Ben Contreras . DOCUMENTS were sent to my house last week. Before I discuss these, let me share my personal take on “loss of trust and confidence.” What actions fall under this? My brief research would show that this doctrine is so designed to make it easier for employers to get rid of employees even under the most whimsical excuses. I have seen employers’ tolerance on minor indiscretions, disrespect or discourtesy because they opt to see the bigger picture which is more vital to the business. Way back in 1969, at the age of 19, I was already a branch manager of Ajinomoto in Butuan City. I understood the way those under me treated me. Everyone in the branch was older and had more experience in life and probably, in the work we’re in. One would address me “Sir”, another, a mere “Ben,” and another, “Bentot.” When I got married in 1971, my wife took note of it and complained. I called everyone to a meeting and told them, “Respect is not manifested in the way we address a person. Respect is in how you deal with a person. If all of you call me “Sir,” and do not obey or cooperate for the branch, then “Sir” is just an empty word. But if you do your job well, you may call me by any name.” I still practice that today. In the document I got, dismissed Cagayan de Oro Water District general manager Rachel Beja was removed on account of “loss of trust and confidence.” Three instances were cited:
  1. “You were discourteous to the BOD when you sent a letter to the office of the OGCC...”
  2. “You were discourteous again to the BOD when you scheduled a management planning in Cebu...”
  3. “You were discourteous to the BOD when you scheduled a thanksgiving affair...”
On Reason No. 1 - Beja was only trying to get the opinion of the OGCC on three of 10 provisions that she felt needed review, putting the interest of COWD foremost. If I were a COWD director, I would commend her instead for her diligence. The haste with which the contract was signed (a huge amount of P2 billion+) and the fact that two of the board members were just there, on their second day, smack of conspiracy to railroad. At what price, if we may ask? On Reason No. 2 - Beja’s decision to hold the management planning in Cebu is not new to government offices. Even the COWD directors hold meeting outside their boardroom, at times even in fancy and expensive restaurants. What is good for the goose must be good for the gander, right? On Reason No. 3 - the thanksgiving event was to show appreciation to the city government for their cooperation in the aftermath of storm “Vinta.” It was neither a huge-budget event that required the COWD board’s approval nor was it for the limelight that it may generate. It was simply to show appreciation. If it was a major lapse, then somebody must be in dire need of exposure or wanted to be in the limelight. All things considered, we might ask, was it really about “loss of trust and confidence” or merely a question of pride and big egos? The three issues say so: “You were discourteous to the BOD... blah, blah, blah...” If the COWD board likes to come clean, show to the public the content of the contract, including that which is still being fine-tuned. It may erase public perception that money -- huge money -- changed hands. And to Oscar S. Moreno, how dare you tell your councilors that the COWD-Metropac mess in none of their business. It is our business and I dare you say the same to us, you *&%#!