The current definition of “unemployed” is based on the International Labor Organization (ILO) concept.
So good to redefine that term’s meaning. Long enough to abuse that word to describe such blood-suckers of the society – or parasites(?), as a victim of [self-fooling] misfortune. I honor those who scan garbages for recyclables, even “barkers” on the streets, the cigar vendors for the effort – even those disabled / incapacitated.
Enough to those unworthy, who hides safely in shadows of “unemployed”. Hiding their lazy-hands, sleepy-eyes, and deceitful hearts in its comforting wall of judgment, and pointing fingers outside to blame for their stake. …
Adopted by the National Statistics Office in its Labor Force Surveys in April 2005, the ILO concept sets three criteria in order for a person 15 years old or older to be considered as unemployed. He or she must be:
- without work, AND
- is actively seeking work OR not seeking work due to valid reasons, AND
- is currently available for work.The old Philippine definition of “unemployed” considered only the first two criteria.
Under the ILO concept, people unavailable for work, or are available for work but are not looking for work, are not considered as unemployed.
Redefining unemployment drastically decreased estimates of unemployed persons.
In NSO’s January 2005 Labor Force Survey, there were 4.03 million unemployed persons under the old Philippine definition. Estimates based on the ILO definition, meanwhile, pegged the number of unemployed at 2.476 million.
NSO published the old Philippine definition and ILO concept estimates side by side in its Labor Force Surveys from July 2004 up to January 2005.
… we choose the ways of our tomorrow, though we have different starting point, it doesn’t mean we can’t cross lines ahead.
