Salaries of Public Health Workers: Rice and Salt Subsistence

PRESS RELEASE
October 11, 2004

Reference: JOSSEL I. EBESATE
Telephone No: 404-3721
Mobile Phone No: 09189276381

After going bald in thinking of means to make both ends meet amidst the ever-increasing prices of goods, now comes the reality of Public Health Workers’ nearing to a hand-to-mouth existence.

Health Workers of the country’s largest state hospital, again launched today a picket rally with noise barrage in front of the Philippine General Hospital (PGH) to emphasize the urgency of their call for a P3,000.00 across the board salary increase for all government employees. This is, following another round of increases in the prices of oil, transport fares, and electricity rates. To further dramatize the worsening economic plight of the Public Health Workers, who have chosen to remain in the country, the protesting PGH Health Workers eat their lunch consisting of rice and salt at the PGH Flagpole Stage. The increase in electricity rates starting on October billing was particularly worrisome to the protesting Public Health Workers because aside from the increase of 28.52 centavos per kilowatt-hour for residential consumer of more than 100 kWh a month; government hospitals will also pay an additional 43.56 centavos per kWh.

The activity held during lunch break (12:00 – 1:00 PM) was again spearheaded by the All U.P. Workers Union, Manila Chapter.

“The elimination of cross-subsidy on government hospital will translate to an average of about P1 million in additional cost per month to PGH, further depleting the already lacking budget allocation for patient services,” says Mr. Jossel Ebesate the Union’s Chapter President. “The monthly take home pay now of most of our Public Health Workers drived us on a rice and salt subsistence, it is already an ominous sign to Malacañang and the ruling elite!” added, Mr. Ebesate.

The increase of 28.52 per kWh for individual household translates to a minimum of P30 additional expense per month on electric bill alone. The added expense adds up to the monthly poverty threshold in the NCR of P16,862.00 (February 2004/NSCB). In contrast, the gross monthly salary of a PGH Utility Worker I (SG1) is just P5,082.00, Nursing Attendant II or Clerk III (SG6) is P7,606, Nurse I (SG10) is P9,939.00, while that of a Medical Officer III (SG18) is P15,831.00, still below the poverty threshold.

Aside from the All U.P. Workers Union, the said activity was supported by the All U.P. Academic Employees’ Union, the PGH Physicians’ Association, the Utility Workers Association of PGH and the Alliance of Health Workers. ###

UPDATE on the Rice Subsidy

Yesterday afternoon, October 4, a pre-bidding conference with prospective bidders for our rice subsidy was held by the UP Manila Bids and Awards Committee I (BAC I). The All UP Workers Union Manila was represented by Mr. Ernesto Ragudos upon my request as I have a prior speaking engagement with 2nd year nursing students of the Manila Central University (Kalookan).

Those who participated were the Primavera Rice Mill Corp. (the previous rice supplier) and Masaganang Sakahan (a Land Bank Subsidiary).

Based on the bidding schedule, the bids will be opened on Monday, October 18, 2004 and delivery of rice is expected one week later. The Union has already opted to have the delivery of rice in the offices and no longer through house-to-house.

There were some problems from PGH but we consider these as procedural in nature that should be addressed by approporiate levels and offices without necessarily delaying further the bidding and delivery schedule.

For those who kept on asking (there were reports that there was already a circulated petition that opted for cash rather than rice) if the fund for rice subsidy would be taken from the P5,000.00 year-end incentive bonus, we reiterate our position that we are against such arrangement. About a month ago, we have already queried the UP Central Administration and we were told by Vice President Martin Gregorio that at this point in time we are only talking here of the rice subsidy, the year-end incentive bonus was yet to be discussed by Management, noting the possibe implications of the austerity program of the National Government.

Considering such responce, we are advising our colleagues especially those from PGH Budget Office to refrain from speculating or disseminating unfounded perceptions. UP Manila's Vice Chancellor for Administration Dr. Arlene Samañiego had already talked with UP Manila and PGH Budget people regarding this matter upon query also from our end.

We note that although the P5,000 Year-end Incentive Bonus was already included in the Internal Operating Budget for 2004 while the P1,000 rice subsidy was not; it is not correct to say at this time that the P1,000 for rice subsidy was taken from the P5,000 UP Bonus - until such time that the Board of Regents had already decided on our Year-end Incentive Bonus.

Indeed, nobody, not even the UP Central Administration could forecast what would happen within the next 2-3 months especially on our fund releases from the DBM considering the twisted priorities of the government. That is, if in a worst case scenario, the DBM withheld our remaining fund releases for the rest of year. In such case, our accumulated savings so far and income would not be enough to cover our budgetary requirements for the rest of the year.

It is therefore within our hands if we just let those people with twisted minds in government to kept on their "irritating entertainment" and self-serving pursuit rather than serve the interest of the people. Or, we the people, show them the exit door.

Can we count on you? or you will just remain a kibitzer on such scenario?

Hanggang "usi" na lang ba tayo kahit nilulublub na sa putikan ang ating Inang Bayan at ginugutom na ang marami sa ating mga kababayan?

Winston Garcia and the Plunder of GSIS

A welfare agency is supposed to look after its members so its funds must be managed well and spent prudently. However, as alleged by critics, it takes only one abusive, highly paid official to profit from the moneys contributed by underpaid employees, much to the consternation of the supposed beneficiaries.

BY DABET CASTAÑEDA
http://www.bulatlat.com/news/4-35/4-35-garcia.html

This government corporation was established for a good cause but it has now become a symbol of corruption.

The Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) was created by Commonwealth Act No. 186 on November 14, 1936, a year after the inauguration of the Philippine Commonwealth. It was mandated to provide and administer compulsory and optional life insurance, retirement benefits, disability benefits for work-related contingencies and death benefits.

Today, about 1.5 million government employees from various agencies, local government units and government-owned and controlled corporations (GOCCs) are members of the GSIS.

The GSIS’ workforce currently consists of 3,104 employees, 52 percent of whom are in the head office at the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) complex in Pasay City. The remaining 48 percent are in the 48 branches and 78 satellite offices nationwide. They are unionized under the Kapisanan ng mga Manggagawa sa GSIS (KMG or workers union) which has about 800 members in the head office alone.

Lost mandate?

Lawyer Jose Cortes, a former director of the Bureau of Legal Assistance of the Department of Agrarian Reform, told Bulatlat over the weekend that today, the GSIS has almost lost its mandate. “Nakalimutan na ang element of service” (They have already forgotten the element of service.).

Cortes retired in 2000 when he reached the retirement age of 65. He enjoyed medical assistance benefit during the first three years of his retirement. However, since mid-2003, he has not received a single cent of his medical assistance benefit.

He said he has traveled back and forth from his home in Malabon to the GSIS head office in Pasay City to inquire about his reimbursements. “The last time I asked, I was told that there is no fund to pay for my medical needs,” Cortes said.

Lost billions

KMG President Albert Velasco, who is also a lawyer, said in a separate interview with Bulatlat, that the GSIS acquires billions every month from the employees’ mandatory contributions. These contributions, called premiums, should go directly to the trust fund, he explained.

Citing the annual report of the GSIS for 2003, premium payments totaled P40 billion ($710.48 million, based on an exchange rate of P56.30 per US dollar) reported under the social insurance fund.
Velasco alleged that the money is being used by GSIS President and General Manager Winston Garcia for his “personal quirks.”

Documents acquired by the KMG show that Garcia made the following extravagant investments: a P1-billion ($17.76-million) loan to the Public Estates Authority; purchase of a P611.8-million ($10.87-million) property in London to pay for the Philippine Embassy office there; and the purchase of various paintings, among them Juan Luna’s Parisian Life which cost the GSIS P45.4 million ($806,394.32).

In his first 10 months in office, Garcia had cash advances amounting to P5.25 million ($93,250.44).
From September 2003 to July 2004, records showed that Garcia had P6,883,006.63 ($122,255.89) in miscellaneous disbursements.

He approved a P700-million ($12.43 million) computerization project even if, according to the KMG, the same computer functions and programs can be obtained for P40 million ($710,479.57) through the GSIS branches.

Garcia also spends P300,000 ($5,328.60) a month for advertisements while spending another P200,000 ($3,552.40) a month for personal legal assistance.

It is this alleged grave misuse of the government employees’ pension fund that has kept Garcia under fire and it comes as no surprise that there is now a groundswell of support for his ouster.

Garcia has denied all charges and challenged his critics to face him in court. His superior, President Macapagal-Arroyo, has asked the embattled GSIS president to explain and she made assurances that everything will be transparent. Bulatlat

A Report on the September 29, 2004 Senate Committee on Education’s Technical Working Group Meeting on the UP Charter

This was an excerpt from an e-mailed Report from Prof. Judy Taguiwalo, National President of the All UP Academic Employees Union. The administrative sector (All UP Workers Union) especially from Manila Chapter although invited for the said Senate Committee TWG Meeting, was not able to send a representative because of tight schedule (we have an emergency Expanded Executive Board Meeting yesterday at around 9:00 for a discussion of our Discussion Guide for the P3,000.00 Salary Increase campaign, and other related plans for the said campaign. Considering our hospital setting (PGH) it is always a struggle to go get people on short notice.

Delen was informed only on September 27 that a meeting of the Technical Working Group for the UP Charter Bills in the Senate was to be held on Wednesday, September 29

Delen, Edvil, Judy, Marco and Ken attended the meeting which was presided by Atty. Quimbo, COS of Sen. Flavier and staff of senators who are members of the Committee on Education.

The UP Administration was represented by VP Diokno, VP Butch Dalisay, VP Rodriguez, Pritchie Legazpi, and two or three other members of the Legal Office.

What actually transpired was again presentations on three key areas: democratization, commercialization and exemption from SSL (which Marco suggested for inclusion). While VP Diokno felt that the discussion was redundant and wanted to proceed to the presentation of a consolidated bill, Atty. Quimbo explained that the process was decided upon by his principal and while he consulted the latter during the break in the hearing, continued with the process.

On governance

We reiterated our position that after 100 years a change in the governance structure from a BOR to a democratically elected UP System Assembly is necessary given that UP has grown from one unit to seven constitutent universities with more than 50,000 students. UPSA will allow representation from Mindanao, Visayas, Baguio, LB, Manila,Diliman and avoid the current Manila-centric composition of the Board. The mere expansion or changes in the BOR would not necessitate a new UP Charter as this would only require an amendment in the present charter.

Academic concerns would still be the purview of the faculty as the Univesity Councils retain the power it is enjoying at present.

The link of UP to the national government is retained through the retention of the membership of the Chair of CHED, the Chairs of the House and Senate Committees on Higher Education and on Education, respectively

There was not too much discussion on these as the lines are quite drawn between a democratically elected UPSA and a small BOR. I think our strength here, relative to the interest of some of the Senators (Pimentel, Biazon) is the concern about the BOR composition being Manila-centric.

There were discussions on actual problems such as the unilateral and anti-democratic actions of the UPLB Dean and the intervention of Pres. Nemenzo in the process of the selection of the Dean of the UP College of Nursing. Diokno said that Pres. Nemenzo was merely concerned about the application of a May 2004 decision of the BOR which was supposed to be for UP Diliman alone (the removal of a search committee, under certain conditions, in the selection of the officers of the university). Once this was clarified, the Dean selected by the College Assembly of the UPCN was appointed. (I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT HERE, BUT NOT IN THE SENATE HEARING, THAT THIS PROCESS WAS ADOPTED BY OUR COLLEGE, CSWCD, IN OUR SELECTION OF OUR NEW DEAN IN NOV. 2003, EVEN WITHOUT THE BOR DECISION) While Marco provided as example that one-semester appointments of more than 150 faculty in Los Banos, Diokno was saying that it was the fault of the Regent and the Acad Union President in LB that up to now she does not have the papers she wanted regarding the cases.

The question was raised by one of the staff whether the problems are really operational rather than structural in nature and again there was an exchange about this.

On commercialization

Delen read the section of HB 2327 (Section 28, 3): To prevent the commercialization of the university, programs, projects or mechanisms to generate revenues and other resources from the land grants and other real property entrusted to the University should be consistent with university’s academic mission and orientation as the premier state university and shall not be meant to replace, in part or in whole, the annual appropriation provided by the national government to the university. Such programs, projects or mechanisms shall require the approval of the UPSA and shall require the approval of the UPSA and shall be subject to a transparent and democratic process of consultation with university’s constituents” to explain that we are not against the utilization of the land grants and other assets of the university but such utilization should be in consonance with the university’s academic mission and should require the approval of the UPSA.

There were discussions on the question of outright sale of properties such as the Citibank property and the Pandancan property of UP and even a property in Cebu donated by the Yulos. Our position is that exceptional cases may be decided upon by the UPSA but would not require the inclusion of a provision of expanding the powers of the BOR to include the sale of UP properties as these are more the exception rather than the rule.

Judy read from the minutes of the January 28, 2004 Senate deliberations of SB 2587 (the Pangilinan Bill)to remind the meeting that this aspect of the proposal had been raised in the 12th Congress: “Given the temptation to sell properties, Senator Arroyo asked how the properties can be preserved. Senator Pangilinan said that at the proper time, he would propose the deletion of the provisions on outright sale and put in a requirement of two-thirds (2/3) vote of the members of the Board before a sale or lease could be affected. Senator Arroyo said that he was thinking more of internal safeguards within the Act, noting that UP has been free of scandals so far, probably until it sells real estate assets. He further noted that throughout the deliberations, no satisfactory answers have been provided by representatives of UP”…

While Atty Quimbo initially summarized that there was an agreement to drop the phrase “outright sale”, VP Diokno insisted in its retention to make explicit that this is the power the BOR should have.

In the process of the discussion, VP Rodriguez said that there is no need for consultation with the faculty regarding the disposition of the assets of the University as this is a non-academic matter. Judy commented that he had a short memory as we were together in the 1996-97 opposition to the Javier’s Commonwealth Property Development Plan (CPDP) which was conceptualized and implemented without consultation with the university constituency. Diokno was quick to point out that the opposition was not because there was no consultation but because it was a violation of a law limiting leases to only a 25 year period while the CPDP allowed a lease of 75 years. There was an interesting discussion on the relationship between consultation and transparency and the legality and correction of an action with our side emphasizing that the two are very much interrelated.

On the Exemption from SSL

Marco reiterated the concern of the students, who while recognizing that the faculty and staff of UP together with other government employees are receiving low salaries, an explicit provision exempting UP from the SSL would mean UP has to generate the income for the higher salaries. In turn, this would translate into higher tuition and other fees from the students.

Butch Dalisay wanted to hear from the faculty representatives of UP WIDEM regarding this matter.

Judy reiterated out position on this. We recognize that the salaries of UP faculty and staff are low and should be increased. We also recognize the inherent defect of the SSL which was the basis of the opposition of the All UP Workers Union and other government employees union when this was passed in the early 90s. However, the experience of GOCCS as well as PNU has shown that such an exemption was at the expense of the constituencies (government employees had to pay higher premiums for GSIS insurance and PNU students had to face a 400% tuition fee increase a year after the new PNU charter was passed). She also reiterated that even under the current SSL, the UP administration can look into increasing non-salary benefits (such as housing provisions) for faculty and staff. She also pointed out that the loss of UP faculty cannot merely be attributed to lower salaries but the intradepartmental conflicts and lack of democracy and transparency in the decision-making in the University are factors that should be looked into. A one-sided emphasis on the low salary of UP faculty is self-defeating as UP can never compete with private universities such as Ateneo which charges astronomically high fees or with transnational corporations such as Intel which has pirated several young UP engineering professors.

At the end of the meeting, the staff of Sen. Pimentel wanted to know if the College of Law has a position paper on the charter. VP Diokno assured him that UP will be sending them such as soon as possible

What next

Another Technical Working Group meeting has been set on Oct. 7, Thursday at 9 am to discuss a consolidated bill. The bill will be distributed on October 4. (Note: Everybody from UP Manila/PGH who could spare some time for it, are enjoined to witness/participate in the said meeting.)

Scores Hurt at GSIS Rally Dispersal

Mula sa Tanggapan ni Anakpawis Rep. Crispin B. Beltran

News Release
September 28, 2004
House of Representatives, South Wing Rm 602
Telephone No: 931-6615
Ina Alleco R. Silverio, Chief of Staff
Email: anakpawis2003@yahoo.com
Celphone number 09213907362
Visit geocities.com/ap_news

GSIS security personnel ordered to teargas protestors, scores hurt includingRep. Beltran; solon accuses Garcia of nepotismScores were hurt at 11:30 this morning when the security personnel of theGovernment Service Insurance System (GSIS) lobbed two teargas canisters at the main body of protestors during a rally in front of the GSIS against GSISpresident and general manager Winston Garcia.

Over 200 protestors from the Confederation from the Unity, Recognition andAdvancement of Government Employees (Courage) and the Kapisanan ng Mangaggawa saGSIS (KMG) union of GSIS employees and Anakpawis Party-list were peacefullyholding a demonstration in front of the GSIS building in Quezon City when theywere hosed down by two firetrucks. The strong blasts of watercannons, however, did not deter the rallyists whostood their ground. Anakpawis Rep. Crispin Beltran had just finished delivering his speech of support to the crowd when they were hit doused with water. When it became apparent that the rallyists were not leaving, the securitypersonnel of the GSIS itself approached the gates and lobbed two canisters of teargas at the crowd. This caused the rallyists to immediately disperse as the strong and sharp fumes of the tear gas spread. The rallyists tripped and fell on the pavement as they ran to escape the fumes that stung their eyes, noses and very skin. Many sustained cuts and bruises, and not a few threw up violently.

Rep. Beltran strongly condemned the dispersal, but said that he will not file charges against the security personnel of the GSIS who threw the tear gas. Instead, he said that he is even more determined to push for the immediate relief of Winston Garcia from the GSIS." If there's anyone who should be blamed for all this, it's Garcia. He is desperately clinging to this post when it's very clear that all he has done is make a mess of things. Now, apart from single-handedly making the GSIS one ofthe most corrupt government agencies, he has made the GSIS a bastion of anti-labor practices. The attack against the demonstrators this morning is yet another display of Garcia's arrogance and stubborn refusal to resign in the face of strong protests against him," he said.

Beltran added more fuel to the bonfire against Garcia, saying that that Garcia was guilty of nepotism. He filed yesterday HR 290 calling on investigationsinto the anomalies and irregularities being committed by the GSIS managementand Board of Trustees when it came to hiring and promotions. Beltran said that the union of employees KMG question the appointment of acertain Nita P. Javier as corporate secretary. They pointed out that theJavier's appointment has long been declared by the Civil Service Commission tobe null and void and the latter's Motion for Reconsideration has been denied. Up to the moment of the filing of the complaint and up to the moment of the drafting of Beltran's resolution, however, Javier still assumes the position and receives compensation; Beltran also alleged that the members of the Board of Trustees appointed relatives within the prohibited degree of relationship as will be seen in the following tabulation:

Trustee Relative RelationFlorino Ibanez Aida NoceteElmer T. Bautista Fulgencio Factoran Reynaldo P.Palmiery Hermogenes Concepcion Elenita Martinez Lenie de Jesus IreenIbanez-Dimaano Ildebrando F. Ibanez Iandro F. Ibanez Ma. Laura Consuelo C.Nocete Adrian R. Bautista Geronimo P. Estrella Jennifer L. Palmiery Angel T.Concepcion Jr.Orlando D. Tumala Alex John C. TumalaMa. LS Concepcion DJ Hernandez

Daughter Son Son Daughter Son Son-in-law Daughter-in-law Nephew Nephew Nephew Daughter

"The appointments are nepotic because the appointing authority of the GSIS is the President and General Manager and the Board of Trustees pursuant to Sec. 45of RA 8291 (GSIS Charter), which provides that "The President and General Manager, subject to the approval of the Board, shall appoint the personnel ofthe GSIS in accordance with the Civil Service rules and regulations. " It was also stated in a Supreme Court decision in the case GSIS vs. GSIS Employees Association, 154 SCRA 236 ruled that: "However weighty they may be, recommendation cannot control the discretion of the appointing authority which, in this case, is the General Manager and the Board of Trustees of the GSIS." In the case of CSC vs Dacoycoy, 306 SCRA 425, the Supreme Court ruled that "Under the definition of nepotism, one is guilty of nepotism if an appointment is issued in favor of a relative within the third civil degree of consanguinity or affinity."

The appointment of members of the Board of Trustees to executives positions in the GSIS, Beltran said, is also questionable. This, they point out, is prohibited under Sec. 3 (i) of RA 3019 , as amended, otherwise known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, which provides the following that "Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for personal gain, or having material interest in any transaction or act requiring approval of the Board, panel or group of which he is a member and which exercises discretion in such approval, even if he votes against the same or does not participate in the action of the board, committee, or group. Beltran questioned the appointment of Trustees Elmer T. Bautista and Reynaldo P. Palmiery who assumed executive positions as Chief Legal Counsel and Sr.Executive Vice-President respectively. The employees point out that Trustees are much interested in securing positions as executives in the GSIS because as such they will have career positions and regular compensation unlike when they are only Trustees they receive only per diem and representation and transportation allowance (RATA). Garcia himself in a report published in Businessworld (September 24, 2004) defended his appointment of his own sister and executive assistant CarolynGarcia Empemano, saying that that the appointment of family members and relatives to confidential positions in the government was "an accepted practice among top government officials."#

EMPLOYEES FROWN ON RETIREMENT PACKAGE

The All U.P. Workers Union Manila fully supports the following statement by Mr. Ferdinand Gaite, President of COURAGE. Indeed, almost every word now that comes from Malacañang is a doublespeak. The sad truth is that this government is out to save its own neck now, their brethren and their cronies; never for the people, neither for the welfare of the country and for posterity.

“IT’S A CUP OF HEMLOCK, NOT A SILVER PARACHUTE." An early retrenchment not retirement plan”. This was how Ferdinand Gaite, COURAGE National President,described the PhP1 million per taker early retirement package being proposed by Malacañang. Gaite added that the figures being dangled may look enticing at first but once an employee availed of it, only then that the truth will be known - the early retirement plan of the administration is a bait, a sugarcoated bitter pill meant to retrench the personnel of the bureaucracy and abandon basic social services.

Based on Malacañang proposal, those who wish to avail of the package shallreceive a corresponding amount depending on their years of service-50percent of salary for each year of service for those with less than 20years, 75% for those with less than 40 years, and 100% for those with 40 ormore years. These allegedly are on top of the regular retirement benefitfrom the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS). But the catch, according to Gaite is that the employees of the former MWSS, National PowerCorporation and Economic Intelligence and Investigation Bureau who availed of the early retirement plan offered by these offices, have yet to receive in full or worst even a fraction of the supposed retirement pay.

“It is also ominous that they will once again tap the GSIS to bankroll theP15 billion allocation for the program. The mismanagement and fund abuse issues raised against GSIS with Winston Garcia at the helm have yet to be settled, now the government will once again dip their hands into our funds. Imagine, money from the employees’ sweat and blood to finance the employees’ early retrenchment.” Gaite also scored Rep. Joey Salceda’s statement that Arroyo’s early retirement program for the government employees “is a solid step of thePresident towards fiscal health and is likely to excite investors”. “A heartless Congressman who would rather please the investors at the expense of the thousands of employees who will lose their jobs. We wonder, how much is he being paid for being the spokesperson of the government’s streamlining program. Salceda being a member of the Economic Manager’s Group of the President should instead subject the President to audit, ask for the liquidations of the expenditures that went beyond the income and receivables of the government especially during the elections.”

COURAGE warns that it will not just the government employees who will be affected by the streamlining program of the government but also the delivery of basic public services. And as such, the government can expect that it will not just face the restiveness of the employees but the general public as well. #

POETRY: Balangiga