Of racists and the courts

Of racists and the courts


Posted 00:23am (Mla time) Mar 04, 2005
By Rina Jimenez-David
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A15 of the March 4, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer


TEN years ago, Filipino teachers at the International School of Manila began their struggle for justice. Though couched in crass material terms (they were demanding "parity" in wages with foreign faculty members either hired abroad or locally), they were actually fighting for their dignity, for their right, and the right of all Filipinos, to be viewed and treated as the equals of anyone in the world.

I'm not being overdramatic when I say the ISM teachers were -- are -- in fact continuing the struggle waged by Jose Rizal and the Propagandists who were motivated mainly by their desire to prove themselves the equals of the Spanish colonialists. In another era, and against a different colonizer, Filipinos waged other forms of struggle against racism, forcibly knocking down race-based barriers against membership in social clubs and leisure establishments.

One would think, more than a century after these nationalist struggles were waged, and decades after the success of the civil rights movement in the United States and the end of apartheid in South Africa, that there would no longer be room for racism anywhere, but especially in an educational institution. But to this day, Filipinos teaching in the International School are treated as "second-class citizens," deemed unworthy of receiving equal pay for equal work.

When news of the labor dispute between Filipino teachers and ISM management first leaked out, a columnist said he wanted to know what the locals were complaining about when their pay, even if it was the lowest among the "three-tier" salary levels, was still much higher than the average salary of their counterparts in local private and public schools.

"In other words," says Vida Dizon-Vergel, an officer of the International School Alliance of Educators (ISAE), "we were already in the bus, even if we were made to sit in the back. Why do we still want to sit up front?"

* * *

THERE is another, more serious aspect to the ISM controversy than "just" racism. There is the spectacle of, again, an educational institution flouting the law, defying no less than the Supreme Court, and even boasting to parents of its students that it has the capacity to delay execution of the final decision until "some years down the road."

In a background paper, the ISAE asks, with some exasperation: "Why, or how, is it possible that they [ISM] have the audacity to openly dance around the highest court and then brag that they have the courts' favor? This foreigner's view that manipulation in Philippine courts is endemic is not his view alone. When will the courts and DOLE [Department of Labor and Employment] finally have the courage, determination and guts to put an end to this sad, revealing and never-ending circus?"

The teachers thought that the circus had wound down in July 2000 when, after five years of CBA negotiations and contentious arguments before the DOLE and the courts, the Supreme Court ruled that the Filipino teachers at ISM were entitled to equal pay for equal work. But when Labor Secretary Patricia Santo Tomas attempted to implement the Supreme Court decision in 2002, after a flurry of appeals from ISM, the school's lawyers inexplicably managed to secure a temporary restraining order from the Court of Appeals, in effect reversing the Supreme Court!

* * *

THREE more years passed before the Court of Appeals finally bowed to the will of the Supreme Court, which I must say certainly moved glacially in this case to assert its authority.

But if the teachers thought the "final and executory" order held any real meaning, they had another think coming. At the scheduled pre-execution conference last Feb. 15, the lawyers of the school and the administrators, upon spotting the ISAE leaders and their lawyers, refused to sit down at the negotiation table, demanding a separate session with the DOLE official assigned to the case. To the astonishment of the ISAE and the teachers, the official seemed amenable to giving in to this unreasonable demand, which they immediately opposed.

"The issue seems to be now whether the writ (of execution) can ever be enforced," seethes Raquel David-Ching, ISAE president.

If Ching seems overcome with frustration, it could only be because while the school administration has failed to win its case for discrimination in the courts, it is achieving a de facto victory through attrition and delay.

* * *

WHEN the ISAE's case reached the Supreme Court, she says, Filipinos composed 80 percent of the faculty. Now they make up just over 30 percent. Of the original 147 petitioners, only 34 are still left in the school.

What happened? Well, many things can take place in the course of 10 years. Some teachers resigned or opted for early retirement, with the snail's pace of justice certainly contributing to their frustration. Others were systematically harassed and hounded out of their jobs. Most important, ISM refused to replace the Filipino teachers with other Filipinos, opting instead to hire from overseas. And the few Filipinos they took in were relegated to the new category of "teaching apprentice."

Through the years, the board and the parents at ISM have denied the Filipino teachers their support, with some arguing that if the school were forced to finally cough up the back wages it owes, tuition would shoot through the roof. But education at ISM is already even costlier than in the United States. The decision to make foreign hires the majority of the faculty has resulted in much higher salary costs overall, not including expenses for "expat" privileges such as housing in a posh condominium near the new ISM campus.

Like all racists before them, the ISM administrators may yet realize that all they have done is to cut off their nose to spite their face.