Dear Honorable Chair and Members of the PRB-SW:

With  urgency. we bring to your attention the onerous effects on social workers of Resolution No. 3, Series of 2019 which you issued on July 31, 2019 , effective August 21, 2019. Said resolution requires us to present a) proof of payment for initial registration, and b) a Certificate of Good Standing (COGS) for the renewal of the Professional Identification Card (PIC). Both documents are to be issued by the accredited and integrated professional organisation (AIPO), i.e. the Philippine Association of Social Workers Inc. (PASWI).

Section 3 of R.A. 10847 provides the rationale as it requires all registered and licensed social workers to unite under one national organisation. With the designation of PASWI as AIPO, all social workers are compelled to become its members; hence, the additional requirements.

Unfortunately, the PASWI implementing guidelines pertain only to the fees it will collect from applicants for the issuance of COGS. Each applicant is required to pay at least P1,850. This has led to puzzlement, questioning, and reflection among social workers, leading to this petition.

We strongly urge you to suspend the enforcement of Resolution No.3, S.2019 for the following reasons:

1. Absence of a consultative, democratic and inclusive process with social workers. The resolution was adopted and the guidelines enforced sans consultations with associations of social workers and official information dissemination using popular platforms. Apart from PASWI, there are at least six other professional organisations. We were taken aback, especially by the fees we must pay to obtain the COGS. We were also saddened and disappointed, even angered, knowing how our profession gives premium to process as much as the outcomes.

2. Lack of material time for the PRC to prepare administratively and logistically for the enforcement of the Resolution. Twenty days do not seem enough to prepare Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) offices for a uniform and consistent enforcement of the additional requirements. According to social workers who recently applied for the renewal of their PIC, there are PRC offices that collected application fees for renewal but withheld the new PIC in the absence of the COGS. Others issued the PIC even without the COGS.  Then, there were offices that offered to issue the COGS themselves for a fee.

3. Absence of any PASWI-led consultations on the formulation of the implementing guidelines and an official statement on why the issuance of COGS is contingent only on the payment of fees. Perhaps, PASWI lacked time to do  them. The lack of information has led us to ask questions such as : Why does PASWI charge three years back payment for membership and renewal fees totalling P1,800 when the resolution was issued only on July 31, 2019? Why does it enforce the policy retroactively?

We are aware that a policy is enforced prospectively, not retroactively.

For initial registrants, PASWI is collecting P550.00 as membership fee, P600.00 as advanced membership fee for two years for a total of P1,150.00. Then, PASWI deducts P300.00 (representing a year’s membership fee) as “amnesty” , leaving a balance of P850.00. What is the amnesty for?

4. Onerous effects of the additional requirements on social workers. The new requirements translate into additional steps in the process of PIC renewal and payment of exorbitant fees. Many of us have expressed in social media platforms of social workers how burdensome renewing the PIC has become, particularly for those who earn less than the daily minimum wage and spend time and money to go to the nearest PRC office . To renew a PIC, it is estimated that a social worker has to spend at least P13,350 to fully comply with the requirements, i.e. 45 units of Continuing Professional Development unit,  fees for the COGS and the PRC processing costs. The  net effect? We are discouraged from renewing our PIC.

5.  The lack of clarity and unity among social workers on the basis for the issuance of the COGS. At present, PASWI issues COGS based on payment of the required fees. Surely, “good standing “ reflects the positive quality of one’s participation and contributions, not only the capacity to pay.

6. The seemingly abrupt and forced process of uniting and integrating all registered and licensed social workers into an AIPO. While R.A. 10847 provides us with the legal mandate to unite under an AIPO, our social work training tells us this is a painstaking process that needs more than legislated compulsion to achieve. Start where the people are is a basic principle in organising. If you want social workers to unite under one organisation, give us time and space. Let us define the process and identify ways by which we can contribute to the goal. Let us develop and advance an agenda that truly promotes and upholds our rights and interests as social workers. Only then will social workers freely and enthusiastically be part of an AIPO.

We urge you to suspend the enforcement of the resolution until such time that public consultations with social workers, the academe and other stakeholders are held and the following concerns clarified: a) the process and mechanics of how to unite and integrate all registered and licensed social workers into one national organisation; b) an operational definition of what “good standing” means, and its indicators; and c) the adoption of minimal fees for the registration and renewal of PICs.

We laud and support you, Honorable Chair and Members of the PRB-SW , in your efforts to improve professional standards, qualifications and practice. We are willing to comply with legal and administrative requirements governing our profession, provided they emanate from democratic and inclusive processes, are fair and just, and are cognizant of our lived realities as social workers in the field.

We remain one with you in the promotion and advancement of the social work profession. Thank you.

Signed :