For Your Information: Employees Association

The De La Salle Univeristy Employees Association (DLSU-EA) is an independent union formed to represent certain employees in the University, and to protect their right to collective action. It was established during the 1980s, and has since been representing the aforementioned personnel in policy and decision making processes in the University.

“It is a union, so it is supposed to be focused on the rights of the workers,” explains Dr. Jesusa Marco, executive director of the Human Resources Development and Management Office (HRDMO).

The union members are co-academic personnel who are neither confidential nor supervisory staff. Out of the 356 non-teaching employees, only over a hundred of them are members of the DLSUEA. These members are part of the collective bargaining unit (CBU) that coordinates with the University to discuss regulations regarding working conditions, employee benefits and other entitlements.

Agreements between the University and the DLSUEA are legalized in the collective bargaining agreement (CBA). The CBA is a contract between two parties, in this case the University and the DLSUEA, which serves as the governing law that regulates working conditions and ensures mutual interest between the two parties.

The DLSUEA has nine officers – President, Vice President, Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Treasurer, Assistant Treasurer, Auditor, Public Relations Officer – with candidates for these positions coming from its current members. Elections are held every three years, and its members can only elect one candidate for each position, with the exception of the Sergeant-at-Arms.

Issues with the University

Given its constant interaction with the central administration, there are instances where the EA has come into disagreements with the University.

Cases ranged from salary increases and working conditions, to inclusion of certain entities and bodies to the CBA that went to higher courts for arbitration.

Last March 2005, the Eleventh Division of the Court of Appeals found the University guilty of unfair labor practice (ULP) against the DLSUEA – National Federation of Teachers and Employees Union (NAFTEU). The Univeristy previously filed a request for reversal of the ruling of the ULP in 2003 to DOLE, but was denied in 2004.

The ruling declared DLSU guilty since it refused to bargain collectively and it interfered with the DLSUEA’s right to self organization. DOLE denied the University’s motion for a reversal of ruling because such actions were unlawful. The decision read that “non-proclamation of the newly elected union officers cannot be used as an excuse to fulfill the duty to bargain collectively.”

In 1995, the DLSUEA called for grievance, following the administration’s alleged inaction regarding several complaints raised by the union.

In a letter written to the Director of the then Human Resources Development Office (HRDO), then DLSUEA President Baylon Banez enumerated six issues, which needed action. Some of the issues were meal allowances for employee drivers and revisions in the evaluation procedure for employees.

In response, Director of the HRDO, Cecilia Albatruso, saw no need to convene a grievance committee as “most issues have already been resolved.”

Banez felt that there was a “breach of contract” on the different issues, and tried to push through with their complaints.

In 2000, the University petitioned for further arbitration against then DLSUEA-NAFTEU to a higher court, after an unsuccessful CBA. Issues raised were the exclusion from the CBA of computer operators of the Computer Services Center and discipline officers of the Discipline Office. The validity of the University’s claim that they can no longer increase salary, and other legal statements regarding salaries and work compensation were also questioned.

In a four year dispute, from 2001 to 2004, a faction of the DLSUEA led by member Belen Aliazas filed a petition to conduct elections with the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), alleging that the incumbent officers of the respondent had failed to call for a regular election since 1985.

The group of Aliazas requested the University to keep custody of all union dues or agency fees, and all money considerations deducted from salaries of concerned co-academic personnel until such time that an election of union officials has been scheduled and subsequent elections has been held.

Even with the said issues, Marco asserts that the University has been developing a better relationship with the DLSUEA over the years.