Showing posts with label Hacienda Luisita. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hacienda Luisita. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 20, 2011

Expropriation is the ultimate solution to Hacienda Luisita dispute

July 20, 2011

In the Philippines where big landlords sway both economic and political powers in all levels of society, the idea of putting an end to the age-old old agrarian dispute at Hacienda Luisita through a referendum is neither just nor democratic.

It is a farce.  It is a ploy.  It is a travesty of justice. 

First, the referendum on stocks distribution option (SDO) expressed in the recent Supreme Court decision bolsters rather than weakens the Cojuangcos’ perpetual control of their sprawling 6,435-hectare estate.

Second, Luisita farmers were actually denied justice when the Justices threw the issue back to them in clear breach of their constitutional duty to dispense social justice to the poor farmers.

Third, a referendum was never made a demand by both the farmers and workers of Hacienda Luisita, thus, can never be considered an exercise of democracy.  What they want, on the contrary, is land distribution and not an SDO.

Fourth, the Cojuangcos’ undeniable reign of power all over Tarlac, notwithstanding their present familial grip over Malacanang through PNoy, is what would make the referendum ‘an initiative from above’ and therefore a patently undemocratic political exercise.

The Supreme Court has clearly played mum and deaf on the farmers’ and workers’ cry for agrarian justice.  But more than that, it turned a blind eye on the concept of social justice by wilfully taking the landlords’ side in keeping the SDO scheme alive. 

The SDO was no doubt a brilliant ploy by the Cojuangcos to evade agrarian reform.  The Constitution, as well as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law, neither mentioned nor referred to the SDO as another option for land reform.  Thus, it is in the best interest of the Cojuangcos and for other landlords to make the SDO scheme lawful either by legislation or by judicial action.  The Supreme Court may have consciously played into this game.  And this is not acceptable!

The Partido ng Manggagawa stands for democracy and social justice, thus it supports the farmers’ struggle for land and the democratization of the countryside.  Agrarian justice through expropriation or nationalization of lands is a basic democratic demand for it is a struggle against land monopoly and tyranny by the feudal lords.  And more importantly, it is about social justice because agrarian reform, in its true form, commands wealth redistribution thus an empowering tool for social justice and national development.

Unfortunately, agrarian reform in the Philippines was considered a ‘centerpiece’ program which, ironically, has never been at the heart of the past and present administrations.   As such, even a less hostile form of expropriation (with compensation) mandated by law has never been enforced on big landholdings.  Hacienda Luisita is a showcase.  The reason is obvious.  It cannot be enforced because landlords and the elite have been ruling this country since the first republic up to the present.

Without expropriation, Hacienda Luisita cannot be freed from the control of the Cojuangcos.  Without expropriation, Hacienda Luisita cannot be transformed into state or cooperative farms.  Without expropriation, farmers will never enjoy the fruit of their half-century old struggle for land and justice.

Without expropriation, genuine agrarian reform will remain dead.

Wednesday, December 17, 2008

The Labor Dispute at Wesleyan University-Philippines

Fact Sheet and Timeline

Parties to the dispute: Wesleyan University-Philippines owned by the United Methodist Church of the Philippines and located at Cabanatuan City, Nueva Ecija (a provincial city to the north of Metro Manila). Wesleyan University-Philippines Faculty and Staff Association (WUPFSA-LAGMAN). The union president is Corazon Gonzales and can be reached at corazoncruzgonzales@yahoo.com

29 May 2006: Union submits CBA proposal

June to Nov 2006: No movement in negotiations. University board of trustees rejects some economic demands of the union

22 Sept 2006: Union president receives memo re serious misconduct complaint by 12 students and in the same day is handed down a preventive suspension for 30 days

Union president is subsequently dismissed. Union charges that suspension violates CBA provisions on job security and union security, and even the Manual of Regulations for Private Schools. Union alleges harassment

1 Oct 2006: Union files a case for unfair labor practice at the National Conciliation and Mediation Board (NCMB)

3, 4, 20 Oct 2006: Eleven of twelve accusers successively retract their complaints. In their retraction students say the complaint was merely orchestrated by the lone remaining complainant who is a live in partner of a friend of the University legal counsel

2 Nov 2006: Union files a case for CBA deadlock at NCMB

23 Nov 2006: Union files a notice of strike

30 Nov 2006: Office of the Secretary of Labor assumes jurisdiction (AJ) of labor dispute

2 July 2007: Protest rally by the union on University’s 61st foundation day. Marching band played mournful songs while union members protested outside University campus

28 Jan 2008: University files cases vs. union president, vice president, secretary, treasurer, auditor, pro and spokesperson for violation of AJ order on the basis of the protest rally of 2 July 2007. This is two days before a scheduled local union election. Union alleges harassment and union busting

19, 20 Feb 2008: University recommends union officers be found guilty of violating AJ

3 Jan 2008: Office of the Labor Secretary decides on the labor dispute. Orders the following:

Execute a CBA for the period 1 June 2006-31 May 2008
Dismisses union complaint re unfair labor practice for refusal to bargain
Finds University guilty of union busting
Invalidates preventive suspension and dismissal of union president
Reinstates union president with full back wages and benefits

“We need not overstretch our imagination too that the acts of the University that we invalidated here were undertaken to cripple the Union’s representation at bargaining. On the whole, the totality of the University’s acts sufficiently shows the University’s interference with or restraint on the employees’ exercise on their right to self-organization.”

15 Jan 2008: University files motion for reconsideration on the 3 January 2008 decision. Starts a series of pleadings from both parties

7 Oct 2008: Office of the Labor Secretary issues an Omnibus Resolution on the all the cases arising from the labor dispute. The decision of 3 January 2008 is affirmed.

University has filed a petition for review of the Omnibus Resolution at Court of Appeals. Case is still pending.

29 Oct 2008: University holds a “peace and development seminar” for employees. Sgt. Edgar Dimalanta of the Civil Affairs Office of the 71st Infantry Division of the Philippine Army says that union can suffer the same bloody fate as the Hacienda Luisita workers if they insist on presence of the union president in the CBA negotiations. He also declares that the military has received reports the union is infiltrated by communist guerillas

25 Nov 2008: Sgt. Dimalanta tells the union vice-president that military men will visit their homes after the latter refused the former’s invitation to meet the union executive committee

2 Dec 2008: Union files complaint at the Commission on Human Rights against the Armed Forces of the Philippines for harassment

Tuesday, December 2, 2008

University union in labor dispute decry military harassment

Press Release
December 2, 2008


Just days before the commemoration of human rights day, the faculty and staff union of the Wesleyan University in Cabanatuan City, Nueva Ecija denounced today in a press conference the interference and harassment by the military in their labor dispute. “We appeal to the government and the AFP to stop the use of military personnel in the harassment of workers involved in a labor dispute. Labor rights are human rights. This violation of labor rights becomes more glaring with the coming observance of human rights day,” declared Corazon Gonzales, the union president.

According to the Wesleyan University-Philippines Faculty and Staff Association (WUPFSA-LAGMAN), a certain Sgt. Edgar Dimalanta of the Civil Affairs Office of the 71st Infantry Division of the Philippine Army has been issuing veiled threats, and pressuring union officers and even some union members to sit down with him for a meeting. In a recent incident last November 25, Sgt. Dimalanta told Engr. Melquiades Guevarra, the union vice-president, that military men will visit them in their homes after the latter refused the former’s invitation to meet the union executive committee. “The circumstances clearly show that Sgt. Dimalanta is being used by the university administration headed by Atty. Guillermo T. Maglaya in his effort to bust the union and sabotage negotiations for a CBA,” Gonzales added.

After the press conference, the union officers of WUPFSA-LAGMAN trooped to the office of the Commission on Human Rights. Gonzales stated that “The union officers fear for our lives because of the blatant interference and intimidation by the military.” The union has also sent letters to the offices of the President of the Philippines, Chief Justice and Labor Secretary among others. They are also appealing for solidarity from the labor movement and human rights advocates. Officers of the labor federation LAGMAN to which the union is affiliated and the Partido ng Manggagawa (PM) expressed their support for the workers.

The harassment started with a “peace and development seminar” that was called by the administration for its employees last October 29. In the seminar, Sgt. Dimalanta, shrewdly threatened the union by saying that they can suffer the same bloody fate as the Hacienda Luisita workers if they insisted on the union president sitting in the CBA negotiations and that the military has received reports the union is infiltrated by communist guerillas.

In the past three years the union has charged the administration with unfair labor practices and violations of the collective bargaining agreement. On two occasions the Department of Labor and Employment has handed down decisions in favor of the union, finding the management guilty of union busting and ordering the reinstatement of the union president who was illegally dismissed. The administration of Wesleyan University, which is owned by the United Methodist Church, has refused to implement the orders and has rejected negotiations for a CBA on the alibi that the union president has been dismissed.