Text Brigade Going On

Have you received this text message? It reads: "IPCAP very actively campaigning for APO. Need you to have your friends and colleagues to write a letter to PRC Secretary Retired Justice Nicolas Lapena to endorse PGCA ASAP. Thanks"

This is the second time I was told about this text, the first one being last week (Monday or Tuesday?) and this latest was just yesterday, Sunday October 5, 2008 as I drove back from Tagaytay where I gave a marriage encounter weekend (hoy I am not [yet] married ha? aba, nag-eentertain pa pala? Haha pray for me to be faithful). The texter added in the text, saying:

"FATHER, I GOT THIS TEXT FROM A FRIEND. SHE SAID IT CAME FROM A PGCA OFFICER."

CAUTION:

Before you read the rest of this blog, please take note of the following:

1. The matter is strictly for mature and responsible adults only (di po 'to x-rated) because it can be very disturbing and calls for some appropriate action.

2. If you happen to belong to an organization either as member or officer, particularly any of the following: PGCA, PACERS, PACC, PAPSHP, GCC, CDAP, RGS, and FPCAP, please tell them your mind before your Presidents or anyone in your Boards dares to represent your take on the matters here without consulting you! I remember still clearly that in 2004, when PGMA was challenged to resign, the Association of Major Religious Superiors of the Philippines (AMRSP) met at De La Salle, Greenhills and released a statement calling the President to resign. A certain religious community told its superior who attended the meeting that the said statement appeared to not reflect the sentiments of their community because when their community conducted a survey, majority of the members did not agree that GMA resigns. So be counted, and assert your right to be heard. Yes, talk about the text message you received and discuss with your friends and colleagues your ideas, in the light of the following matters.

Proceed!

Let it be clear that IPCAP has not petitioned the PRC to be accredited as the APO. So, the one (was that a PGCA Officer kamo?) who texted you has spread something that is not true. And just to remind that PGCA Officer who texted you, the IPCAP was endorsed to the SEC for registration by the PRC mismo or else IPCAP wouldn't have been certified by the SEC! IPCAP is a legitimate organization and what we at IPCAP are doing is to open the gates to ALL RGC's for membership and form this organization that shall embody what we truly are at this time that we are governed under the law, the Republic Act No. 9258 or the "Guidance and Counseling Act of 2004."

We are PGCA Members

In requiring all who have been given the license under the R.A. 9258's Grandfather's Clause (Sec. 14) to become a PGCA member, the Rules and Regulations of RA No. 9258 has made us all "captive" now in PGCA. How many RGC's are we now? Our latest count at the IPCAP is 885, including those 84 who have passed the first licensure exams last Aug. 21-22, 2008. Simple mathematics tells us that the PRBGC has licensed for three batches in one year's time only 801! What PGCA did is something that they should even account for: WHY DID THEY BRING US IN WITHOUT OUR CONSENT? Payment of dues was not within our consent because we were constrained to follow the law. But the interpretation of the law appears to be really questionable, and smacks of favoritism by the two members of the PRBGC who are PGCA members!

I have just talked with Dr. Luz Guzman, and have "ventilated" (she used this word to describe my manner of presenting the matter) the following:

The requirement for certificate of active membership and good moral character from (APO) to be issued by the President and two other officers - while a prerogative of the Board - may have effectively flushed out many who have not been able to attend conventions through the years (like the emailer I blogged about, remember?). I do remember that for the first batch, this was absolutely required!

What was required? To get a certificate of active membership, one ought to have had attended two PGCA events, one national and one local. By national refers to either a PGCA Convention (usually in May) or Midyear (Usually October therabouts), while the "local" referred to any PGCA Local Chapter-held event. Of course many complained and failed to meet this requirement because there are more practicing Guidance Counselors who are NOT MEMBERS of PGCA, and there are many places all over the country without a PGCA Local Chapter, and thereby were FORCED to become one. See POWER AT WORK! Good, because this was corrected in the 2nd and 3rd batches. I remember having bargained in one of the IPCAP meetings which sounded like a consensus area, that participation in other Guidance Counseling-related organizations' events, e.g., PACERS National Convention or Midyear, the PACC Seminars, should suffice as having complied with the "local" requirement. That's how many made it to get their certificates of active membership and GMC - from PGCA! We were allowed to attend one PGCA (for national) and one other Guidance & Counseling-related organization's event (as local) to indicate active membership. But remember, this requirement is not in Sec. 14. What Sec. 14 wants to be generous about is ACTUAL PRACTICE! And sometimes, actual practice does not mean getting rich enough to pay and attend conventions. And dami nating pro bono counseling exposures that can drain our pockets.

Eto pa! The requirement in the law, Sec. 14 which the Rules and Regulations of the law has stipulated states: "that the 18 units shall have been completed on/or before March 2004" - remember that provision? - led to the proliferation of summer classes and lots of catching up by the succeeding applicants for the Grandfather's Clause to get those required units. I know of many who made the schools richer by attending those classes for the 18 units required and were given the PRC ID. If anyone would like the law followed strictly and to the letter, many would not make it having a PRC ID as RGC, in all fairness! But why would PRC and the Board do that when those licenses were theirs to grant in the first place and I know they have looked into our requirements qite meticulously! But of course, without having given such concessions, how many should there have been licensed now in three batches? Even someone I know who got her PhD sometime after the date stipulated in 2004 was given the license! Is this the case of "it matters WHOM you know, not WHAT you know." Malakas! But I'm not complaining.

For this last batch of oath-takers, I would like to further bargain that this provision should not be imposed any longer! Why? Buking na ang PGCA na di siya APO! In short, there is no APO from where we can get the required certificates! Yes, PGCA is INTERIM, and the task of the REAL APO should not be given to the INTERIM APO. In this period of the Grandfather, i.e., INTERIM period, we need to reckon with the fact that the law (RA 9258 Sec. 14) NEVER REQUIRED ACTIVE MEMBERSHIP in any organization. (How many times must I harp on this point!) The Good Moral Character is already evident in the Barangay Captain's certificate of Good Moral Character, the Parish Priest's/Pastor's/Imam's Certificate of Good Moral Character, the employer's certificate of good moral character. Yes, since these people may not be privy to private matters of the applicant, therefore the NBI and the Ombudsman were added evidences of good moral standing, i.e., the applicant shall not have or be suffering from moral turpitude. All of these are in fulfillment of the requirements stipulated in Sec. 13[b] of the RR and the RA 9258! Therefore, I apologize for writing this thought aloud, but I overheard this said way back 2007 pa pero di ako naniwala: the PGCA certificates of good moral character and active membership appears to be a fund-raising strategy to boost its chances of gaining the APO-hood.

Now, it was only lately, as I studied this regulatory law on the practice of Guidance and Counseling here in the Philippines, that I stumbled upon at the PRC website the PRC Resolution No. 132 Series of 2003, which requires all who are to take the Board exams to secure from any Professional in one's field this certificate of Good Moral Character. Remember, it's not from an organization! The Rules and Regulations of R.A. 9258 promulgated by the Board NEVER REQUIRED this from the Board Examinees! Much less was it required from PGCA! Di ba under the control and supervision ang PRBGC by the PRC? What is this evidence of? I bet the PRC needs to look into itself and the way it runs things! It failed to show the PRBGC this PRC Resolution! And the PRBGC may have acted either in ignorance of this particular Resolution, or, hopefully not, against such Resolution! Ignorance excuses no one, says the pundit, but rebellion and insubordination shall never stop those under the PRBGC from emulating! Di ba ganon 'to? Modeling! But sorry, and sadly, it's poor modeling! Kawawang Guidance and Counseling profession. Hence, I am trying my best to point to all these kinks we need to iron out!

Now, PGCA is texting people to endorse PGCA to PRC as APO. Isn't this the best evidence of admission that indeed it is not APO! After the thousands we have given it, they are telling us that they were not the APO pala? Hah! What a strategy! Naloko kaya tayo, and this is something PGCA, the Board and PRC should account for! Or nagpaloko kaya tayo? The only consolation I have is the fact that at least PGCA has funds to really promote the profession! It should do so because we paid them for it! Imagine the hotel meals they spend when they meet as a Board! They get paid for every Board meeting. P700 na ba per meeting? Mayaman na si Mama! Kaya halika na, sama na tayo ke Mama!

In the race to the APO-hood, PGCA is llamado because every one of the 885 RGC's are all PGCA members! Many are members of other organizations too, and all sum up to 885. But what about those among us who are not as cash-filled as some of us are? There were those who made utangs here and utangs there only to comply. Pero kapos pa rin ang bilang natin. Di pa tayo umabot ng 1,000. Imagine, the last two PGCA National Conventions were both blockbusters, like a pregnant woman about to give birth. Bundat talaga sa dami natin noon. Why should their non-participation in conferences penalize them from getting the coveted PRC ID as RGC for the fourth and last batch? Dr. Guzman herself knows of many cases who simply have no time to comply due to their taxing job demands. I pray the PRBGC and the PRC really look into this motu proprio! The PGCA won't say anything on this matter because it stands to lose the membership and participation fees we will have to spend!

Kakapagod no? Kakalungkot kamo! Nakakapanlumo talaga!

Eto pa: Yes, PGCA AS APO, if they get the accreditation certificate from PRC this time!

Let me now blog in here the letter IN FULL, a part of which I cited before in my previous blog entitled "Open Letter to fellow Guidance Counselors." I know marami ang nabitin about it, even asking in their minds where I got it! Go and check it yourself with the PGCA Office (see their website for the address and phone number). Baka naman sabihin ninyo na tsismis lang yan! If PGCA were to be the APO, it is OUR organization! Our ignorance does not excuse us, the pundits say, di ba? And the PGCA Boards (before, now and in the future) should not continue with the practice of hiding things from the members, or appear favoring its friends. Kawawa naman ang di nila kilala or di pa nagiging kaibigan! Let's be professional! The matters in PGCA, particularly those you will read in here are NOT COUNSELING ISSUES covered under the CONFIDENTIALITY CLAUSE of the Counseling profession! We have every right to know this and to effect the right solutions to these problems. The intensity of the reasonability and necessity of this exposition here is due to the fact that years have passed and these ones appear to have not been fully resolved! So, if those whom we have elected have failed, maybe our knowledge will keep these from happening again! So, before you read this, please remember that after reading, YOU HAVE AN OBLIGATION! Don't allow yourself to be a bystander. Makialam ka! It's our profession now! And yes, KUNG WALA KANG PAKIALAM DITO, WAG MO NA ITO BASAHIN! Para lang ito sa mga professional ang gawi.

I am not intending to destroy PGCA as some would like to believe or accuse me of, especially those whose ways will be unveiled, ala projected guilt. To tell you honestly, if I were to mention here what Jesus said in Scriptures, "Unless you reform, you shall go their way" (referring to Corazin and Bethsaida, and Capernaum).

I would just like to have an APO that is really capable of doing what is right to friend and foe alike, consistently, professionally, conscientiously. I hope I am acting in the spirit of justice here. If anyone has an answer to these matters below, do please let us know about them, specially about their developments. I really hope we enter into the stage where the APO is one we can all call our own and not simply the legacy of the older ones, or because it is the largest. The criteria for APO rest not in these concerns. It is even best that there is INTEGRITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY (di ba ito ang theme ng upcoming PGCA Midyear in Cagayan de Oro this October 2008?) in the PGCA, not just in the REAL APO but also in each one of us. Let's make ourselves advocates of transparency and good governance for as Guidance Counselors, we are charged with affecting our clients in helping free the Philippine society from corruption and shady living.

In Family Therapy, one of the principles I've learned and have seen to be very crucial to a positive therapeutic outcome (experiential though undocumented), is knowledge about the family patterns. The more the client family or its members know about these patterns, the better for them in terms of making a choice whether to let these continue or not. The power of choice becomes more intense when one clearly knows about the options! Living in the light is really good, while living in the dark excuses no one from seeking the light. In our latest PGCA National Convention in May 2008, di ba nagkagulo tayo about the non-turnover by the previous PGCA Treasurer? Dr. Nuval was our heroine then! Pero wala pa ring effect! Maybe by letting us know about the following, may we have a better knowledge and act better next time, something we can do whether in PGCA or in other organizations, including the IPCAP! So, eto na!


"July 26, 2007

Dear Dr. Ho,

This is to request for your written explanation on the issues raised in Board Resolution No. 05 (2007-08) dated July 12, 2007. Hereunder are the issues:

1. The title of Unit 1204 Medical Plaza Ortigas, 25 San Miguel Ave., Ortigas Center, Pasig City has not been turned over to the Board despite demand;

2. The PGCA Application for accreditation as professional organization at the Professional Regulation Commission is pending due to the submission of the Constitution of 1969 which is not the one in force, as it has already been amended;

3. The dollar time deposit Account No. A218148 in the amount of $1,048.44 and accrued interest in PNB-Diliman Campus was closed by a board resolution dated September 28, 2004 with only five signatories which falls short of the majority (See Attachment A)

4. The unliquidated cash advance in the amount of Php50,000 of Geraldine cavaneyro, former Secretary of PGCA, which you assumed as your accountability has not been fully paid (See Attachment B)

5. There are letters from some members raising issues on your behavior and conduct (See Attachment C1, C2, C3, C4, C5 and C6.)

Please submit your reply within seventy two hours upon receipt of this letter.

Very truly yours,

Sgd. Ms. Maria Lourdes L. Chavez
Secretary

Noted

Sgd. Dr. Rosa Maria I. Llanes
President

UPCOMING CONCERNS FOR ACCOUNTABILITY

1. As regards the CONDO TITLE, the Board was given one which needs to be audited and scrutinized. Dr. Luz Guzman mentioned to me that Dr. Villar managed to get the real one last Friday - Oct. 3? How I hope the PGCA website will have uploaded a pdf of this title so that we can for ourselves see the veracity of this matter which has been delayed for how many years - 5 years? - and not just cajole us into believing that this matter has been resolved. And of curse, explanations from the persons responsible, I believe Dr. Villar is not the one I mean here about: (a) What took it so long? Whoever has caused this delay needs also to account for the fact that at the moment since the time it was bought with P1.2M, PGCA has accrued expenses, including the current expenses for an office which should not have been its office in the first place if this CONDO TITLE were turned over soonest. Talk of ACCOUNTABILITY in the upcoming midyear? This is it! (b) Why are there two receipts to this title - one for P1.2M and one for P1.6M? Oh c'mon, the Board knows all of these because we all saw this at the IPCAP Meetings last year. Again, this is not to destroy PGCA nor anybody. This revelation is only to ensure that we don't have an APO that is saddled with such problems, or a future PRBGC Member or Chair who will hoodwink us in corrupt ways! Or another problem like this in the future. If we don't solve this matter, history has a free space to repeat itself because there is no watch dog!

2. As regards the PNB UP-Campus DOLLAR ACCOUNT, the Board Resolution to close it does not have reasons for closing it. All the Resolution states is the fact that indeed PGCA has that account in PNB UP-Campus, and that in a regular meeting of PGCA Board of Directors on Sept. 28,n 2004 at the UP College of Education Rm. 107, it was resolved that it be closed. Ganon lang!? The Resolution carries with it the following signatories: Annabelle Sangalang (Secretary), Zenaida Lapitan-Garcia (Treasurer), Ann Marie Sunga Vargas (Vice-President), and Ligaya de Guzman (Asst. Treasurer). Dr. Leticia Ho signed also as President. Five signatories they were against the following who DID NOT SIGN: Grace Agustin (Auditor), Efrea Uy (PRO), Josefina Donato (Board of Director), Editha A. Peñano (Asst. Secretary), Maripaz Ortiz (Business Manager) and Amparo de Guzman (Board of Director). The Resolution was subscribed and sworn before a lawyer on Oct. 1, 2004. One sees that indeed, there was NO MAJORITY, and yet it prevailed!

The withdrawal of the Dollar Account was also coursed through a Board Resolution (again undated, napansin nyo ba?) by no less than the same persons, and also UNSIGNED by the same persons, and also subscribed and sworn before a lawyer on the same day. And yes, also by a non-majority and yet prevailed! Lakas talaga!

3. As regards the unliquidated P50,000, has it been paid? Why not? Are there any interests accrued to that too? Buhay pa kaya ako pag nabayaran na ito? What is keeping PGCA from pursuing this? There are now courts in the land for claiming debts P50K and below, which do not need lawyers! C'mon, PGCA wake up! It's high time PGCA funds are well accounted for! In the words of one good RGC I know, "when anyone in the Board uses the money of the organization, such is no longer a matter of personal concern so that former Presidents become at odds with one another. It is a moral problem!"

Okey, let PGCA be APO. Why not?

But with these matters unaudited, will it stand the PRC scrutiny? Let's not put ourselves into shame. We've had it once already when the poor Dr. Llanes was shown the PGCA's inability to qualify as APO last year! Believe you, it ached to be told ALL YOU HAVE IS THE LAW! - the you here referring to PGCA. Let me state that in my readings on the legislative history of the law, PGCA was there indeed for the House and the Senate deliberations. And the PAP was represented well too. But what we have now is not a PGCA Law! Bawal ang class legislation!

Let us have an ACCOUNTABLE APO, one which has integrity and clarity of purpose, hindi dahil paborito siya ni Lola. Let PGCA, and the PRBGC then account for its actions in hoarding us all into PGCA while these matters remain unsolved. Let the present Treasurer Dr. Alexa Abrenica do her job! Let the P1,500 we paid for the Oath Taking be accounted for and audited because that's the way it should be! Let's follow the law, or else, no one may have the right to accuse others for not following the law later. Remember the woman caught in adultery - "You who have no sin, cast the first stone."

I have not cast the first stone. I am not sinless like the Blessed Virgin Mary. I am just helping everyone of us in our discernment about this matter. We have been texted to, and we need to respond! I have told Dr. Llanes and Dr. Villar prior to IPCAP's registration process that began in June 2008 - imagine ang tagal nating hinintay ito kasi I respected PGCA's "right of ascendancy to APO-hood" - if PGCA can make it, GO! But if PGCA cannot make it, why should the profession suffer? The Profession of Guidance and Counseling in the Philippines CANNOT STAND HAVING NO APO. So, let not PGCA stand in the way! With all these in the light, and meron pa po! Please PGCA, let's do something. Let's keep everyone knowledgeable about these things so that nobody will do it again. Di ba may problema din about a bank account the amount of which was not turned over to the Board? Why has the Board allowed it to happen? This is one of the patterns which we need to ensure won't happen again! Shall PGCA send to the PRC unaudited financial reports for the past three years, like it did in 2005?

Haay talagang nakakapagod ito!

Where goest thee,
my Guidance and Counseling profession in the Philippines
but to the halls of reform, transparency and integrity
without which we are like horned creatures
fighting in the dark, enslaved in our unrepenting ways!

God save us all!