LETTER TO A LAWYER
Dear Attorney,
I am a security officer assigned to a private hospital in North Caloocan City. I have been working there continuously since December 5, 2022, and I am still actively serving. My concern revolves around the Health Emergency Allowance that the government grants to eligible workers in healthcare institutions, especially those who diligently served during the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent public health emergencies.
As a security officer, I have supported the hospital’s operations by ensuring the safety of healthcare personnel, patients, and visitors throughout critical times—most notably during the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite these risks, I have not received any of the Health Emergency Allowance or similar benefits that, to my understanding, should be extended to all workers in a hospital setting who have similarly risked exposure to public health hazards.
I respectfully seek your legal advice regarding my rights. I would like to understand the legal basis for my claim to be included in the grant of these allowances, as well as the administrative remedies available to me if I continue to be excluded. Any guidance or clarifications you can provide would be greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
A Concerned Security Officer
LEGAL ARTICLE ON PHILIPPINE LAW: UNDERSTANDING HEALTH EMERGENCY ALLOWANCES FOR NON-MEDICAL PERSONNEL IN PRIVATE HOSPITALS
Introduction
In the Philippines, healthcare institutions—whether public or private—form the frontline defense against epidemics, pandemics, and other health crises. Government policies, especially in the wake of COVID-19, have recognized the crucial role of healthcare workers and, in certain instances, non-healthcare personnel working in high-risk environments such as hospitals. While doctors, nurses, and allied health professionals are at the forefront of patient care, it is important to acknowledge that other critical personnel, including security officers, janitors, ambulance drivers, and other support staff, face potential exposure to the same hazards. This legal article provides a comprehensive exploration of laws, regulations, and administrative issuances relevant to the granting of Health Emergency Allowances and similar benefits to private hospital security officers and other non-medical personnel. It aims to clarify the legal basis for claims, the classification of eligible workers, and the available remedies under Philippine law.
I. Overview of Relevant Laws and Issuances
Republic Act No. 11494 (Bayanihan to Recover as One Act or “Bayanihan 2”)
Enacted in 2020 as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Bayanihan 2 authorized the provision of special allowances and benefits to health workers, including a “Special Risk Allowance” (SRA). Although primarily directed toward public health workers, the implementing rules and subsequent memoranda recognized that certain private-sector healthcare frontliners may also qualify. The definition of healthcare workers under implementing guidelines sometimes included ancillary staff. This provided a legal basis for private hospital staff—beyond doctors and nurses—to receive hazard pay or risk allowance if they performed COVID-related duties.Administrative Orders from the Office of the President (e.g., Administrative Order No. 42, 2021)
The President issued various administrative orders granting active hazard duty pay and special risk allowance for both public and private health workers directly catering to or in contact with COVID-19 patients. While many of these issuances were broad enough to include support personnel at risk of COVID-19 infection, the actual disbursement frequently hinged on departmental guidance and budget availability. If security officers had direct or high-frequency exposure to suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases, these administrative orders would often be invoked as the legal basis for awarding the allowance.Department of Health (DOH) and Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) Joint Memoranda
Joint memoranda or circulars from DOH and DOLE typically provided the operational guidelines on how private institutions should implement hazard allowances. In many cases, the guidelines recognized that employees who maintained regular presence in areas with COVID-19 patients, or who were assigned tasks that exposed them to higher risk, would be eligible. These guidelines often emphasize the principle that any personnel whose services were essential for COVID-19 response could be included.Local Government Regulations
Certain local government units (LGUs) may issue ordinances or guidelines extending hazard pay or allowances to medical and non-medical frontline workers within their jurisdiction. For instance, an LGU might adopt a broader definition of “healthcare frontliner,” thereby covering more categories of workers.Relevant Provisions Under Labor Laws
The Labor Code of the Philippines (Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended) generally governs the terms and conditions of employment, but does not specifically mandate “health emergency allowances.” Instead, hazard pay or additional allowances can often be stipulated in employment contracts, collective bargaining agreements (CBAs), or mandated by special laws in extraordinary circumstances (e.g., a pandemic).The Universal Health Care Act (Republic Act No. 11223)
This act ushered in reforms aimed at improving equitable access to healthcare. Although not explicitly spelling out hazard allowances for non-medical staff, it underscores a public policy of ensuring adequate healthcare resources, workforce protection, and system resilience.Magna Carta of Public Health Workers (Republic Act No. 7305)
While RA 7305 applies primarily to public health workers, it articulates the principle that individuals who work in healthcare settings under hazardous conditions are entitled to hazard pay. This principle, though not always directly extended to private hospital employees, offers a guiding philosophy that may influence policy decisions for private institutions.
II. Who Qualifies as a “Health Worker”?
Traditional Definition
Commonly, the term “health worker” refers to licensed medical professionals, including doctors, nurses, midwives, and allied health professionals such as pharmacists and physical therapists. This is often the immediate classification used by lawmakers, thereby making it challenging at times for hospital-based security guards to obtain the same benefits.Expanded Definition Under COVID-19 Regulations
During the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the government and certain administrative orders broadened the definition of “health worker” (or “healthcare frontliner”) to encompass individuals who were not strictly medical professionals but whose functions were indispensable in limiting the spread of the virus. Security officers stationed at hospital entrances, for instance, often handled tasks like temperature checks, enforcing mask mandates, or monitoring patient entry and exit flows, placing them at a heightened risk of exposure.Concept of “Risk Exposure”
A common thread in determining eligibility for emergency allowances is the risk of exposure to contagion. If a security guard’s duties regularly bring them into contact with or proximity to confirmed or suspected COVID-19 patients, or to high-risk hospital areas like emergency rooms and COVID-19 wards, that worker may have grounds to assert eligibility under existing laws and guidelines.Specific Institutional Policies
Private hospitals may have internal policies recognizing the essential support roles played by security officers, janitorial personnel, and other staff. Sometimes, such policies are crucial in bridging the gap between statutory language and on-the-ground realities.
III. Legal Bases for Claiming Health Emergency Allowances
Bayanihan 2 Special Risk Allowance
One of the most cited legal bases for hazard or emergency allowances during the pandemic was the “Special Risk Allowance” (SRA) authorized under Bayanihan 2. While not unlimited in scope, the law’s implementing rules recognized that private hospital personnel exposed to COVID-19 risk could receive an SRA. If a security guard can demonstrate that their duties put them in direct contact with high-risk areas or activities, they can make a strong case for inclusion.Administrative Orders from the President
Certain administrative orders, especially those issued in 2020–2021, explicitly allowed for additional pay for workers assigned to COVID-19 operations. These presidential directives often included language about “health workers in the private sector who provide critical and essential services in hospitals.” If a security officer’s tasks align with “critical and essential” duties, they could reasonably claim eligibility. It is crucial, however, to understand the eligibility requirements, such as the need for documentation from the hospital or the DOH acknowledging one’s exposure and role.DOH Guidelines and Local Ordinances
DOH guidelines typically outline the procedural steps: submission of names by the hospital administration, validation of roles, and calculation of exposure time. If the private hospital neglected to include non-medical personnel on their official roster for hazard pay or emergency allowances, the security guard could inquire as to why and request an explanation or official re-evaluation.
In some LGUs, municipal or city ordinances expanded coverage or offered additional incentives for hospital workers. Security officers could check with their LGU for specific local provisions on hazard allowances.Contractual Agreements and Company Policies
Although not strictly mandated by the Labor Code, hazard pay or other allowances can be established through employment contracts or hospital policies. Employees who can show a legal or policy basis within their institution for claiming these allowances may have a valid contractual argument, even if statutory coverage is ambiguous.
IV. Legal Remedies and Enforcement
Filing a Complaint with DOLE
Employees who believe they have been unlawfully denied benefits may file a complaint with the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE). The DOLE can conduct an administrative investigation, verify employment records, and determine if the employer has complied with relevant laws or administrative issuances. While DOLE’s jurisdiction often pertains to wage and labor standards, it can also address issues related to statutory or government-mandated allowances, provided there is a clear legal or regulatory directive.Approaching the Hospital Management / Human Resources Department
Before initiating any formal legal proceedings, security officers would be wise to pursue internal grievance procedures, if available. By presenting evidence of their exposure to health risks (e.g., assignment to areas where COVID-19 patients pass, performance of tasks that involve contact or screening), they may persuade management to include them in the next round of emergency allowance distributions.Seeking Assistance from Labor Unions or Worker Associations
If a security officer is part of a union or a recognized worker’s association, that group may negotiate collectively or intervene on behalf of its members. Union representatives could assist in determining whether the terms of a collective bargaining agreement or institutional policy entitle security officers to hazard pay or other allowances.Local Government Intervention
Sometimes, the local government unit (LGU) can provide clarifications or directly facilitate the release of allowances. Security officers should monitor local guidelines or contact their city or municipal labor office, where staff might provide instructions on how to proceed with a claim for hazard allowances under municipal or city ordinances.Court Action
If all administrative remedies fail, employees may bring their claims before the regular courts. However, litigation can be time-consuming and expensive. In many instances, the DOLE’s dispute resolution and labor arbitration processes are more expedient in resolving matters about the denial of legally or administratively mandated benefits.
V. Common Challenges and Pitfalls
Non-Inclusion in Hospital’s Official Roster for Allowances
A frequent obstacle is the failure of the employer to include certain categories of workers (such as security personnel) in the official list submitted to the DOH or the relevant agency for allowances. If names are not listed, funds for such personnel are never requested, resulting in non-payment. This deficiency can usually be addressed by presenting evidence of one’s duties and actual exposures.Changing Guidelines and Deadlines
Over the course of the pandemic, the government released numerous guidelines and deadlines for the submission of claims or supporting documentation. Missing a filing window can complicate an employee’s ability to receive a particular allowance, although retroactive claims might still be possible if new guidelines or additional funding windows open up.Differences Between Public and Private Institutions
Because RA 7305 (Magna Carta of Public Health Workers) explicitly covers government or public health institutions, confusion often arises as to whether private hospital workers, including security personnel, are entitled to hazard pay or similar benefits. The typical solution involves referencing special or temporary laws passed during health emergencies that encompass private sector workers.Proof of Risk Exposure
Even though security guards often have front-facing duties, the burden of proof may still be on them to demonstrate they faced significant exposure risk. Documentation or testimonies (e.g., from supervisors or coworkers) may be needed to show consistent contact with areas where COVID-19 risks were high. Security logs, timekeeping records, or official memoranda from management can also serve as strong evidence.Availability of Funding
Even if there is a valid entitlement, actual payment might be constrained by budgetary limitations or delayed releases of funds from the national government. This can lead to partial or delayed allowances, often causing further confusion and frustration among workers.
VI. Practical Steps for Security Officers Seeking Inclusion
Document Your Duties and Exposure
Keep written records of your daily tasks, especially noting any shifts or routines that put you in direct contact with potential carriers of infectious diseases. If you have memoranda, schedules, or assignments referencing COVID-19 security protocols, collect these as evidence of your job’s risk component.Request Official Clarification from Management
Send a formal letter to your hospital’s administration or Human Resources department. Politely but firmly inquire about your eligibility for Health Emergency Allowances, referencing relevant laws and guidelines. Ask for a written response to ensure accountability and clarity.Coordinate with Colleagues
If other security officers or non-medical personnel have successfully received allowances, find out how they processed their claim. Similarly, if multiple similarly situated workers are being denied, a group approach may offer more pressure and visibility.Consult DOLE and DOH Bulletins
New issuances from the Department of Health and the Department of Labor and Employment can clarify or expand coverage. Keep track of these announcements and consult with local officials. If new guidelines confirm that your category of work is covered, reference them in your official communications.Seek Legal Assistance
If internal resolutions are unsuccessful, you might consider consulting a lawyer or a legal aid organization. They can help you ascertain the strength of your claim, gather documentary evidence, and possibly write a demand letter invoking specific legal provisions that support your entitlement.
VII. Conclusion and Key Takeaways
Security officers who serve in private hospitals are crucial frontline personnel, especially during public health emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Their role in screening, controlling entry and exit points, and enforcing safety protocols often places them in close proximity to infected or high-risk patients. While earlier laws tended to focus on “health workers” in the conventional sense (e.g., licensed medical practitioners), subsequent administrative issuances have recognized the essential contributions and exposure risks faced by non-medical staff. Under Philippine law, notably Republic Act No. 11494 (Bayanihan 2) and various administrative orders, security officers who can demonstrate substantial exposure or risk of exposure while performing essential tasks during a health crisis may be entitled to special risk allowances or hazard pay.
To successfully claim such allowances, security officers must overcome several challenges, including administrative delays, ambiguous or shifting eligibility guidelines, and potential non-inclusion in official hospital rosters. Therefore, documentation is vital—security logs, shift schedules, and written instructions detailing one’s duties help prove exposure risk. Hospital management, when apprised of these duties, may realize it has an obligation—legal or policy-based—to include security officers in the distribution of allowances. If initial internal channels fail, legal remedies through the Department of Labor and Employment, local government offices, or even court actions remain possible alternatives.
Ultimately, though there may be uncertainty in the law, the overarching public policy trend in the Philippines is to broaden, not restrict, coverage of hazard allowances in times of critical health emergencies. Stakeholders such as private hospital administrators, government agencies, and lawmakers are increasingly sensitive to the fairness of ensuring that all personnel at risk, whether providing direct clinical care or performing essential supportive duties, receive due recognition and financial compensation. Indeed, the principle of equity—that those who bear the same hazards should receive similar protections—underscores the moral and legal argument in favor of granting Health Emergency Allowances to security officers.
Disclaimer: This legal article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute formal legal advice. It reflects the current legal framework in the Philippines as of this writing. Individuals seeking specific guidance are advised to consult with a qualified attorney or approach the relevant government agencies for personalized advice based on their particular circumstances.