EO, resolution discriminate vs LGU staff

I WRITE to bring to the attention of concerned authorities two issues of common interest to LGU employees. The first has to do with Executive Order 900 (Adopting the Second Tranche of the Modified Salary Schedule [MSS] of Civilian Personnel and Base Pay Schedule of Military and Uniformed Personnel in the Philippines), particularly Item 4.

While we appreciate the entitlements of LGU personnel under the MSS, we are disappointed that the effectivity of salary adjustments for LGUs was scheduled on Jan. 1, 2011 while that of national government employees was July 1, 2010. There may be LGUs hard-pressed to implement salary adjustments, but there are also LGUs financially capable of implementing the same effective July 1, 2010. The six-month delay each year, since 2009, in the implementation of the MSS for LGUs quite clearly has deprived and will continue to deprive, employees of financially capable municipalities, cities and provinces enormous base pay adjustments as well as 13th-month pay bonuses. Why should the EO discriminate against the autonomous LGUs? EO 900 should be amended such that its effectivity would be made retroactive starting July 1, 2009, and henceforth simultaneous with the annual salary adjustment for national government employees.

The second issue pertains to the Senate and House of Representatives (HR) Joint Resolution 04, series of 2009 (Joint Resolution Authorizing the President of the Philippines to Modify the Compensation and Position Classification System of Civilian Personnel and the Base Pay Schedule of Military and Uniformed Personnel in the Government, and for Other Purposes). The resolution stipulates that first-class municipalities may adjust their salary schedule equivalent to 90 percent of that of first-class provinces and cities or equivalent to the salary schedule of third-class provinces and cities (Item 7). The resolution effectively stops, beginning 2010, the implementation of Senate and HR Joint Resolution 01, s. of 1994 (Item 5) authorizing LGUs to adopt the salary schedules for those of higher income classes. Again, why discriminate against autonomous LGUs that contribute a great deal to the collection of real estate taxes?

In the interest of justice, we ask that the Senate and HR Joint Resolution 04, s. of 2009, particularly Item 7, be recalled and Joint Resolution 01 (s. of 1994) reinstated, particularly Item 5.

—RAUL A. MABINI,
city budget officer, Baybay City, Leyte; incumbent director, Region VIII Association of Local Budget Officers, Leyte League of Local Budget Officers and former national executive vice president for Visayas, Philippine Association for Government Budget Administration, Inc., aponymabini@yahoo.com