Professional learning online community of teachers and for teachers.

Five Reasons Why PNOY'S Productivity Enhancement Incentive Guidelines are Unjust

  • Posted In: General Discussion

  • Member

    1. PNoy’s spokespersons are deceiving government employees–They say that a “bonus equal to one month’s salary” waits for them in June when in fact THIS IS NOT AUTOMATIC, and they still have to meet HIGH CONDITIONS (at least 90% achievement of targets, for example) and hurdle DOCUMENTARY AND VERIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.

    2. He STILL did not bring PEI back to its previous amount–It was P10,000 until he slashed it in half to make way for PBB, through his Executive Order 80, series of 2012.

    3. He based it on “performance,” AS IF TEACHERS AND NON-TEACHING EMPLOYEES ARE NOT ALREADY PERFORMING ABOVE AND BEYOND THEIR DUTIES. Overworked with the greater demands of K to 12 yet underpaid without any salary increase for five years (the last increase in 2009 was given in four installments until 2012).

    4. Just like with PBB, TEACHERS AND NON-TEACHING EMPLOYEES ARE IN EFFECT MADE TO ANSWER FOR THINGS OVER WHICH THEY HAVE NO CONTROL, like the enrollment rate, NAT rating, and completion rate (the criteria which must be met). It’s as if it’s the teachers’ fault whenever a student drops out due to lack of baon, pamasahe, or the distance of the school, or exam ratings are low because classes are held in cramped, airless classrooms. (Please see the photo for DepEd’s Performance Indicators under the 2014 GAA.)

    5. He subjected PEI to TEDIOUS AND LENGTHY DOCUMENTATION AND VERIFICATION REQUIREMENTS over which teachers and non-teaching employees have no control. Also, according to our bitter experience under PBB, this system caused the denial of the bonus, like in the case of ARMM.

    Source: ACT

Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.