Statement on the Status of the Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Silliman University Faculty Association (SUFA)

Issued on May 17, 2017 by the SU Administration Panel:

For the better appreciation of the Silliman community, in light of misinformation circulating about the CBA negotiations between the Administration and SUFA: 

The Administration Panel has been professional and collegial in its conduct and approach to the negotiations on a new Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) with the Silliman University Faculty Association (SUFA). We are one in interest to afford our faculty the best, and we do this conscientiously alongside our collective commitment to make sure Silliman University does not only live for the few or the time being, but stand strong on the same noble vision of quality Christian education that it was founded in 1901. 

Negotiations tend to lose foresight and prudence when done outside the scope of affordability, sustainability, and fragility. They have to be viewed with a more conscious understanding of not merely availability of resources but the availability of the same within the context of critical education reforms. These are education reforms with real implications on enrollment revenues and operational expenses in at least the next four years. 

FACT:  Following the implementation of the K to 12 education reform, enrollment has dropped in SY 2016-2017 by 6%. By SY 2017-2018, there will be no enrollment in first year and second year college (Before the reform implementation, first year and second year college students accounted for 43% of our college student population). 

The Administration Panel endeavors to negotiate on terms that ensure the sustainability of University operations and promote conscience that sees ourselves in relation to the many who have yet to pass through the Portals of Silliman. 

FACTS: 

1. Negotiations had been going on for almost a year. Both Administration Panel and SUFA Panel declared a deadlock on November 21, 2016 Conciliation and mediation with NCMB is in process at the instance of the Administration Panel.

2. Is Administration unwilling to improve and raise salaries and benefits as some claim?

No. In fact, the Administration, as it did in other CBA negotiations, submitted an offer.         

Administration’s Initial Offer: 

 So which among the offers did SUFA accept? The following: 

(Note: Except for the continuation of our HMO, the others are NEW BENEFITS granted to faculty.) 

• Senior High School tuition discount privilege
• Service Recognition Awards Cash Incentives
• Tuition Discount for Spouses Up to Master’s Degree
• Productivity Enhancement Incentive (to be converted to 14th month pay in the event that a 14th Month Pay Law is enacted by Congress) on the third year or  SY 2018-2019
• Continuation of the HMO (Intellicare) 

Which among the offers did SUFA reject? The following: 

• Tuition Discount for Minor Children in case of death of parent
• Subsidy on Educational Software
• Discount on Summer Extension Classes
• Discount on Summer Reinforcement Classes
• TOR/Reconstruction of Diploma
• Ambulance Services 

3. At the start of the conciliation-mediation proceedings with Con-Med Murro, the following items were on the table: 

3. During the conciliation-mediation proceedings SUFA accepted the Toxic Chemicals and Wildlife Handling Risk Pay offer of the Administration.

4. SUFA filed a Notice of Strike on January 10, 2017 but this was later withdrawn on March 3, 2017. On March 30, 2017, they yet again filed a Notice of Strike.

5. The SU Admin IMPROVED its offer on wages and salary as follows: 

Yr 1: Php 14,000.00 (One Time Bonus)
Yr 2: Php 500 ATB
Yr 3: Php 1,200 ATB 

SUFA countered by:

Yr 1: Php 40,000 One Time Bonus;
Y 2: Php 1,800 ATB
Y 3: Php 2,500 ATB 

6. For the second time in a row, SU Admin again improved its offer on wages as follows: 

Yr 1: Php 14,000.00 (One Time Bonus)
Yr 2: Php 500 ATB
Yr 3: Php 1,400 ATB 

SUFA countered by demanding:

Yr 1: Php 40,000 One Time Bonus;
Yr 2: Php 1,500 ATB;
Yr 3: Php 2,500 ATB

7. The Administration improved its offer. The table reflects figures improved twice and the Administration’s Final Offer: 

8. Did SUFA accept? NO. SUFA has not wavered on its demands. The Administration has moved on at least three occasions, but SUFA has not done its part. 

9. Are the improvements on salaries and benefits offered by Administration substantial? 

Yes. The Administration’s Final Offer is the best it can give without compromising the operations and the sustainability of Silliman University. The offer has gone through a series of computations against enrollment projections and different cost scenarios in the next 2 to 4 years. It takes into consideration a projected revenue loss by 10 to 20%, which is equivalent to a high of Php 80 million. 

It lacks good judgment to tap into the liquidity reserves of the University for the purpose of satisfying the demands of SUFA. The liquidity reserves have been put in place to buffer pressures that would undermine the capability of the University to continually upgrade its equipment and facilities — which are also crucial in maintaining its competitiveness. 

All in all, take-home peso equivalent of the proposed offers is Php 1,900 per faculty in the next two years. Receptive to concerns, especially those properly preparing for their retirement, the Administration offered a monthly across-the-board increase in the first year (2016-2017), but SUFA opted for a one-time bonus in the first year, to which the Administration counter offer was pegged at Php14,000.00 

It is disheartening that SUFAs wrong information are being circulated out of emotions, lack of appreciation, information or understanding, or an attempt to narrow the perspective through which the sustainability of University operations can be discussed relative to what best Administration can provide its faculty.