U.P. Diliman Sociology Professor Sarah Raymundo is finally granted tenure by the U.P. Board of Regents, ending two years of waiting

U.P. Diliman Professor Sarah Raymundo 

(Source: http://tenureforsarahraymundo.blogspot.com/)

The University of the Philippines (U.P.) Board of Regents (BOR) voted today by a vote of 5 in favor, 2 against and one abstention, granting U.P. Diliman Sociology Professor Sarah Raymundo tenure, ending two years of waiting for the professor, when her department initially recommended her for tenure in February of 2008, and whose latest appeal, dated January 15, 2010 finally reached the BOR. Professor Raymundo's case has gained widespread sympathy, both inside U.P. and internationally.

BOR Chairman Emmanuel Y. Angeles, who was present in the meeting, did not vote. The new Student Regent, Cori Alessa Co, who took her oath of office today, and  replaced outgoing Student Regent Charisse Bañez was able to vote; thus restoring student representation to the BOR, as Ms. Bañez was disallowed by the U.P. Administration from voting ever since December 18, 2009 (See Diliman Diary, February 25, 2010: http://tinyurl.com/36gxb9b)

The Diliman Diary observed Regent Abraham Sarmiento and Regent Nelia Gonzales exiting Quezon Hall in U.P. Diliman after the meeting. The total number of regents present in the May 27, 2010 BOR meeting were nine (9) regents, including  U.P. President Emerlinda Roman and BOR Chairman Emmanuel Angeles. There are eleven (11) regents in the BOR. However, Regent Francis Chua left before the voting began, while Rep. Cynthia Villar, representing the House of Representatives sent in a written vote, and Senator Mar Roxas, representing the Senate, did not attend or send in any vote at all.

(Faculty Regent Taguiwalo. Source: 

Facebook page of Laban PGH Movement)

The basis of the BOR decision was a motion made last January 29, 2010 by Faculty Regent Taguiwalo which was tagged by her to the Diliman Diary and which we are reproducing below in full:

"On the appeal for tenure of Prof. Sarah Raymundo

Judy M. Taguiwalo
Faculty Regent
January 29, 2010

As the Faculty Regent my mandate is to represent the faculty, both tenured and untenured, of the University at the Board of Regents.

Prof. Raymundo’s appeal has ramifications vis a vis the parameters of the right of tenured faculty to make judgment on tenure application and the right of untenured faculty members to expect fairness and justice in the tenure process and decisions. In studying the appeal for tenure of Prof. Sarah Raymundo, I am guided by the existing policies approved by the University at various levels and previous decisions made by the Board.

According to the document "Shaping Our Institutional Future: A Statement on Faculty Tenure, Rank and Promotion" (OVPAA, 2004), there are two rights at stake in considering appeals regarding the non-award of tenure, to wit, "the right of tenured colleagues to make a qualitative judgment on the candidate's performance and record and the right of temporary faculty to expect fairness, both in the process by which the tenure decision is reached and in the substance of that decision. The appeal procedure should take into account both these rights." The same document states that the consideration of tenure should be made "solely on academic grounds" and that the use of any other criteria may lead to a "violation of academic freedom" (I.F.4.a).

The UP Diliman University Council in December 15, 2008 upheld the right of all untenured faculty to be informed upon employment of the criteria for their evaluation and to be evaluated on the basis of these criteria. The UPD UC also spelled out the elements of transparency in the tenure process.

The primacy of academic standards as basis for the grant of tenure is affirmed by the Board of Regents’ decision on the case of Lorraine Carlos Salazar. In the BOR meeting of January 27, 2005 the Board reviewed the case of Prof. Salazar and decided that:

Taking note of the department’s definition of collegiality as explained by Prof Noel Morada, Department Chair, in his letter to President Nemenzo, the Board asked about the weight given to collegiality vis-à-vis Prof. Salazar’s academic credentials (e.g. PhD, international publications). The Board was not satisfied with the department’s argument that the best, though, implicit, measure of collegiality is the confidence vote of two-thirds of the tenured faculty. Since the basis of the vote is not explained in the letter, the Board could only conclude that collegiality outweighed academic credentials. The Board maintained that academic credentials should not be ignored.

Why should the BOR intervene on this matter?

As a young UP faculty member, Prof. Raymundo has spent the past nine years serving the university well and has worked hard to fulfill all the requirements for tenure . The justification provided by the Department of Sociology in April 2008 recognizes Prof. Raymundo’s academic qualifications and in fact, the Department approved her promotion from Assistant Professor 1 to Assistant Professor 2 in June 2008.

After initially providing strong justification for the recommendation to grant tenure to Prof. Raymundo, the majority of the tenured faculty of the Department of Sociology then decided to deny the grant of tenure without providing any reason. In a past case, the BOR had overruled a similar refusal by the Political Science department to grant tenure because the Board deemed the reason given (in that case "lack of collegiality") unacceptable as basis for withholding tenure to one who is otherwise duly qualified. If the BOR can pass upon the acceptability of a reason given to withhold tenure, it must pass upon the unacceptability of no reason being given for a similar act. Otherwise, the BOR is telling departments that the way to avoid BOR oversight and intervention is to simply decide without any declared reason. This gives permission for departments to become whimsical and arbitrary in their decisions on the grant of tenure to faculty.

In pursuit of the appeals process, Prof. Raymundo appeals to the University President who denies her appeal by simply asking the department to vote again and to treat the negative vote result as basis for denying the appeal, again without seeking to determine the substantive reasons for the vote. If the appeal process does nothing to determine and weigh the substantive basis for the action being appealed and instead simply repeats the action, for what purpose do we have an appeals process? Is it merely to torture the affected party with the repetition of the act being appealed?

I am thus requesting my colleagues in the Board of Regents to support the following:

• Declare as a matter of policy that the absence of any reason to deny tenure from a temporary faculty who has otherwise met the declared requirements for tenure is not an acceptable exercise of departmental autonomy that should be uncritically respected.

• Given the lack of any substantive reason declared to deny tenure in this case from the original process as well as from the appeals process and given that Prof. Raymundo met the requirements for tenure, grant the appeal for tenure of Prof. Raymundo."

However, Faculty Regent Taguiwalo told the Diliman Diary that dissenting members of the Sociology Department are expected to file a motion for reconsideration to the BOR pleading that Professor Raymundo not be granted tenure. The next meeting of the BOR is scheduled for June 2, 2010.

Outgoing Student Regent Charisse B. Bañez

(Source: Facebook page of Laban PGH Movement)

The new Student Regent Cori Alessa Co

takes her oath of office before Regent

Sarmiento, President Roman and her mother.

 (Source: Faculty Regent  Taguiwalo)

U.P. Dictates the Script on Student Regent's Vote Eligibility, Preempts its own Board of Regents Meeting on January 29, 2010

                                                   (Artwork by: Pam Liban)

By Chanda Shahani

In its own version of writing on the wall, the University of the Philippines (U.P.) top administration has effectively signalled its objections to the appointment of Dr. Jose C. Gonzales who was selected by the Board of Regents last December 18, 2009 as the new Director of the Philippine General Hospital (PGH) over the then incumbent director, Dr. Carmelo Alifiler, who was going for a third term, by emasculating the vote of Student Regent Ms. Charisse B. Bañez who voted in favour of Dr. Gonzales; thus throwing into doubt the validity of a closely-won contest where Gonzales garnered only six (6) votes and Alfiler five (5) votes.

The U.P. administration has tilted the balance of votes away from Dr. Gonzales when it already announced on its own website at http://www.up.edu.ph/ on January 29, 2010 that Student Regent Bañez was not eligible to vote in the appointment of the new PGH Director; thus preempting its own Board of Regents (BOR) meeting set at 8:00 a.m. on the same day at Quezon Hall in U.P. Diliman to discuss objections set forth by Regent Abraham Sarmiento last December 18, 2009 on Bañez's eligibility to vote on the selection of Dr. Gonzales. The issues of Sarmiento's objections regarding Regent Bañez's eligibility to vote in the selection of Dr. Gonzales, Gonzales's binding appointment thereof, and other issues were set to be discussed at the January 29 BOR meeting.

The proceedings of the January 29 BOR meeting were disrupted by a walkout by the Faculty Regent, U.P. Professor Judy M. Taguiwalo, Staff Regent Clolualdo E. Cabrera, Alumni Regent Alfredo E. Pascual, and Student Regent Bañez, said Arnulfo Anoos of the All-UP Workers Union in a text message. The walkout occurred because the Student Regent was not allowed to participate and had the resulting effect of a lack of quorum, said U.P. Professor Danilo Arao,a member of CONTEND UP in another text message. This was confirmed by Regent Nelia Gonzalez in a telephone interview with the Diliman Diary who said that the lack of a quorum led to a postponement of the BOR meeting. Regent Gonzales also said that Dr. Gonzales remained as Executive Director of PGH thus far.

“Nagkaroon ng principled walkout ang sectoral regents (faculty, staff, students regents) at yung alumni regent, so no quorum kaya hindi natuloy evil plan ni Roman to nullify Dec. 18 BOR decisions, partcularly PGH directorship,” said Prof. Mykel Andrada of the All-UP Academic Employees Union in a text to the Diliman Diary.

With the possible elimination of Bañez as a voting Regent, the jury still remains out on the eligibility of Dr. Gonzales to continue on as UP PGH Director if a new vote was taken and the Regents still vote the same way they did on December 18 as there would now be a division of the vote with five (5) votes for Gonzales and five (5) votes for Alfiler compared to the alignment of the votes on December 18, 2009 where six (6) Regents, including Regent Bañez voted for Dr. Gonzales and five (5) Regents voted for Dr. Alfiler.

Observers state that with Quezon Hall's unilateral splitting of the vote of the BOR, an interim measure such as President Roman's memorandum appointing of an OIC for PGH will take place until more votes are available in the BOR to reinstall Dr. Alfiler as Executive Director for a third term.

The January 29 walkout has forestalled any plans for both the pro and anti Gonzales supporters to make their respective moves until the next BOR meeting however. This date of the next meeting has not yet been announced, however.

According to the Manila Times.Net (http://www.manilatimes.net/index.php/top-stories/8673-new-pgh-director-takes-oath-of-office) , those who voted for Dr. Gonzales were Student Regent Charisse Bañez, Faculty Regent Judy Taguiwalo, Alumni Regent Alfredo Pascual and Admin Staff Regent Cabrera. Sen. Manuel “Mar” Roxas 2nd also sent a written vote in favor of Gonzales.

Alfiler, however, received votes from U.P. President Emerlinda Roman, as well as Regents Abraham Sarmiento, Nelia Gonzales and Francis Chua and Rep. Cynthia Villar of Las Piñas City through a letter.

The Diliman Diary could not immediately confirm over the weekend the statement of Regent Gonzalez that Dr. Gonzales remained officially as Executive Director of UP PGH in view of Quezon Hall's January 29 website statement questioning Regent Bañez's eligibility to vote and Memorandum No. PERR-2010-001, issued by U.P. President Emerlinda R. Roman dated January 5, 2010, appointing Chancellor Ramon L. Arcadio as Officer-in-Charge of PGH.

However, despite the January 5, 2010 memo of Roman, the website of the PGH (http://www.pgh.gov.ph/ ) confirms that Dr. Jose C. Gonzales assumed his new post as PGH Director last January 7, 2010 after being voted into office last December 18, 2009 by the UP Board of Regents. During his first flag ceremony as Director last January 11, he was even introduced by UP Manila Chancellor Ramon Arcadio. Gonzales has already announced the members of his cabinet, namely Dr. Charlotte Chiong as the Deputy Director for Health Operations, Dr. Rey Ang as the Deputy Director for Administration, and Dr. Virgilio Novero as the Deputy Director for Fiscal Services. Ms. Ma. Rita Tamse remains as the Deputy Director for Nursing.

Dr. Gonzales is a renowned thoracic and cardiovascular surgeon and was the former Chair of the PGH Department of Surgery in 2001-2004. He is a member of the UP College of Medicine Alumni Class of 1972. He was former Director of the Regionalization Program of the UP College of Medicine.

Quezon Hall's attempts to rewrite the entire script on the eligibility of the Student Regent to vote after the vote had already been cast by the BOR; and possibly rescind the official appointment of Dr. Gonzales by creating a hung jury among the BOR is also being met with stiff resistance from U.P. PGH alumni in the Philippines and overseas.

An online petition authored by William H.E. Romero, M.D., a U.P. graduate (B.S. Zoology 1977, Medicine 1981) who practices medicine in the United States, with the name, The INSTALL DR. JOSE GONZALES NOW! Petition to ALL FILIPINOS (http://www.petitiononline.com/JOEGON72/petition.html) that was formed by U.P. College of Medicine Alumni and PGH personnel, asked Roman “to protect the welfare of its underpaid and overworked personnel and strengthen the education of our future doctors, by immediately implementing the decision of the Board of Regents to appoint Dr. Jose C. Gonzales as the new PGH Director and rescind the above mentioned memorandum.” The petition now has more than 1100 online signatures.

Roman's memorandum comes at the heels of another controversial decision involving Roman at U.P. Diliman where U.P. Diliman Sociology Professor Sarah Raymundo appealed to Roman to overturn a decision by U.P. Diliman Chancelor Sergio Cao denying her tenure due to a minority protest vote (Please see Diliman Diary, December 10, 2009) despite the fact that the majority of faculty in her department had voted to grant her tenure.

Raymundo's appeal for tenure was denied by Roman in a copy of a resolution of Roman she received last January 4, 2010, according to Raymundo, writing in an update she posted on an online website, Tenure for Prof. Sarah Raymundo (http://tenureforsarahraymundo.blogspot.com/).

On January 15, 2010 Raymundo submitted an appeal to the BOR, asking them to overturn Roman's decision. There has been no decision yet by the BOR, in view of the postponed January 29 BOR meeting.

In a statement dated January 29, 2010 on U.P.'s own website at: (http://www.up.edu.ph/), the date of the BOR meeting, the U.P. administration stated that:

“The Charter of the University of the Philippines, Republic Act No. 9500, provides that there shall be one Student Regent chosen by the students from their ranks in accordance with the rules and qualifications approved in a referendum by the students (sec. 12[g], RA 9500). In 2009, the students overwhelmingly ratified the Codified Rules for Student Regent Selection (CRSRS) through a referendum called for the purpose.”

“Article I, section 6 of the CRSRS defines a bona fide student as one who is “taking up academic units for bachelor’s degree, masters’ degree, doctorate degree, non-degree (sic), or certificate courses in the university, including those who are on residency status or on leave of absence (LOA).” Article III, section 1 provides, as part of the qualifications to be nominated, current enrollment at the time of his/her nomination. Article IX, section 7 provides for grounds to consider the position of SR-elect or the incumbent SR vacant, to wit:

• permanent disqualification from the university
• incapacity to enroll or file an LOA the following semester
• death, illness or any other cause which prevents him/her from discharging functions.”

Regent Bañez admitted to the BOR that she was not currently enrolled at the time of the date of voting by the BOR on December 18, 2009. However, U.P. also admits in its own website that:

“On 18 December 2009, the Board of Regents met for the 1252nd time. Before discussing the items in the agenda, the President brought Ms. Bañez’s status to the attention of the Board.”

“When asked by the Board if she is enrolled, Ms. Bañez admitted that she is not (Minutes, 1252nd BOR Meeting, 18 December 2009, p. 3). During an executive session, the President moved that Ms. Bañez be allowed to sit during the 1252nd BOR meeting but only as an observer because she was no longer a student and therefore cannot discharge the duties of a student regent. This resulted in a division of the Board.”

“Before the vote, however, one of the regents moved that Ms. Bañez be allowed to vote, in effect, on her own fate. The vote went against the President’s motion, 5-4 (with Ms. Bañez voting for herself instead of abstaining). Thus Ms. Bañez was allowed to “sit as a regular member of the Board until the issue on enrollment is resolved.” ”

“The BOR then proceeded to take up its agenda items with Ms. Bañez participating and voting. Part of the agenda included the appointment of the PGH Director, where the voting was decided by a tie breaker vote cast by the Chairman of the CHED, as Co-Chair and Presiding Officer.”

Thus, by its own admission, the U.P. administration has stated in its own website that Student Regent Bañez was allowed not just to sit as an observer but as a regular voting member of the BOR where her own eligibility to vote was agreed upon by the majority of the BOR and in that same meeting, Dr. Gonzales was selected as the new Executive Director of PGH.

The petition authored by Dr. Romero states that given the fact that Regent Sarmiento protested the eligibility of Student Regent Bañez to vote after voting had already taken place on December 18 and at the very end of the meeting; and that Bañez's eligibility to vote had already been discussed prior to voting, but that she was allowed to vote anyway; that Sarmiento's protest, formalized through an official letter dated December 23, 2009 was scheduled to be taken up in the next BOR meeting scheduled on January 29 in Los Baños; Roman's memo “unilaterally decided the outcome of the protest of a single Regent, before this protest could be acted upon by the full Board”

“The question is why is Dr. Gonzales being removed even before the protest of Regent Sarmiento is discussed in the next BOR meeting?” Romero asked the Diliman Diary.