“Filipinos rated most committed to work”

The “employee engagement” is supposed to be a measure of “commitment” and “drive” of a worker to achieve a company’s goal. It runs high among Filipinos. That’s according to a recent survey conducted on workers of some top corporations in the country by Watson Wyatt, a global consulting agency. At 77%, the employee engagement for the Philippines has improved from by 4% since 2007. The score is good among countries of the Asia-Pacific region!

Beating of China (66%,) India (75%), Indonesia (71%,) Thailand (72%,) and Malaysia (67%,) RP’s laudable score appeared in the Philipine Daily Inquirer (01/27/09, Dumlao, D)— a business news item entitled “Filipinos rated most committed to work.”

I find the report flattering. Only the workers of top corporations have been included in the poll. The survey outfit admits there are no international standards to determine the socio-political and cultural factors that are unique for each country which may influence the score. Such limitations hardly dispel the doubts of readers.

Whatever this survey is worth, I like to know if there is any difference in the score of workers in the public sector compared to those who are in the government. It would have been better if all in the labor force (not only the corporate employees) were represented in the survey. It would have been more revealing if those in the farms and those employed abroad were included. The result might be more accurate in characterizing the “commitment” of the entire Filipino labor force. (Photo Credit: Bikoy; Neil Alderney 123)=0=

==========================================================

Cory Aquino’s "Apology": A Betrayal?

Days after former President Cory Aquino’s supposed apology to former President Estrada, I am still in wonderment and puzzled about all the hullabaloo coming from her political allies. Does a former President lose her right to rue one of her public actions? Can an icon like no longer look back to one of the most controversial portions of our history?

Or are all these manifestations of insecurity on the part of her political allies? That she is no longer one with them in affirming that “they did the right thing” in participating in EDSA II?

Among the comments against her that I read, the most galling is the Philippine Daily Inquirer Editorial Opinion on December 26, 2008. Allow me to quote some excepts:

“…former Corazon Aquino’s apology to the disgraced former President Joseph Estrada for the “mistake” of Edsa 2001 is a betrayal of the highest aspirations of the democracy she helped restore in 1986…”

My opinion: Very strong words. I wish that has been reserved for the power-seeking couple now occupying Malacanang.

“It also betrays the elitist understanding of the former President…of the dynamics of recent mass movements in Philippine politics.”

My take: No supporting arguments were offered for this contention. I wonder what are the credentials of the writer regarding the topic of mass movements. I am not even sure that EDSA II is the result of a mass movement.

“Edsa II was a direct political action triggered by evidence of grave presidential wrongdoing…”

“Last year’s well-argued, solidly based Sandiganbayan decision finding him guilty of two of four counts of plunder is the best justification for Edsa II.”

I say: Does the Inquirer say that everytime there’s evidence of “grave presidential wrongdoing” an EDSA II must be launched?

I think this editorial and comments like this reek of political self-righteousness as in, “Yes, we were completely right”, and a refusal to re-study EDSA II. And probably this also shows a refusal to recognize that they were used and conned by a power-seeking couple that now occupies the stinking Palace by the Pasig river.

To be consistent the allies of former President Aquino should launch another EDSA II and it is probably only right to expect the Inquirer to lead this if they believe in their own editorial. And we will probably see who has a poorer understanding of the dynamics of mass movements.

Amando Doronila is Wrong

In his Inquirer column, Amando Doronila argues that US President-elect Barack Obama is “no friend to the Philippines” because Obama snubbed President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s congratulatory call.

Amando Doronila is wrong. Since when did we equate Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo with the Philippines? Certainly, Gloria as an unpopular leader comes strong in Barack Obama’s radar. Joc Joc Bolante’s trial in Chicago, put in spotlight by very vocal anti-Gloria protesters outside the courthouse, was too scandalous to escape Obama’s attention. Even US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice is no fan of the sitting Philippine leader. Gloria’s misconducts are also all over the Web.

If at all, Obama is showing remarkable sensitivity to the feelings of majority of Filipinos who will be outraged if they see the transformational president chummy-chummy with a woman of strong faith who, the world perceives, institutionalized graft and corruption in a third world country to perpetuate her abusive, repressive regime.

Bad signs for Gloria. Three snubs in a row is outside the margin of error. Obama appears to have lumped her together with the leaders of Burma, Zimbabwe and Sudan, who Obama plans to take on (reading his Berlin speech between the lines) and whose congratulatory calls Obama will probably not promptly return.

There is silver lining for Gloria, though. Bill Clinton is her college classmate, and Hillary may just become the US Secretary of State.

Still, a multitude silently waits here now and ready to erupt into cheers if only the “cut and cut cleanly” one-liner gets delivered Obama style— so hope and change would come to the Philippines too.