www.soriano-ph.com

LINK: ‘Note Verbale‘, Manila Times (Sunday-Career Section) - 25 November 2007 Issue

Occupation refers to the principal activity that a person does during his lifetime to earn a living. And occupation is normally left to the individual’s own choosing.

To earn a living, an individual could opt either to accept employment, to be engaged in some profession, to be an entrepreneur, or to be an investor.

Employment means having to be in the service of another person or entity called the employer that directs and controls the material details of the work to be performed. The arrangement between the employer and the employee is always defined or even limited by a contract, whether express or implied, that is usually subject to some minimum standards imposed by laws under the theory that the state must afford appropriate protection to labor. The employee is paid for the services rendered in expectation of his or her contribution to the employer’s productivity, generally driven by the employer’s motivation to realize a profit.

A profession, on the other hand, arises when a specialized field of human activity transforms itself as an occupation through merit and fitness obtained through a formal education and normally after passing state-sponsored qualifying examinations. The practice of most professions is regulated by the government and the professionals are bound by some rules or norms of ethical standards.

The entrepreneur, a word first defined by an 18th-century Irish economic theorist, Richard Cantillon, is a person who assumes the inherent risks of initiating and operating a new enterprise or venture as an occupation by mobilizing the factors of production of land, labor and/or capital also for the purpose of making profits. The entrepreneur is the business owner.

An investor is someone who commits capital in order to gain financial returns. Treating investment as an occupation means making money out of existing monies and resources most often out of passive income like interest, rent, royalties, dividends or some forms of speculative gains.

Typically, a person’s occupation starts with employment. Many would end up in this state until retirement day. If monies were saved or some assets were acquired out of employment, they could be used to change their occupation or start another one either as an entrepreneur or an investor or both. Without such assets though, the person is bound to live either a life of misery or dependency until his retirement from this world. Some gifted employees may also climb up the apex of the corporate ladder and be an entrepreneur in their own right using other people’s money and resources.

Many people would choose the path of spending more years of study to possess a bona fide standing in a regulated profession. Most starting out professionals would begin their career as an employee, often justified by the sense of a lack of experience, while the gutsy others would rather embark immediately on entrepreneurship as a mode of carrying out their vocation. Success in a professional career also provides the professional the opportunity to become an investor.

Entrepreneurship is a good option because it permits people to exclusively enjoy the profits arising from the value of their own hard work. Simply stated entrepreneurship is self-employment, and that means being an employer and employee at the same time. Every successful entrepreneur eventually becomes an investor.

Obviously, the most comfortable and ideal of these occupations is to become an investor. And this is simply because investors make their own money and resources work for them with least human effort and risk. But to be one, the individual needs to muster a good amount of resources from employment, from the practice of profession or from entrepreneurship. The only exception perhaps would be those who were born in a silver platter or those who got married to someone with a silver spoon. Otherwise, to attain the station of an investor necessitates hard work.

In the scheme of things though, each of these occupations provides the dynamic engine to complete the economic cycle of society.

At the end of the day, every person despite their occupational beginnings should strive to become an investor as a reward for a lifetime of hard work.

LINK: ‘Note Verbale‘, Manila Times (Sunday-Career Section) - 24 June 2007 Issue

Valdas Adamkus proved to himself and to the world that there is nothing a person cannot do, said author and life coach, Dr. Cherie Carter-Scott.

Adamkus emigrated to the United States in 1949 at the age of 23 after joining the underground movement against the Soviets in his teens and escaping to Germany in the process. In an interview he related this experience in this wise: “I survived and even managed to get on a ship that was to take me to America. All I had with me was a small backpack which contained a change of underwear and a book — and five dollars in my pocket. I earned my passage doing odd jobs on board the ship, and as I was leaving the ship upon arrival in the States, the captain said that he thought I “would make it real big” in life… It was very encouraging to hear him say it, the first such encouragement in several years of moving from place to place. . . ”

While in Chicago, he worked as a draftsman and in a car factory. Out of sheer determination, Adamkus finished his degree in civil engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology at the age of 34.

As an engineering student, he was a part of the signature campaign to petition the US government to intervene in the deportations of Lithuanians to Siberia by the Soviets. He also raised strong concerns about Soviet activities of his occupied country with then UN Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld and former US President John F. Kennedy.

Adamkus later worked for the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). He was responsible for the pollution control programs in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin. He also implemented a massive environmental cleanup strategy for the Great Lakes. For his work, former US President Ronald Reagan conferred on him the Distinguished Executive Presidential Rank Award, the highest honor that can be bestowed upon a civil servant.

After Lithuania declared independence on March 11, 1990, Valdas entertained the idea of going back to his native land to help her in the same passion that he did for America. And so in 1998, at 71 years old, Valdas ran and became the President of Lithuania. After successfully winning a court battle on his eligibility to become head of his nation, Valdas immediately renounced his US citizenship at the American Embassy in Vilnius.

Adamkus served as President until 2003 when he ran for re-election but was unexpectedly defeated by populist Rolandas Paksas. The latter however was impeached and removed from office. And Adamkus seized the occasion to run again for the presidency, a post which he held until today at the age of 81.

According to Dr. Scott, when Valdas was asked about his inner process that led him to aspire for the demanding office of the presidency at a time when he was supposed to be retiring, he replied, “There are no limits in life.”

Adamkus enjoys a very high approval rating among the Lithuanians. Since 1998, he has been honored with more than two dozen decorations and recognition by different countries in Europe including Japan. He was also conferred at least sixteen honorary doctoral degrees by various universities in Lithuania, the United States, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Ukraine.

Adamkus described the ecological state of the Lithuanian soul in this manner, “Ecology is a very wide concept indeed. Ecology is cleansing. In the foundation of the Lithuanian mentality there has always been the most essential, age-old and time-tested values — love and respect for the native land, for its history, for the people of our land.”

He views globalization as a process that no country can avoid being affected by, to a greater or smaller extent. He said that, “The worst effects of total globalization can be prevented if the people of a nation have the national identity and awareness inculcated in them from childhood. We do our best to build the whole system of education and national upbringing with this in mind.”

The personal life of Adamkus should be a constant reminder to all overseas Filipinos that no matter where they are now they should not forget that they have only one country to truly love and work for, the Philippines.

LINK: ‘Note Verbale‘, Manila Times (Sunday-Career Section) - 7 January 2007 Issue

The year 2007 started with some good news about the country’s economic performance.

Among other economic accomplishments, government reported that:

First, the exchange rate of the peso against the US dollar closed at 49.03 in 2006, the highest in nearly six years.  And the peso continues to show sustainable strength.

Second, the Bangko Sentral reasonably expects foreign exchange remittance of overseas Filipino workers to post a staggering new record of almost US$12 billion for the year 2006 as soon as all the data are in. And government anticipates a 10 percent increase in such remittances this year. By the way, the figure only reflects remittances coursed through the banking system and formal channels.

Third, the Department of Labor and Employment reported that as early as November 2006, the country had already breached the one million mark in terms of documented deployment of Filipino workers abroad. It represents an increase of no less than 12 percent compared with the previous year.

One need not be an economist to understand that the first was the result of the second and third accomplishments.

There is no dispute that a peso getting stronger each day is music to the ears of government not only because it strengthens the country’s gross international reserves.  More importantly, it significantly eases the pressure brought about by the country’s huge foreign debt. It also means lesser peso spent for the import of essential commodities like crude oil.

As of 2004, the Commission on Filipino Overseas estimated at least 8 million Filipinos already staying abroad. By adding the number of Filipinos leaving the country for greener pastures in another land two years after, it is fair to say that there are at least 10 million Filipinos away from home as of the year 2006.

Using conservative and basic mathematical assumptions, if all the 10 million Filipinos abroad had put in the US$12 billion foreign remittance in 2006, it means that each of them remitted only US$1,200 for the year, or US$100 per month. What does this mean then?

First, it could be that Filipinos overseas do not trust the country’s economy enough, or perhaps the way the government manages it, that they would rather have rather leave behind in the country where they stay a substantial part of their foreign earnings. In which case, the receiving country becomes the real beneficiary of the diaspora.

Second, it could also mean that the so-called record breaking foreign remittances in 2006 is just a tip of the iceberg because overseas Filipinos would rather remit their earnings through underground channels than the usual banking system that is perceived to take advantage of the workers’ money to earn more money for the banks.

If these first and second assumptions are not correct, then it is possible that no less than 10 percent of the country’s population are unfortunately toiling abroad with their sweat and blood but chose to just close their eyes as they earn pitiful and meager salaries simply to keep the economy of their respective families afloat.

If from the extrapolation earlier shown that each overseas Filipinos only remit US$100 per month, it may be too much to assume that on the average each of them earns at least US$500.  But even the amount of US$500 is only about P25,000 per month.

Meanwhile, the continuing appreciation of the peso also diminishes the purchasing power of the families of the country’s overseas Filipinos.

The current situation of the Philippine economy therefore is a great contradiction.  Behind the good news is the bad news that the country has a ‘camouflage’ economy, with the harsh realities waiting to unfold in the future.

PUBLISHED: ‘Note Verbale‘, Manila Times (Sunday-Career Section) – 1 May 2005 Issue

It is ironic that Labor Day celebrations have become the vehicle to highlight the oppressive and inhumane condition of the working class in the country, and anywhere in the world. 

Peter McGuire, the apparent “Father of Labor Day”, began working at age 11 in the streets of New York City sometime in 1863 to help support his family. In those days, many children had to do factory work for low pay 10 to 12 hours a day, even when they were sick and exhausted physically. From that experience, an adult McGuire staged strikes and mounted mass actions to call attention to, and protect, the rights of workers. For his ‘adventurism’, McGuire became known as “disturber of the public peace”.  His mass-led actions culminated in the first Labor Day parade in New York City on September 5, 1882, which US Congress later recognized as a federal holiday.

Even May 1, acknowledged as Labor Day by many countries, was conceived out of a violent labor protest in Haymarket Square in Chicago in 1886, resulting in the death and injury of workers and policemen. This event led the World Workers Central Organization during its 2nd Congress in Paris, France, to declare and commemorate May 1 as Labor Day in 1889.

The Philippines marks Labor Day with the traditional activities, promises and rhetoric assuring a better condition for Filipino workers. Enigmatically, many labor issues that confront McGuire centuries ago have persisted to the present time. Perhaps, this is because labor is always outsmarted by capital in its interface with production. This leaves the government to act as a fulcrum to strike a balance between the many conflicting interests of labor and capital. The government is expected to play an unenviable role in breaking the impasse between these sectors. Government apathy in this regard has led to poverty, hunger, economic collapse, breakdown of peace and order, bloodshed, or even uprising and revolution.

The labor situation in the country demands greater challenges for the government.  In a research prepared by the Commission on Filipinos Overseas, there are at least 7.7 million Filipinos abroad as of December 2003, most of them working for foreign employers.  This influx of Filipino workers abroad puts a pressure on the government to protect their interest to the hilt. If it is difficult enough to harmonize the interest of labor and capital within the country, how much more between our Filipino workers overseas and their employers in a foreign country?  The problem becomes more complicated if we take into account the differences in migration, labor, and socio-economic policies between a foreign state and our country. And this is further complicated by discrimination, prostitution, illegal migration and recruitment, exploitation, corruption, complacency of some diplomatic and consular officials, and indifference, plain and simple.

Given the enormity of the perennial concerns of the Filipino workers, here and abroad, is there any reason to call for a celebration? Or perhaps, it may be more fitting to view May 1, Labor Day, as a commemoration of the continuing struggle of the working class that would seem endless in the course of time.