Você está na página 1de 4

Chapter 5

Summary of Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations


This chapter is dedicated to the summarization of the results presented in the previous
chapter, as well as the conclusions that can be derived from the gathered and collected data.
Recommendations for actions as well as further studies are also included in this chapter.
A. Summary of Findings
Through the aid of the above research instrument used, the researchers have found out
that:
1.
a.
b.
c.

Demographical Attributes of the Respondents


That most of the respondents belong to the age range 20-29 years of age;
That majority of them belong to the male sex;
That most of the outsourced employees, educational attainment fall on the

college graduate category;


d. That most of the respondents entered into a contract of employment below
11 months; and
e. That most of the respondents receive a monthly wage ranging from P5000P9999 which is within the scope of the prescribed minimum wage.
2. Extent of Implementation of the Labor Standards
a. It has been found out that the conditions of employment is moderately
implemented with the category mean of 3.39;
b. In terms of wage, such is greatly implemented with the category mean of
3.50;
c. In the implementation of health, safety and social welfare benefits, it was
found out that these benefits are implemented to a moderate extent, with the
category mean of 3.36; and
d. Overall findings in the implementation of the labor standards revealed that
these standards are moderately implemented.
3. Significant Difference between the respondents perception on who has the
actual control and who should have the control in terms of:
a. Wage- Statistics shows that indeed there is a difference in between who
has the actual control of employees and who should have control.

b. Conditions of Employment- It was revealed that there is no difference


between who has the actual control of contractual employees and who
should have control over contractual employees.
c. Social Benefits- Through the data gathered, it was manifested that
indeed there is a difference in between who has the actual

control of

employees and who should have control.


d. Medical and Dental Services and Occupational Safety- Statistics shows
that there is no difference between the actual control of contractual
employees and who should have control over contractual employees.
e. Means to be employed in the accomplishment of work- The study
shows that there is no difference between the actual control of
contractual employees and who should have control over outsourced
employees
B. Conclusions
1. The respondents are not aware of the supposed set up of the triangular
employement arrangement due to the non distribution of information regarding the
scheme.
2. Underemployment can be traced inside the trilateral employment relationship.
3. The present scheme is vulnerable to rooms for the employer to escape the liability
of giving complete benefits to the employees due to lack of security of tenure. This
is in parallel with the findings of Vosco, 2000 by stating that since the agencies
are able to pay the workers significantly less and are not bound by job security
agreements, firms can cut costs and gain flexibility. They also let go of some of the
headache associated with dealing with employees, whether it is hiring, firing,
payroll, unemployment insurance and workerscompensation payments, and so
on.
4. The employers, as perceived by the employees, have moderately complied with the
labor standards but a major flaw in this implementation can be drawn in terms of
payment of the night shift differential.
5. In terms of wages, there is a significant difference in between the perception of the
respondents on who has the actual control of employees and who they want to have
control over them. This signifies that the outsourced employees are not that
satisfied with the present set up that their employers are adopting.

6. As regards to the conditions of employment, there is no difference between who


has the actual control of contractual employees and who should have control over
contractual employees. But the respondents choice on both instances (user firm) is
not the prescribed controller according to the law.
7. With regard to the implementation of the social benefits, there is a difference in
between who has the actual control of employees and who should have control.
This implies that the respondents are not pleased with the present arrangement
wherein such is given to the contractor.
8. There is no difference between the actual control of contractual employees and
who should have control over contractual employees in terms of medical and
dental services and occupational safety, but their choice on both instances (the
contractor) is not the prescribed controller over these standards according to the
law.
9. Statistics shows that there is no difference between the actual control of contractual
employees and who should have control over contractual employees. This that the
respondents want the present arrangement when it comes to the means to be
employed in accomplishing/completing a specific work.
10.
The confusion made by the whole set up, with the question of who is who?
creates disadvantage to the employees because the confusion might lead to the
dilemma of demanding and claiming the employees benefits to a wrong person.
The said dilemma was also recognized by the International Labor Organization
Report V (1), The Employment Relationship, when it stated that workers may
wonder who is responsible for their rights.
C. Recommendations
1. The Department of Labor and Employment must focus on conducting symposiums
and information drive to give all parties inside the arrangement the knowledge of
what is due to them, at the instance of the employeess, and what are the scope of
their liabilities, at the instance of the user and the provider (contractor) ;
2. The legislative department must specifically address the problems in this kind of
relationship. They must adjust the present policies if necessary to address these
problems. This fact was also suugested by Davinov, 2004, saying that the law must
react to the changes in industrial practices, just as industry reacts to changes in law.

The International Labor Organization also suggested this one because, according to it,
Clarification alone, however, may not be enough to regulate cases which do not fall within the
current scope of the legislation. These call for certain adjustments to the limits of the
legislation.
3. The State must deviced a more stricter approach to ensure compliance to the labor
standards not only by those inside the tripartite arrangement, but to all kind of
employment relationship. As the ILO stated that another contributing factor to the
problem of this kind of scheme, which is particularly serious in some countries, is
failure to comply with the law, accompanied by poor enforcement.
4. Future researchers who will explore the same topic must also seek the perception
of the contractors and of the user firms to have a more balanced assessment since
the study only focused on the respondents coming from the work force