Faculty unions back NU teachers’ organizing bid

Two faculty labor groups have issued statements of solidarity with teachers at National University who are moving to form a faculty union, urging the university’s administration to allow the effort to proceed without interference.

The Council of Teachers and Staff of Colleges and Universities in the Philippines (CoTeSCUP) released a two-page statement dated Aug. 31, 2026, titled “For a stronger National University, let teachers have a voice: A Statement of Solidarity with the Teachers of National University.”

“We support this effort not because we are against National University,” the statement said. “We support it because we believe that a university becomes stronger when the teachers who sustain its academic mission are able to speak, participate, and engage management collectively and without fear.”

CoTeSCUP said the solidarity is consistent with its advocacy for “decent work, freedom of association, collective bargaining, social dialogue, academic freedom, and meaningful participation of education workers” in decisions affecting their lives and profession.

The council said a union transforms individual concerns into a “collective and legitimate voice” on wages and benefits, workload, security of tenure, promotion, due process, grievance procedures, professional development and workplace welfare.

“Unionization is therefore not an act against the University,” the statement said. “It is an affirmation that those who help build the University deserve a meaningful voice in its future.”

CoTeSCUP cited the 1987 Constitution, which protects the right of persons employed in both the public and private sectors to form unions and associations and guarantees workers the rights to self-organization, collective bargaining, humane conditions of work, and participation in decisions affecting their rights and benefits.

The statement quoted Pope Francis: “There is no trade union without workers, and there are no free workers without trade unions.”

Addressing NU teachers, CoTeSCUP said: “No teacher should be compelled to support a union. But neither should any teacher be made afraid to support one.”

It called on the NU administration to “fully respect the freedom of association of its teachers” and to ensure an environment free of intimidation, discrimination, retaliation or fear for employment.

The statement was signed under officers Rene Tadle, president; Jonathan Te, vice president; Myra Duldulao, secretary general; and Grace Socorro Larceña, treasurer. Its board members are Victor Aguilan, Tadle, Michael Jambalos, Te, Nestor Asuncion, Duldulao, Jovy Cuadra, Larceña, John Vincent Ignacio, Raymond Tano, Johnny Perez, Emerito Gonzales, Josephine Prudente, Paul Nullan and German Manzanero.

Labor organizations represented in CoTeSCUP include the Faculty Association of MAPUA Institute of Technology (Manila), Silliman University Faculty Association (Dumaguete), Lyceum Faculty Association (Manila), St. Paul University-Manila Faculty Union, Centro Escolar University Faculty & Allied Workers Union (Manila), San Beda College Union (Manila), San Beda College Alabang Employees Association, Central Philippine University Faculty Association (Iloilo), De La Salle Araneta University Faculty Society and De La Salle Araneta University Employees Union (Malabon), University of San Carlos College Faculty Independent Union (Cebu), De La Salle University Employee Association Union (Manila), Ateneo Employees and Workers Union (Quezon City), Far Eastern University Faculty Association Inc. (Manila), Union of Faculty and Employees of St. Louis University (Baguio), Letran Calamba Faculty Employee Association, University of Santo Tomas Faculty Union (Manila), the National Federation of Labor, and the Federation of Free Workers and its affiliated unions in education.

The University of Santo Tomas Faculty Union (USTFU) issued a separate statement backing NU faculty in their bid to establish “a genuine, autonomous, and independent faculty union.”

USTFU said it noted “with deep concern” reports that management-led mechanisms such as Faculty-Management Councils are used to bypass genuine democratic representation, adding that consultation bodies “lack the legal standing and independence required to challenge unfair workplace practices or guarantee humane working conditions.”

The union said only an independent union allows faculty to collectively protect academic freedom, secure a transparent and fair tenure policy, negotiate fair economic benefits, and stand on equal footing with management at the negotiating table.

“A university’s integrity lies in how it treats its academic workforce,” USTFU said, calling on NU management “to respect labor rights, cease interference, and allow the faculty to freely organize.”

Supporting documents circulated with the statements point to an internal push at NU-Manila. In an email dated Aug. 19, 2026, Associate Professor Domar C. Alviar reminded fellow faculty of Section 22: Freedom of Association of the NU Employee Manual, quoting Section 22.2: “The formation of association/participation in an association shall not be part of disciplinary action or administrative case in the University.”

In a follow-up email dated Aug. 27, 2026, addressed to Renato Carlos H. Ermita Jr., Arlene O. Trillanes and NU Manila faculty, Alviar said statements made by the president of the Faculty-Management Council during a town hall meeting the previous day “appear to run contrary to the very conduct that Section 22 seeks to prevent.”

Alviar wrote that, as advised by their federation lawyer, faculty “will continue to document any acts or statements that may constitute interference or otherwise violate the DOLE mechanism, particularly now that a petition in relation thereto is ongoing.”

The documents also cite two pending labor disputes involving NU. A petition docketed as SP-189349 before the Court of Appeals in Manila, titled “Debbie Francisco Dianco vs. National University, Dr. Renato Carlos Ermita, Dr. Arlene Trillanes, Hans Sy, Aimee Jane Martinez, Leo Del Rosario and NLRC,” is listed as “submitted for completion.” The materials describe Dianco’s dismissal as arising from a retirement-age issue.

They cite a mid-2026 Supreme Court ruling in a case involving Colegio de San Juan de Letran-Calamba holding that retirement must be a truly voluntary, bilateral agreement. The decision states in part: “Settled is the rule that an employee in the private sector who did not expressly agree to an early retirement cannot be retired from the service before he reaches the age of 65 years. ‘Acceptance by the employee of an early retirement age option must be explicit, voluntary, free and uncompelled.'” The materials also reference the 2018 case of Alfredo Laya vs. Philippine Veterans Bank, noting both rulings set 65 as the retirement age that should apply.

The second dispute involves Jose Mario de Vega, described as Associate Professor 1 at NU-Manila. Writing in Asia-Pacific Research on Oct. 28, 2025, Prof. Ruel F. Pepa said: “A striking and illustrative example of academic exploitation under contractualization is the case of Prof. Jose Mario de Vega, who served as an Associate Professor 1 at the National University in Manila. Despite having devoted two years and six months of service as a probationary full-time faculty member, contributing significantly to teaching, curriculum development, and student mentorship, Prof. de Vega was never granted regularization or a permanent appointment. His repeated contributions exceeded the standard probationary or contractual period, yet the university failed to recognize his rights to security of tenure. Without legitimate cause, explanation, or due process, he was ultimately issued an end-of-contract notice, effectively terminating his employment and abruptly ending his academic engagement.”

A July 21, 2025 release by the Center for Trade Union and Human Rights said de Vega’s dismissal “is most unjust and deserves an investigation by the government.” The Teachers’ Dignity Coalition also raised the case in a Facebook post on faculty exploitation in private higher education institutions.

An accompanying essay by Alviar, “It might take 333 years for the NU faculty union to materialize,” argues that NU’s labor culture channels workers’ voices through human resources mechanisms and labor-management councils rather than an independent union, and that faculty hesitancy is shaped by the mixed records of unions at UST, De La Salle University and the University of the Philippines.

“A union is not merely about staging strikes; it is about securing an equal seat at the table where the future of those who shape the minds of the youth is determined,” Alviar wrote. “While NU may appear to be a ‘Great Place to Work’ on the surface, a university’s true greatness can only be measured by whether its faculty members have the freedom to speak and organize without fear.”