turn to chicken. However, in the first quarter of this year, chicken prices also saw a substantial rise, leading many to shift to eggs,” a PEBA official said.

As demand grows, manipulation in egg pricing and sizing has been noted. Uyehara said some wet market vendors manipulate egg sizes to mislead buyers.

Eggs prices can be increased arbitrarily without proper size labeling. Small eggs are sometimes passed off as medium-size.

Consumers are advised to verify egg sizes and weights before purchasing. Consumers should use digital weighing scales in markets to check the accuracy of their purchases.

Due to manipulation by some crafty retailers, proposals to shift from selling eggs by the piece to by weight have become stronger.

Switching to a per-kilo pricing system would not necessarily affect actual prices but would address issues of fraud and handling.

As more people turn to eggs due to increasing meat prices, the demand naturally pushes egg prices up.