LOUISIAN MANINDIGAN

Sa harap ng mga pagbubulgar ni Jun Lozada tungkol sa ma-anomalyang ZTE-NBN transaksyon, saan lulugar ang mga Louisian? Patuloy bang tikom ang ating mga labi ngunit halos lahat ng mga universidad sa Maynila ay pinagsisigawan ang agarang pagbitiw sa tungkulin ni Gloria Macapagal Arroyo? O tayo ay tatalima na lamang sa pananaw ng mga Obispo ng Simbahang Katoliko na ayaw pababain sa pwesto si PGMA?

Bilang isang mamayang naghahangad ng katotohanan, tayo sana ay makiisa sa mga Pilipinong nagnanais na magbitiw na sa pwesto si PGMA. Na minsan tayo ay nanindigan para sa katotohanan ay isa lamang sa ating mga maipapamana sa darating na henerasyon.

Panahon na...Louisian manindigan!

Tamang gawain

Ano lang ba kung gumawa ka ng tama?

Kung gumawa ka ng tama walang problema

THE "GODS" ARE BACK

The "Gods" are back from their trip in Palawan for their "management planning." Ano kaya ang maganda nilang pinag-usapan sa Palawan? Last year, as a result of their "management planning" in Bohol, the "Gods" required the students to "clean" their armchairs. Maybe today, as a result of their "management planning" in Palawan, the "Gods" will require the students to clean the walls and the ceilings.

Sa mga empleyado? The "Gods" will just send us (the employees) for one day at a secluded seminary and have our recollection. Sayang, hindi rin natin makikita ang underground river sa Palawan.

To borrow the words of Lozada, the ZTE-NBN witness, how could we "moderate the greed" of these "Gods?" Kawawa naman ang mga guro na nagpapakahirap na magturo at ang non-teaching na nagpapakahirap ng magtrabaho...

But seriously speaking, this trip by the "Gods" is in reality "rest and recreation." Buti pa sila...

SLU Walkway Anomaly (Northern Dispatch)

An elected officer of the Saint Louis University Supreme Student Council (SLU-SSC), here, who was later expelled from his position after he demanded that funds used in the construction of the SLU covered walkway be returned to the student fund exposed what he described as anomalous transactions by its president.

NEEDED BUT REJECTED. The questioned SLU covered walk path should be funded by university fund not from the student fund, student leaers asserted. NORDIS Photo

Joined by other officers of the Executive committee and the Congress of Louisians, the student leader also demanded transparency even from the SLU administration.

In an interview, Elton Jun Veloria, secretary for public relations of the SLU-SSC said he was expelled by SSC Pres. Michael Carl Flores after he and two other officers questioned the proposal to allocate some P400,000 from the student fund for the school’s shaded walk path.

Veloria said the construction of the project should be shouldered by the SLU administration and not funded by the student central fund.

“Tuition and other fee increases are justified by the administration that 20% of the increases would be spent on infrastructure projects,” Veloria cited a Commission on Higher Education (Ched) guidelines on tuition hikes.

As this developed, the Student Affairs Office directed the SSC complaint to the student court because it was heavily premised on violations of the SSC Constitution and By-laws. The student court is inexistent and has yet to be installed, according to the student leaders.

Illegal and anomalous

Veloria also questioned Flores and the SLU administration for pushing through with the construction in December despite prior disapproval by the Congress of Louisians and the absence of an approved budget, citing provisions of the SSC constitution and by-laws and other rules on fund releases.

The student body scrapped the item for the walk path installation from the General Appropriations Act on December 11.

On December 22, three officers of the Execom retracted their earlier approval for the allocation of funds for the walk path project on three grounds, which included the absence of a canvass form attached in the resolution; the failure to indicate an amount and the absence of a Congress concurrence.

In the same letter Veloria, Cortez and Valerie Marcius Aquino, secretary for audit, said it is not the SSC’s responsibility to construct the project, iterating the 20% ToFI for improvement of facilities.

Two subsequent retraction letters were sent on January 4 and 7.

The written account he signed with Rolirey H. Flores, speaker of the Congress of Louisians and Paul Christian Cortez, secretary for Finance stated that the project was done in December when no student was in school.

The officers also questioned the release of funds from SSC funds, despite irregularities, which Veloria claims, is known to the administration.

“The haste by which the project was implemented and the timing cast a darker show of doubt on the Shaded Walk,” the written statement said.

Student responsibility

Veloria’s group reminded Flores that their responsibility as student council officers is to protect the rights and welfare of students.

They also clarified that they are not against the construction of the walk path because it would benefit students, especially during inclement weather. They made it clear that their responsibility is to ask the university to shoulder the construction and not draw the funds from the SSC.

The Anakbayan-SLU chapter supported Veloria and his group demand that funds used to construct the walk path be reverted to the student fund. It said the funds were mysteriously drawn without the knowledge of the secretary for finance.

“The SSC is a training ground for the youth to become worthy people’s servants and not a training ground for graft and corruption,” Anakbayan said in a support statement.

Arbitrary

Veloria maintains that he was arbitrarily expelled by Flores, who cited as ground four absences in the Execom meetings, which he contested in another letter.

Anakbayan believed the expulsion did not go through due process.

It supported Veloria’s analysis that he was expelled due to Flores’es disregard for democratic processes as embodied in the SSC by-laws.

Flores alleged that he could not find proof that Veloria was never absent in meetings because no documents could be found in the SSC office.

The appointment of John Balignasay as a replacement for Veloria was not approved by the Congress of Louisians. Instead the Congress ruled that Veloria be reinstated for lack of basis for expulsion.

Aquino and Cortez are reportedly threatened of expulsion for supporting Veloria. Like Veloria, they were voted into office by the student population, according to Anakbayan.

Flores, 29, a barangay captain in a downtown barangay, here, is a nursing student.

Nordis tried, but failed to get an interview with Flores.

HOLIDAY ECONOMICS

“HOLIDAY ECONOMICS” (The power of the President of the Philippines to move certain holidays to another date.)

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9492

AN ACT RATIONALIZING THE CELEBRATION OF NATIONAL HOLIDAYS AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE SECTION 26, CHAPTER 7, BOOK I OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 292, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF 1987

a) Regular Holidays

New year’s Day - January 1
Maundy Thursday - Movable date
Good Friday - Movable date
Eidul Fitr - Movable date
Araw ng Kagitingan - Monday nearest April 9
(Bataaan and Corregidor Day)
Labor Day - Monday nearest May 1
Independence Day - Monday nearest June 12
National Heroes Day - Last Monday of August
Bonifacio Day - Monday nearest November 30
Christmas Day - December 25
Rizal Day - Monday nearest December 30

b) Nationwide Special Holidays:

Ninoy Aquino Day - Monday nearest August 21
All Saints Day - November 1
Last Day of the Year - December 31

In the event the holiday falls on a Wednesday, the holiday will be observed on the Monday of the week. If the holiday falls on a Sunday, the holiday will be observed on the Monday that follows.

Provided, That for movable holidays, the President shall issue a proclamation, at least six months prior to the holiday concerned, the specific date that shall be declared as a nonworking day:

Provided, however, The Eidul Adha shall be celebrated as a regional holiday in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao."


Approved: July 25, 2007
(Sgd.)GLORIA MACAPAGAL – ARROYO
President of the Philippines

BASIC RIGHTS OF WORKERS

Right to Self-Organization and Collective Bargaining

The right to self-organization is the right of every worker, free of any interference from the employer or from government, to form or join any legitimate worker's organization, association or union of his or her own choice. Except those classified as managerial or confidential, all employees may form or join unions for purposes of collective bargaining and other legitimate concerted activities. An employee is eligible for membership in an appropriate union on the first day of his or her employment.

Collective Bargaining involves two parties:

1. the representative of the employer
2. a union duly authorized by the majority of the employees within a bargaining unit called exclusive bargaining agent.

It is a process where the parties agree:

1. to fix and administer terms and conditions of employment which must not be below the minimum standards fixed by law
2. to set a mechanism for resolving their grievances

The result of collective bargaining is a contract called collective bargaining agreement (CBA). A CBA generally has a term of five years. The provisions of a CBA may be classified as political or economic. Political provisions refer to those refer to those which define the coverage of the CBA and recognize the collective bargaining agent as the exclusive representative of the employees for the term of the CBA. Economic provisions refer to all terms and conditions of employment with a monetary value. Economic provisions have a term of five years but may be renegotiated before the end of the third year of affectivity for the CBA.

Sacrifice

Sacrifice is not an economic policy. And it is certainly not a goal for which the nation should be striving. Besides, it is not the people who need to sacrifice, it's the bloated government.

Jack Kemp

Tuition Fee Increase and Employees' Salary Increase

This next school year, 2008-2009, another round of tuition fee increase (TFI) is being baked by the SLU Administration. While the Student Supreme Student Council (SSC) is planning its move on this planned TFI, the employees must also brace themselves for the possible increase in their salaries.

In the past, the increase in the salaries of the employees was done through percentage system. So if the TFI is 5%, in all probability, the increase in the employees' salaries will also be 5% percent. Granting, therefore, that your salary is 10,000 a month, the 5 % increase of your salary is only 500 pesos a month (10,000 x .05 = 500; magiging 10,500 a month) or if your salary is 20,000 a month, the 5 % salary increase is 1,000 pesos (20,000 x .o5; magiging 21,000 a month). But if the salary is 60,000 a month (like Deans?), their 5 % increase salary increase is 3,000 pesos a month (60,000 x .05; magiging 63,000 a month). Unfair? Nakikita natin na sa PERCENTAGE SYSTEM mas lumalaki ang agwat ng sweldo ng mga Administration officials sa sweldo nating mga rank-and-file.

That is why, the employees should insist that the salary increases should be accross-the-board. Meaning, if the SLU Administration so desires, the amount of 1,500 pesos should be given equally to all employees regardless of rank. Pero pag ayaw ng Administration, kaya ba nating ipahayag ang ating mga saloobin sa freedom park?

He says - She says (A valentine's day blog)

A man is a person who, if a woman says, "Never mind, i'll do it myself, " lets her.

A woman is a person who, if she says to a man, "Never mind, i'll do it myself," and lets her, gets mad.

A man is a person who, if a woman says to him, "Never mind, i'll do it myself, " and he lets her and she gets mad, says, "Now what are you mad about?"

A woman is a person who, if she says to a man, "Never mind, i'll do it myself," and he lets her, and she gets mad, and he says, "Now what are you mad about?" says, "If you don't know I'm not going to tell you."

From Sunstar Baguio

Quoted from Sunstar Baguio Newspaper:

"Tuesday, February 12, 2008
SLU leader in trouble for P400k walkway
By Rimaliza Opiña

THE president of Supreme Student Council (SSC) of Saint Louis University (SLU) is embroiled in a controversy involving the P400,000 worth shaded walkway that connects three buildings of the university. SSC president Michael Karl Flores was accused of irregularity when he implemented the construction of three walkways for the Diego Silang, Waldo Perfecto, and Otto Hahn buildings despite the absence of appropriations for the project under the SSC's general appropriations act. According to Elton Jun Veloria, former SSC secretary for public relations, construction of the walkway was done during the Christmas break-at a time when officers did not have time to "stop" its installation. Veloria, along with SSC secretaries for finance and audit Paul Christian Cortez and Valerie Marcius Aquino, withdrew their support to the resolution approving construction of the walkway after the Congress of Louisians ratified the proposed budget, but without the P400,000 for the walkway, as proposed by Flores. "It was only on the third week of December 2007 we found out that not only did the Congress of Louisians remove the shaded walk from the budget proposal, it also scrapped the P400,000 proposed budget which you placed in that item," Veloria, Cortez and Aquino pointed out in their letter to Flores dated January 7. Veloria said they are not against the project, but stressed funds for the purpose should come from the SLU administration, not from funds allotted for the SSC. He added that the SLU accounting office did not release any amount because the project was not approved. Veloria ceased to be an officer of the SSC, last month, reported for incurring a succession of absences during meetings of the SSC executive committee. The SSC constitution and bylaws provide officers who fail to attend four consecutive meetings will be deemed removed from office. However, Veloria asserted that he was not absent in any of their meetings. He claimed his removal was meant to restrain opposition to the project. Sun.Star tried to get Flores's comment via his cellular phone, but he did not respond. However, in a document obtained by Sun.Star, Flores argued that the proposed budget was deemed approved, because the Congress of Louisians failed to ratify the budget within the required time period, which is 10 days from the day it was submitted for appropriation. Section 10 of SSC budget processing procedure deems the proposed budget as the final budget if Congress of Louisians fails to pass an appropriations act, within the prescribed period. In response, the Congress of Louisians, through its speaker Rolirey Flores said the congress acted within the time period and was transmitted to the execom. This issue was referred to the Student Affairs Office. This in turn was referred to the student court. However, Veloria said the matter would remain unresolved because members of the student court have yet to be appointed. The student court is composed of 10 members. It was created by the Congress of Louisians under the committee on appointments. "

Quotable Quotes

Sa tingin po ba ninyo walang makikinig sa mga sasabihin ninyo? Take it from Gandhi who said,

"You may think your actions are meaningless and that they won't help, but that is no excuse, you must still act." -- Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

Summer Loading

So summer is just a few months away. The Administration is allegedly having problems on how much to spend in case it pursues its plan to go to Palawan (?). (Nakakainggit!) However, the faculty members are having problems on where to get money to spend during the summer because of the yearly problem on summer loading.

To solve this problem on summer loading, the UNION submitted several suggestions (please see below).

The answer of the SLU Administration to these proposals? NONE

These proposals were given last year. Yet up to this time, the SLU Administration has not given any answers to solve the problem on summer loading. Hanggang kalian tayo magtitiis?

So kung titingnan po natin, puwede namang ma-solve yung problema sa summer loading dito sa loob ng University. Pero, mukhang sa labas na naman ng SLU eto mabibigyan ng solusyon. Nag-iisip tuloy ako…The SLU Administration is depriving many of its teaching employees their rightful salaries (nine units) during summer. Mayaman naman ang SLU!!! Napakakaunting bagay, hindi man lang nila maibigay…

So here are the proposals submitted to the Administration to solve the summer loading:

1. Decrease the minimum class size during the summer term. The minimum class size should be decreased from thirty -five (35) to a MAXIMUM of twenty-five (25) students in each class.

At present, SLU claims that thirty-five (35) students should be the minimum class size for the summer term for a “break-even” situation in terms of expenses and salaries of teachers. However, in the past years, when the total enrollees of SLU for each semester is lower, SLU allowed even fifteen (15) or twenty (2) students for the summer classes. Ironically, at the moment when the enrollees at SLU have dramatically increased, the number of students for each class during the summer term has increased.

2. Maintain a thirty-five (35) student MAXIMUM for each class (all classes) during the summer term.

This means that each class (all classes) during the summer term should have a MAXIMUM of thirty-five (35) students. Logically, no class then has more than 35 students.

3. Averaging

During the summer term, some classes have full fifty students (50) but some classes also have less than the SLU imposed thirty-five (35) student-for-each-class. Since some classes already have 50 students, the classes with less than 35 students should not be dissolved. With this, the need to fill the class to a maximum of 35 students is already solved with the “excess” of other classes.

4. Paid summer in-service work

Faculty members will be required to do summer work such as curriculum development, syllabi upgrading, research work, module making, and other possible work related to their teaching. This summer work will be given equivalent units.

5. Return to the old system of assigning permanent general faculty members for each of the colleges.

Before globalization, general education teachers were permanently assigned to specific colleges. With this, there was no problem on summer loading since the Deans of the colleges were obliged to offer subjects for their general education teachers during the summer.

For instance, before globalization, a general education math teacher is permanently assigned in the College of Natural Sciences (CNS). He/She was always given full nine units during the summer term since the Dean of the CNS had to offer basic mathematics subjects for the summer so that his/her general education math teacher would have something to teach.

At present, general education teachers are now placed under the supervision of a specific college (ex. CHS, CICS). But there is nothing wrong of putting specific general education teachers in specific colleges so that the Deans of the specific colleges have to see to it that his/her general education teachers have something to teach during the summer. But the supervision and evaluation of these general education teachers stay with their mother college (ex: CHS, CICS).

6. Close coordination with the mother college of general education teachers on the subject offerings during the summer term.

At present, the different colleges decide on what general education subjects to offer during the summer. Such that these colleges are not knowledgeable on what subjects to offer so that the general education teachers will have full summer load.

This could be solved when the Deans of the different colleges coordinate with the mother college (ex. CHS, CICS) of general education teachers to discuss subject offerings during the summer.

7. The problem on NSTP

During the summer term, NSTP classes are offered to first or second year students with a class reaching 100 students. These classes of 100 students each are usually held for the whole morning or the whole afternoon. With this set-up, summer load for general education teachers will be greatly lessened since most of the students who are supposed to take basic subjects during the summer are enrolled in NSTP. Most students would only be free then in the morning or in the afternoon which set-up reduces the number of subjects they take for the summer.

In the past, ROTC was offered regularly every Sunday of the semester. There should be no reason why the same set-up should be applied in the present for the NSTP.

This may be done even while at present there are still unresolved issues in the giving of NSTP loads to teachers. Last time we heard, there are still no written guidelines on the selection and rotation of NSTP teachers. In fact, many teachers attended NSTP seminars and are therefore qualified to teach.

8. Allow incoming freshmen to enroll for summer

First year students of some colleges are fully loaded and over loaded during their first semester in SLU like the College of Nursing and the College of Natural Sciences. If some of the basic subjects are offered during the summer for these colleges, it would greatly reduce their stress during their first semester. Likewise, there would be additional load for general education teachers for the summer.

Qoutable Qoute

Para sa mga may desk (Sino ba sa SLU ang me mga desk?) ;-)

"A DESK IS A DANGEROUS PLACE FROM WHICH TO VIEW THE WORLD"

Contributions (blogs and monetary)

Dear colleagues in the university

If anybody out there wants to contribute to the Kris at Kalasag ( blogs) you can email us at this address: krisatkalasag@gmail.com.

Those who want to give monetary contribution for the printing of the Kris at Kalasag newsletter you can see us personally at Perfecto bldng room 302 or email us and tell us where to pick up your contributions.

We understand your concern and would keep your identity anonymous if you want it that way.

Thank you and more power!

Trivia naman tayo!!!

Did you know that...

a nursing extension of SLU is being put up in the campus of our sister school in La Union (SLC)?

Its construction has started last December. The construction is being done 24/7.

CONTRACTUALIZATION OF SLU COLLEGE TEACHERS

QUESTION:

In general, what law governs the probationary employment of teachers in private schools or higher educational institutions (HEIs)?

ANSWER:

According to Policy Instructions No. 11 issued by the Department of Labor and Employment, "the probationary employment of professors, instructors and teachers shall be subject to standards established by the Department of Education and Culture". Said standards are embodied in Section 75 (now section 93) of the Manual of Regulations for Private Schools, to wit:

“75. Full time teachers who have rendered three consecutive years of satisfactory service shall be considered permanent. (Emphasis supplied)

The legal requisites, therefore, for acquisition by a teacher of permanent employment, of security of tenure, are as follows:
1) the teacher is a full time teacher;
2) The teacher must have rendered three consecutive years of service; and
3) such service must have been satisfactory.

Now, the Manual of Regulations also states that "a full-time teacher" is "one whose total working day is devoted to the school, has no other regular remunerative employment and is paid on a regular monthly basis regardless of the number of teaching hours" (par 77); and that in college, the normal teaching load of a full-time instructor shall be eighteen hours a week. (University of Santo Tomas, et al. v. National Labor Relations Commission, et al., 182 SCRA 371, 376-377, February 15, 1990)

Further, under DOLE-DECS-CHED-TESDA Order No. 1, s. 1996 (February 7, 1996), the college teacher must possess “at least a master’s degree.”

QUESTION:

While the Manual of Regulations for Private Schools (MRPS) requires “three consecutive years of satisfactory service,” for a private school teacher to acquire permanency, may this 3-year probationary period be lowered?

ANSWER:

YES. The law (Art. 281, Labor Code) does not prohibit the parties from lowering the probationary period of three years. The “…parties to an employment contract (may) agree otherwise…” (Buiser vs. Leogardo, G.R. No. L-63316, July 13, 1984)

The lowering of the probationary period is that which is provided in the COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT (CBA) between the employer and the employees union. So, it is perfectly all right if the CBA will provide for two (2) years probationary period.

QUESTION:

After rendering (2) consecutive semesters or two years as provided in the CBA, will the probationary teacher AUTOMATICALLY acquire permanent status?

ANSWER:

In the case of Cagayan Capitol College vs. NLRC (G.R. Nos. 90010-11, Sept. 14, 1990), the Supreme Court held that “upon the termination of the three-year probationary period (under Section 93, Manual of Regulations for Private Schools), the teacher becomes permanent…on the compliance with the third requisite that the services of said teacher during the probationary period was satisfactory.”

Applying the same principle with respect to a CBA probationary period (for example, two years), the teacher becomes permanent after rendering the two-year probationary period if the services of the teacher was also satisfactory based on his/her evaluation ratings.

To allow the employer to refuse to make the teacher permanent after finishing the probationary period of satisfactory performance, would make the teacher contractual forever. The Supreme Court said:

“It is noteworthy that what determines whether a certain employment is regular or casual is not the will and word of the employer, to which the desperate worker often accedes. It is the nature of the activities performed in relation to the particular business or trade considering all circumstances, and in some cases the length of time of its performance and its continued existence.” (De Leon v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 70705, August 21, 1989. 176 SCRA 615, 620-621)

In another case, the Supreme held the dismissal of an employee after the expiration of his contract as illegal because he has already satisfied the probationary period provided by law. This is the case of A. Bongar vs. NLRC and AMA Computer College, G.R No. 107234, 24 August 1998, where the Supreme Court held:

“It must be noted that the principal cause of the petitioner’s dismissal was the alleged expiration of his teaching contract. This contention, however, is negated by the fact that petitioner, as the record shows, had rendered service for nearly four (4) years. AMA’s contention that petitioner could not qualify as a regular employee for failure to comply with the three-year service rule is likewise unavailing. On this point, we concur with the opinion laid down by the NLRC, to wit:

“If this line of reasoning (which we perceive to be too technical to serve the ends of justice) is adopted in the process of determining the regularity of a teacher’s employment, the possibility of a teacher becoming infinitely non-regular is not too far-fetched to expect. For all that unscrupulous school has to do to negate or render meaningless the rule on probationary employment, is to inflexibly confine the recruitment or employment of its teachers to part-time basis, or to revert as what happened to the complainant herein, an originally full-time status to mere part-time bases to prevent in any way the incumbent teacher from becoming regular, a subtle way of circumventing the Labor Code provisions on probationary employment.” (underscoring supplied)

In Kimberly Independent Labor Union for Solidarity (KILUS) vs. Drilon and KILUS vs. NLRC (GR. No. 77629; G.R. No. 78791, May 9, 1990), the Supreme Court held that a casual employee with one year of service of service becomes regular:

“As long as the employee has rendered at least one year of service, he becomes a regular employee with respect to the activity in which he is employed. The law does not provide the qualification that the employee must first be issued a regular appointment or must first be formally declared as such before he can acquire a regular status. Obviously, where the law does not distinguish, no distinction should be drawn.”

In Zosimo Cielo vs. NLRC (GR No. 78693, January 28, 1991), Zosimo Cielo, a truck driver, was employed by Henry Lei Trucking Company. He signed a contract of employment where one of the stipulations was:

“1. That the term of this Agreement is six (6) months from and after the execution thereof, unless otherwise earlier terminated at the option of either party.”

After rendering service from June 30, 1984 to end on December 31, 1984, Zosimo was formally notified of the termination of his services on the ground of expiration of his contract. When Zosimo filed a case with the then Ministry of Labor, the trucking company argued that the contract having expired, it was the prerogative of the trucking company to renew it or not as it saw fit.

But the Supreme Court held:

“The private respondent’s intention is obvious. It is remarkable that neither the NLRC nor the Solicitor General recognized. There is no question that the purpose behind these individual contracts was to evade the application of the labor laws by making it appear that the drivers of the trucking company were not its regular employees.

Under these circumstances, the private respondent hoped to be able to terminate the services of the drivers without the inhibitions of the Labor Code. All it had to do was refuse to renew the agreements, which significantly, were uniformly limited to a six-month period. No cause had to be established because such renewal was subject to the discretion of the parties. In fact, the private respondent did not even have to wait for the expiration of the contract as it was there provided that it could be “earlier terminated at the option of either party.”

By this clever scheme, the private respondent could also prevent the drivers from becoming regular employees and thus be entitled to security of tenure and other benefits, such a as minimum wage, cost-of-living allowances, vacation and sick leaves, holiday pay, and other statutory requirements.”

This pattern of harassment employed by employers has not escaped the attention of C.A Azucena, Jr., a respected labor lawyer and author, who commented:

“ x x x in the great preponderance of cases, the employer’s efforts (of harassment) are much more covert (or hidden) and are generally disguised to escape detection.” (The Labor Code with Comments and Cases, Azucena, 1996, p. 209)


QUESTION:

In SLU, if a teacher has just finished the mandated two-year probationary period and is due for permanency, may the university hire NEW contractuals instead of making the teacher permanent or regular?

ANSWER:

NO. The contractual employee “shall be given priority in case a regular position is available.” [Art. 7, Section 7.13 (a), CBA]. Hence, the university should not hire NEW contractuals.


QUESTION:

In SLU, what is being done to solve this problem?

ANSWER:

This issue has been brought before the attention of the SLU Administration. However, the SLU Administration believes that when the teacher finishes his/her probationary period (two years) with satisfactory performance based on the yearly evaluation, the teacher does not automatically become permanent. The SLU still maintains that it has the management prerogative whether to make the teacher permanent or not. That is why until now, there are many teachers in SLU who have rendered more than two years but are still contractual.

There are now two pending cases before the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) to determine the legality of the argument of SLU. One case (where the teacher rendered 3 consecutive years) was decided in favor the employee, that is why the employee is now reinstated. The other case, where the teacher has rendered two consecutive years, is still pending.

Printing of the Kris at Kalasag

The time has come for the printing of the hard copy of the Kris at Kalasag. According to one comment by a reader: there is a need to print a hard copy because despite the presence of its blog site not all employees have access to the net and thus can not read the blogs found in the site. The reader even added that he/she is willing to contribute to the cost that will be incurred in the printing. I hope he/she wouldn't mind that I will hold him/her to his/her words. So if he/she is reading this I hope he/she would bring her contribution to Perfecto bldng, room 302. Look for Sir Jops Andaya.

The invitation is also open to our dear friends out there. We hope that you too can and will be able to send or bring your contributions to Sir Jops Andaya at room 302, Perfecto bldng.

We will be looking forward to our working together to keep our fellow employees informed of the issues affecting our dear university. Thank you in advance.

INSIDER STORIES

ABOUT OUR TAXES

So, last December 27, 2008, the UFESLU and the SLU met to discuss the problem about our taxes. By the way, if we refer to SLU , this would refer to Atty. Arnulfo Soriano, Mrs. Evangeline Trinidad, Dr. Noel De Leon and sometimes Ms. Geraldine Sanil. During this meeting, while SLU was represented by a CPA (Mrs. Trinidad) and a lawyer (Atty. Soriano), the UFESLU was also represented by Ms. Alice Lerma, Mr. Edwin Valencia (CPA), Atty. Rigoberto Gallardo (CPA), and Mrs. Elvira Dacayo (CPA) (o di ba!?). With overwhelming proofs and evidences that the UFESLU presented, the SLU Administration was open on the "reclassification" of the economic package as "rice subsidy." With this reclassification, the 12,000 rice susbsidy would be non-taxable. On the scholarship program of an employee, the tuition fee is also non-taxable provided the employee signs a contract with the Administration agreeing on an equivalent number of years for every year of service.

On the tuition fees of our dependents, the UFESLU presented a similar case at De La Salle Unversity (DLSU) where its dependents are considered as scholars and consequently, the tuition fees of their dependents are non-taxable. All these proposals were submitted to the SLU Administration for its consideration. The UFESLU believes that, with all our proposals supported with BIR Rulings, the SLU Administration decides in favor of the employees. Now, what if the SLU Administration refuses to consider as a scholarship grant the educational benefit of our dependents despite a clear BIR Ruling in our favor? Are the 1,400 union members willing to voice their disagreement outside of their work places?

ON THE PHILHEALTH

Upon a check with the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (Philhealth), the individual contributions of all SLU employees were last updated in March 2006. So for nearly two years, our individual contributions were not updated. However, SLU regularly remitted our contributions to Philhealth in "bulk." Ibig sabihin, lahat ng pera na binayad natin eh ibinayad ng SLU sa Philhealth pero hindi sila nag-submit ng listahan sa Philhealth kung sino yung mga nagbayad. In a clearing meeting about this issue, the SLU Administration blamed the employees for not doing the initiative in checking the status of their contributions with Philhealth. So tayo daw ang may kasalanan. SLU never admitted any lapses because of this unfortunate incident. The solution? Some individuals are planning to file a "class suit" with Philhealth to determine the culpability of SLU. Para sana hindi na maulit eto...interested to join?

DELOADING OF SOME IPR FACULTY MEMBERS

A certain faculty member of the Institute of Philosophy and Religion (IPR) was not re-hired "allegedly" because of the end of his contract. He has been with the University for three (3) continuous years. This faculty member filed a case with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) which decided the case in his favor. Nanalo siya. In the decision, he may be actually reinstated or reinstated merely on payrol. Ang ginawa ng SLU, he was actually reinstated by giving him a load of 24 units. Ang problema, seven (7) IPR faculty members were deloaded and their loads were given to him. The UFESLU cried foul over this action. SLU ang may kasalanan na tinanggal nila yung teacher tapos nung ma-reinstate eh babawasan ng load yung iba?

In a Clearing Meeting, the SLU Administration believes that its action is legal. So, the case will surely go outside of SLU para malaman kung sino talaga ang tama. Napapansin ninyo, dumarami ang mga kaso laban sa SLU? Hindi sana eto mangyayari kung aaminin "nila" ang kanilang mga pagkakamali. Sino ba naman tayo para hindi marunong magpatawad.