TUCP-ITUC’s Herrera and Umali file charges versus DOLE’s Baldoz, et al., with Ombudsman

Published by reposted only Date posted on July 5, 2013

TRADE UNION CONGRESS OF THE PHILIPPINES (TUCP)
(An affiliate of the International Trade Union Confederation)

PRESS RELEASE 06 July 2013
Reference:
Rafael E Mapalo (09472812811)
Manuel Portus (09196191206)

TUCP-ITUC’s Herrera and Umali file charges versus DOLE’s Baldoz, et al., with Ombudsman

The Trade Union Congress of the Philippines-International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) filed a graft complaint against three officials –DOLE Secretary Rosalinda D. Baldoz, Undersecretary Rebecca Chato and BLR OIC-Director Romeo Montefalco – before the Ombudsman’s Office for “grave abuse of discretion” in connection with aforesaid DOLE officials’ unsolicited intervention or interference in the TUCP’s leadership “succession rule” provided for in the TUCP Constitution and By-laws.

Former Senator and current TUCP-ITUC President Ernesto F. Herrera and TUCP-ITUC General Secretary Jose P. Umali, Jr., accompanied by Vice Presidents Alex Villaviza, Zoilo de la Cruz, and other TUCP-ITUC Vice Presidents and officers, filed the complaint.

In the labor group’s complaint, TUCP accused DOLE officials Sec. Baldoz, Usec. Chato and OIC-Dir. Montefalco of undue interference in the TUCP’s internal affairs by issuing a controversial decision packed with arbitrary and whimsical and, therefore, suspicious allegations.

TUCP questioned the BLR-DOLE’s decision to maintain a “status quo ante”, which favors the group of resigned former President Democrito Mendoza, when in fact neither of the contending parties – Herrera’s TUCP-ITUC and the Mendoza group – filed a complaint of any kind, much less a petition for intervention.

“Where in the Law does it say that the BLR has the authority to come up with a ‘decision motu proprio’ without such a petition for intervention,” Herrera asked.

At the same time, the TUCP-ITUC leadership expressed dismay that Sec. Baldoz had earlier issued a “status quo ante” order on TUCP’s dispute over its presidency – an issue which is purely and simply the organization’s internal affair . Thus, it is, clearly, a “constitutional issue”, but needs no interpretation.

“The issue of succession in TUCP is a matter explicitly defined and provided for under TUCP’s Constitution and By-laws,” Herrera emphasized.

TUCP also cited ILO Convention 87, referring to the workers’ freedom of association, which bars governments from interfering with perceived or actual intramurals between and among trade unions.

Herrera noted that the TUCP’s leadership issue had long been resolved when an overwhelming majority of TUCP affiliates voted for Herrera during a Special Convention held on 16 March 2012 at Club Filipino. The ratified election results and signatures thereon of TUCP affiliates had also been submitted to the BLR.

xxx

Categories for Archives articles
Get Email from TUCP