POEA Rules on Maximum Placement Fees for Overseas Employment of Household and Service Workers

(Philippine Legal Context)

I. Introduction

In the Philippines, the protection of overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) is a declared policy of the State. Household and service workers (often referred to as “household service workers” or HSWs, including domestic helpers, caregivers in some cases, and similar occupations) are considered a particularly vulnerable class of OFWs because they work in private homes and are usually isolated from public view.

One of the central protective mechanisms is the strict regulation—and, for HSWs, general prohibition—of placement fees. This article explains the legal framework, the maximum placement fee rules, the special treatment of household and service workers, what fees may still be collected from them, the liabilities of recruitment agencies and employers, and the remedies available to workers.

II. Legal and Institutional Framework

  1. Constitutional Policy The 1987 Constitution mandates the State to “afford full protection to labor, local and overseas” and “to protect the rights and promote the welfare of migrant workers and their families.” This constitutional backdrop informs POEA/DMW rules on placement fees and recruitment costs.

  2. Migrant Workers Act (RA 8042, as amended by RA 10022 and RA 11641)

    • RA 8042 (Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995) established core protections for OFWs, prohibited illegal recruitment, and provided for regulation of recruitment activities.
    • RA 10022 strengthened protections, clarified illegal recruitment acts, and enhanced penalties.
    • RA 11641 created the Department of Migrant Workers (DMW) and transferred to it the powers and functions of the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA). In practice, however, the rules are still widely referred to as POEA Rules, and earlier POEA issuances remain relevant unless superseded.

  3. POEA Rules and Regulations For land-based workers, including HSWs, the main source is the POEA Rules and Regulations Governing the Recruitment and Employment of Land-based Overseas Filipino Workers (various series: 2002, 2016, and updates), plus POEA Governing Board Resolutions that set policy guidelines (including on household service workers and placement fees).

    These rules:

    • Define “placement fee”
    • Prescribe when it can be charged and up to what maximum
    • Enumerate additional fees that may be lawfully collected
    • Prohibit certain collections entirely for specific categories, including household service workers

III. Key Legal Concepts

  1. Placement Fee (Basic Concept) In POEA rules, a “placement fee” is generally understood as the amount charged by a licensed recruitment agency to a worker as payment for the recruitment and placement services. It is distinct from:

    • Documentation costs (e.g., passport, NBI)
    • Medical tests
    • Government clearances and contributions
    • Training costs when allowed by law or regulation

  2. Household and Service Workers / Household Service Worker (HSW) While different issuances refine the terminology, an HSW typically includes:

    • Domestic helpers
    • Houseboys/housemaids
    • Nannies and babysitters
    • Cooks working in private households
    • Other workers performing household chores or services in a private home environment

    The classification matters because HSWs are given special protection on placement fees: they generally cannot be charged any placement fee at all.

  3. Licensed vs. Unlicensed Recruitment

    • Licensed Recruitment Agency – Holders of a POEA/DMW license to recruit and place workers overseas; subject to maximum fee rules and may collect certain charges within those limits.
    • Unlicensed (Illegal) Recruiters – Any entity recruiting without a proper license or authority; any collection of fees from workers is presumptively illegal and may be prosecuted as illegal recruitment.

IV. General Rule on Maximum Placement Fees (for Most Land-based OFWs)

Before focusing on HSWs, it’s helpful to understand the general rule under POEA regulations for most land-based workers:

  • The maximum placement fee that a licensed recruitment agency may charge is typically an amount equivalent to one (1) month’s basic salary, and only if:

    1. The employment contract or host country law allows the worker to pay such fee; and
    2. The worker is not in a category exempted from paying placement fees.

  • Collection of the fee is usually allowed only after the worker has been issued a valid employment visa and has signed the appropriate employment contract approved by POEA/DMW.

However, this general rule does not apply to household service workers, who are treated differently and more protectively.

V. Special Rule for Household and Service Workers: No Placement Fee

1. The Core Policy: Zero Placement Fee

Under POEA policy and later DMW practice, household service workers are not supposed to pay any placement fee. Instead, the employer bears the full cost of recruitment and placement charged by the foreign or Philippine recruitment entities.

This “no placement fee” policy for HSWs is a cornerstone of protective regulations, developed in response to:

  • Widespread reports that domestic workers were deeply indebted before departure due to high placement fees,
  • The especially vulnerable nature of their work environment, and
  • International standards on domestic workers and migrant recruitment costs.

2. Interaction with the “One Month’s Salary” Rule

The “one month basic salary” maximum placement fee rule is inapplicable to HSWs. For them, the rule is stricter:

  • Maximum placement fee for household and service workers: effectively zero.
  • Any collection disguised as “loan,” “processing fee,” or other label that is essentially a placement fee can be considered a violation.

3. Coverage

The no placement fee rule generally applies to:

  • Household service workers deployed to countries where POEA/DMW has authorized deployment, including (but not limited to) many Middle Eastern countries, Asian destinations (e.g. Hong Kong, Singapore), and others, subject to existing deployment rules.
  • The exact scope can vary across time by destination, but the policy thrust remains: HSWs are not to be charged placement fees.

VI. Distinguishing Placement Fees from Allowable Worker-Paid Costs

Even with the no-placement-fee policy, HSWs may still shoulder certain personal documentation and government costs, provided that:

  • The charges are actual, necessary, and receipt-supported; and
  • The recruitment agency is not making a profit from these charges (i.e., no overpricing or “service charges” on top).

Common examples of permissible worker-paid costs (subject to change depending on POEA/DMW issuances and host country agreements) typically include:

  1. Passport Fees

    • Fees for obtaining or renewing a Philippine passport (paid to the Department of Foreign Affairs).

  2. NBI Clearance and Similar Clearances

    • For NBI clearance and other character or police checks in the Philippines, if required.

  3. Medical and Psychological Examinations

    • Pre-employment medical examinations (PEME) and other necessary tests, when not shouldered by the employer under a specific arrangement or bilateral agreement.
    • In some deployment programs, the employer or foreign recruitment agency must shoulder medicals; in others, the worker may initially pay but must not be overcharged.

  4. Government Contributions and Insurance (if legally required)

    • OWWA membership contribution
    • PhilHealth / national health insurance contributions (or their OFW variants)
    • SSS or other mandatory pension contributions
    • Mandatory insurance coverage for OFWs under the Migrant Workers Act and its regulations

  5. Skills Training and Assessment Costs (Only When Required and Allowed to be Worker-Paid)

    • Training or competency assessments mandated as a condition of employment, subject to specific policy guidelines that may place the burden on the employer, government, or shared.

Crucially, recruitment agencies cannot label a placement fee as a “training fee” or “orientation fee” if the amount is clearly excessive or not reflective of actual cost. Overcharging under these heads may constitute illegal recruitment or fraudulent recruitment practices.

VII. Prohibited Practices and Common Evasions

  1. Charging Beyond Authorized Fees For HSWs, any amount collected as a fee for placement services is prohibited, even if:

    • The worker “voluntarily” agrees,
    • The collection is made through a financing scheme orchestrated by the agency,
    • The payment is made to a third party connected with the agency, or
    • The payment is disguised as “training,” “accommodation,” or “documentation service” but is grossly disproportionate to actual cost.

  2. Loans and Salary Deductions to Recover Placement Fees Agencies and employers are not allowed to:

    • Arrange loan schemes where the worker’s salary is used to repay “placement fee loans,” or
    • Deduct from the worker’s salary amounts that are effectively repayment of recruitment costs that should have been borne by the employer.

  3. Collection of “Processing Fees” Beyond Actual Cost Even if certain processing costs are allowed, recruitment agencies may not add markups and then call them “processing fees.” They may charge only the actual cost or any clearly authorized service fee within regulatory limits.

  4. Pre-Signing of Receipts and Waivers Agencies may not require workers to sign:

    • Blank or falsified receipts indicating that no fees were collected when in fact they were;
    • Waivers of their right to refund or complain; or
    • Statements that misrepresent the true nature of the amounts paid.

    Such practices can support a finding of illegal recruitment, fraud, or misrepresentation.

  5. Collection Before Job is Secured Collecting any form of placement fee or significant monetary contribution before a valid job offer or visa is secured and before a POEA-approved contract exists is a classic hallmark of potential illegal recruitment.

VIII. Administrative and Criminal Liability

  1. Administrative Liability (POEA/DMW) Licensed recruitment agencies found charging illegal or excessive fees, especially to HSWs, face:

    • Suspension or cancellation of their recruitment license
    • Blacklisting or delisting from accredited recruiters
    • Fines and other administrative penalties
    • Requirement to refund illegal collections to the worker

    Officers and responsible employees of the agency can also be held personally liable administratively.

  2. Criminal Liability for Illegal Recruitment

    Under RA 8042 as amended:

    • Illegal recruitment includes charging or accepting, directly or indirectly, any amount greater than the allowable fees as prescribed by the government.
    • Charging any placement fee at all to a category of workers who are not supposed to pay placement fees (like HSWs) can be treated as illegal recruitment.

    Illegal recruitment may be:

    • Simple illegal recruitment – punishable by imprisonment and fine; or
    • Illegal recruitment in large scale (if committed against three or more persons) or by a syndicate (if done by three or more conspirators) – treated as an offense akin to economic sabotage, with higher penalties.

  3. Civil Liability and Restitution

    Beyond criminal and administrative penalties, agencies and their officers can be held liable to:

    • Refund illegal or excessive fees
    • Pay damages for the worker’s actual losses and, in appropriate cases, moral and exemplary damages

    Employers who connive with agencies to violate fee rules may also face liabilities under labor and civil law, and can be excluded from future hiring from the Philippines.

IX. Remedies for Household and Service Workers

  1. Filing Complaints with DMW/POEA HSWs who have been charged placement fees may:

    • File a complaint or request for assistance with the DMW (or its regional offices and POLO/Philippine Overseas Labor Office/Embassy Labor Sections abroad).
    • Seek refund of illegally collected amounts and administrative sanctions against the agency.

  2. Filing Criminal Complaints If the acts constitute illegal recruitment:

    • Workers may file a criminal complaint with the Department of Justice, the National Bureau of Investigation, or the Philippine National Police, which can then proceed with investigation and prosecution.

  3. Assistance from OWWA and Other Government Agencies As OFWs, household workers who are members of the OWWA and other programs can obtain legal assistance, counseling, and, in some cases, representation.

  4. Use of Documentary Proof Workers should keep:

    • Receipts and acknowledgment slips
    • Loan documents and promissory notes
    • Text messages, emails, and social media exchanges
    • Contracts and vouchers

    Even if agencies try to avoid issuing formal receipts, any proof of payment (bank slips, padala/remittance receipts, etc.) can help establish illegal collection.

X. Practical Implications for Stakeholders

  1. For Household and Service Workers (HSWs)

    • As a rule, you should not be paying any placement fee for overseas household work.
    • If someone tells you “it’s standard” to pay several months’ salary for a domestic work job abroad, that is a red flag.
    • You may need to shoulder some documentation or medical costs, but they must reflect real, official rates, not inflated or arbitrary amounts.

  2. For Recruitment Agencies

    • You must internalize the policy that for HSWs, employers—not workers—pay the placement fees.
    • Your contracts with foreign principals should clearly allocate recruitment costs to the employer.
    • Any scheme that shifts these costs to workers, directly or indirectly, risks administrative sanctions and criminal prosecution.

  3. For Employers (Foreign and Local Principals)

    • Philippine law and regulations require you to shoulder recruitment and placement expenses for HSWs.
    • Attempting to “recover” these costs through salary deductions or loans charged to the worker may expose you and your partner agencies to legal liability.
    • Compliance with these rules supports sustainable recruitment and reduces the risk of contract cancellations and reputational damage.

  4. For Policy Makers and Advocates

    • The no-placement-fee rule for HSWs is closely connected with broader efforts against debt bondage, trafficking in persons, and labor exploitation.
    • Continuous monitoring, enforcement, and public education are crucial to ensure that the policy’s protective purpose is realized in practice.

XI. Conclusion

In the Philippine legal framework, household and service workers deployed overseas occupy a specially protected category of migrant workers. While the general rule in POEA regulations allows recruitment agencies to charge up to the equivalent of one month’s basic salary as placement fee to most land-based workers (subject to strict conditions), this rule is expressly displaced for HSWs.

For household service workers, the policy is clear and firm:

No placement fee should be charged to the worker; the employer must bear the recruitment and placement costs.

Any attempt to circumvent this—whether through disguised fees, loans, salary deductions, or inflated “processing” or “training” charges—can give rise to administrative sanctions, civil liability, and even criminal prosecution for illegal recruitment.

Understanding this framework helps workers recognize and resist exploitation, guides agencies and employers in lawful recruitment practices, and supports the State’s constitutional mandate to afford full protection to labor, particularly to the most vulnerable migrant workers employed in private households abroad.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

Lawyer Login

 
 
Privacy Policy         Terms of Use         Lawyer Login