TENSION BETWEEN the Ateneo administration and the Ateneo Employees and Workers Union (AEWU) over the renegotiated Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) has been settled, but the AEWU remains in conflict with its own members.

In separate interviews with The GUIDON, three university workers, Jesus Cordova, Richard Gabito and Dennis Silava, claimed to be victims of harassment and unjust treatment after being accused of non-compliance with direct orders from AEWU officers.

According to AEWU President Tobias Tano, the three did not follow instructions to wear armbands and non-work prescribed t-shirts during the Union’s strike.

Tano filed a notice of strike on November 5, 2014 during a deadlock in the negotiations for the now agreed upon five-year CBA.

A letter by the AEWU’s Grievance Committee to Cordova, Gabito and Silava dated November 19 details that the three are facing violations in relation to Numbers 3, 11 and 12 of Article XII, Section 1 of the Constitution and By-Laws (CBL) of the AEWU.

Number 3 refers to failure to attend a Union-sanctioned meeting without valid reason, while Number 11 indicates the refusal of a member to obey strike calls authorized by AEWU officers. Number 12 cites penalty for “other acts inimical to the interests of the Union.”

Cordova, Gabito and Silava said they were not aware of the instructions for the strike or of a vote among the general membership with regard to filing one.

Correspondence

Prior to November 19, Cordova, Gabito and Silava each received two letters from the AEWU regarding their alleged violations.

The first letter on November 11 instructed the three to reply with a justifiable reason for their offenses within 48 hours, while the second one, on November 17, summoned them to face AEWU’s Executive Board on November 19 to further explain.

The three said that they did not wear the armband because they did not know what it meant and that they were initially denied a copy of the CBL; the same reason holds for why they refused to go to the hearing.

Silava said that when he approached an AEWU officer to ask why there was no notice given about the armband, he was just told to comply.

He recalled, “Napaka-arogante ng approach [ng mga opisyales ng AEWU] sa akin noong panahon na iyon. Karamihan sa ibang opisyales, nananakot na matatanggal daw ako sa trabaho.”

Silava and the other two later on complied with wearing the armband after the second warning in order to avoid further conflict.

Cordova said he questioned the order by the AEWU officers in fear of possible sanctions from the Ateneo administration, given that they have an official Ateneo uniform.

The letter on November 19 stated that it was the last and final warning for the workers to face the AEWU officers for a hearing that was set for November 22.

In response to the frequent requests of the three workers for a copy of the CBL to fully understand their rights, the letter also read that a copy of the CBL has always been available at the AEWU’s office for anyone who wants to ask for one.

Both Cordova and Silava showed up to the meeting while Gabito did not, asking the AEWU Executive Board instead if he could choose which officers to face.

“Ang aking nasabing pakiusap ay dahil lamang gusto kong siguraduhin na ako ay tnuay na mabibigyan ng patas na pagkakataon na maipahayag ang aking panig at madepensahan ang aking sarili,” he said in a letter to the AEWU.

Two tales

Tano said that the three workers did not know about the instructions because of their own failure to attend AEWU meetings.

The three workers, however, claim that they stopped going to meetings because they were treated badly.

Tano said that the decision to cite violations and file sanctions was made collectively by the AEWU Executive Board.

He further said that since Cordova and Silava showed up at the hearing, their cases were mitigated.

However, he told them that there will be a general assembly during which they should apologize.

“Hindi sila pumunta. Binigay ko lahat para ipaliwanag ninyo ang kakulangan ninyo sa general membership, kasi okay na kami. Pinatawan ko sila ng P500,” said Tano.

Tano said that Gabito did not arrive because the latter said he would not receive due process. “Hindi ka nga dumating para malaman mo eh. Hindi ka sumusunod, tapos magsusulat ka na namimili ka kung sino ang kaharap mo?”

Due to his non-compliance, Gabito is now facing the suspension of his union benefits for 30 days, according to a letter sent to him by the Grievance Committee on November 29.

With regard to the workers’ claims of aggravation, Tano said they were only told of mistakes that needed to be corrected.

“Kailan po manghaharass ang isang opisyales? Eh ‘di kasuhan mo ako, abuse of authority. Ganoon lang po kasimple ‘yon,” he said.

Tano said that the AEWU is fighting for nothing but better benefits and a raise in salary for the workers. “Sabi ko sa kanila, ‘Minahal kayo ng Union.’”

Infringing on due process

Cordova, Gabito and Silava are all in agreement that the Union officers’ actions are in violation of their due process, citing the restriction of their freedom of speech and expression during the whole process.

They also mentioned that the Union officers themselves commit actions that are in violation of the CBL. As an example, Cordova says that members are supposed to be informed of when meetings are to be held and the agenda for a particular meeting a week in advance, as per Article VII, section 2 and 4 of the AEWU’s CBL.

Cordova says that in his 10 years in the Ateneo, he has never seen anything that fulfills the provision mentioned.

Cordova, Gabito and Silava have all been seeking help from Electronics, Computer and Communications Engineering Department Facilities Supervisor Sonny Toledo in their fight against the AEWU.

A former public relations officer of the AEWU, Toledo forfeited his board position and membership with the Union because of his dislike of the AEWU’s leadership.

Toledo recounts that he advised the three to reply to the letters of the Union so they can air their side.

“Ang problema, ayaw naman maniwala nung pamunuan ng Unyon doon sa mga sulat na ginagawa [nina Cordova, Gabito at Silava]. At ang nakakatawa dito, susulatan ka ngayon, gusto pumunta ka doon sa hearing after three days. Mali iyon,” said Toledo.

According to the Article XVII, section 2 of the CBL, a hearing is supposed to commence five days after a notice of hearing is given.

Toledo said that the fault of the three workers was failing to wear the armband, the reason for which was not explained to them. As such, it is unfair for them to be blamed for anything.

In addition, the three workers have also been seeking help from Professor Rene Ofreneo, PhD from the University of the Philippines-Diliman’s School of Labor and Industrial Relations, and Atty. Nenita Garcia of the Bureau of Labor and Relations.

Future arrangements

Cordova, Gabito and Silava are all in agreement that until there are concrete changes made to the leadership of the AEWU, the relationship between the three and the Union would remain estranged.

Silava, for his part, does not know what the future holds for him and his relationship with the Union.

“Hindi ko na alam kasi wala akong assurance sa tamang due process, kasi ‘yung presidente na ‘yun… bastos din samin eh,” he said.

On the other hand, Gabito, who has been with the Ateneo for 32 years, said that his love for the work that the Ateneo gives him is affected by the actions that the AEWU has taken against him.

“Sanay ako sa patayan ng trabaho… Dito ako nabubuhay. ‘Yan ang pinuntahan natin dito eh,” he added.

In the future, Cordova hopes that the constitution and by-laws of the AEWU are clear to both current and future officers, so that future instances of bypassing regulations would not be tolerated.

However, despite the events that have transpired, Cordova sees potential within the Union for something greater.

“Sa bawat miyembro at manggagawa ng Ateneo, lalong-lalo na sa mga Union members, sana magkaroon sila ng malinaw ng pagsukat kung ano ang tama, o pagtimbang sa tama at mali,” Cordova added.