The announcement of the Minister of Education, Anabella Giracca, of a salary increase of 5% and Q500 in two bonds for the teaching staff makes question if the decision is aimed at improving educational quality. For María del Carmen Aceña, former Minister of Education and analyst at the National Economic Research Center (one hundred), it is a political act and considers that mass increases “are more of the same”, and that it would be best to reward teachers for their efficiency.
On the other hand, Aceña sees necessary to act as soon as possible to present to the Constitutional Court (CC) the action of unconstitutionality of the articles of the collective pact that take away the rectory to the Ministry of Education (MINEDUC) and grant privileges to the Union of Education Workers of Guatemala (Steg), represented by Joviel Acevedo.
Has the figure of Joviel Acevedo been positive for the teaching and the educational system in the country?
It has been placed as a great union leader; Everything that has promised teachers has fulfilled it. The problem is that he became an authority being a trade unionist. Governments have given him power and asked for political support at certain times. In the Steg, it seems that there is no other person to direct the union, because he already has several periods in front.
He has responded in salary and bond increases for teachers, but has not responded to the education of Guatemala children. We need a change to direct the Ministry of Education towards better learning.
During her management as Minister of Education, a process of dismissal of Acevedo began. Why wasn’t it achieved?
It was conjunctural, because when we were in the Government (2004-2008), he did union work and was absent from teaching, which is illegal, because it can only be absent while a collective pact is discussed. If he wanted to do union work, I had to do it during school. He found out that he was not going to classes, but the biggest crime was that he subcontracted another teacher to give them.
We couldn’t say goodbye directly because the ministry was located. Then we did it through the labor courts and a court order was given to replace it; However, when this happened there was already the government of Álvaro Colom, who had an agreement with the trade unionists and a figure was found through which the ONSEC – national civil service official – re -enterted him. From then on, he has supported the governments on duty.
The union must ensure workers, but neither do it become a politician, and in the case of education it has been disastrous, because the majority of what is negotiated in the collective pact are privileges for trade union leaders, teachers and administrative workers. In the end, it is an extortion medium, instead of thinking about what matters to the Ministry of Education: student learning.
At this time a new collective pact is negotiated. Does negotiating the requests of the union involve raising an opposition front?
What the minister has announced is a first step, because, as the union and Professor Acevedo were giving more court, she began to have more interference on issues that are the responsibility of the Ministry. For example, he is involved in the Quality Committee, in the selection and dismissal of teachers. That does not respect a union. The first thing is that the Ministry resumes the rectory.
As one hundred, we think that this way of increasing the salary to workers, with bonds and massively, is not the best for education. That has been disastrous. What has to be done is a transformation of human resource, where the teacher is really rewarded for efficiency, because it has results. But that everyone is given a bonus, in what improves education? Nothing. Mass increases either, because many teachers strive and succeed, but there are teachers who don’t.
It is like Q1 billion that will cost this. Too bad that an educational transformation does not begin with these resources. There should be a discussion about that, but they are all pacts or privileges; We do not concentrate on children.
In the end, if there is no law for collective pacts of the public sector, we are sentenced to mediocrity, and the official is subject to the pressures of the unions. The salary mass grows, but the quality of public services does not.
Do you see positive the 5% salary increase announced for teachers and Q400 for administrative staff?
It is a political act, because she (Giracca) wanted to increase and had the resources, but it is more of the same. And if you, as a minister, have that freedom to choose what to do with money, would have done something different from mass increases and increases to bonds. I would have given a computer to all teachers, computer classes, connectivity in the classroom, for example, and perhaps performance bonds. They are q1 billion. But it is a political action, to say: “I increase”, regardless of whether or not the trade unionist agrees.
Now the negotiation must continue, and if the union does not agree, because they can continue to solve it in the courts, but it is much longer and expensive.
The Mineduc authorities also announced actions of unconstitutionality against several articles of the collective pact. Is it right?
The minister announced that they will present, with the Attorney General’s Office (PGN), a series of articles of the current pact before the CC for issues of unconstitutionality. They have to send them, because there are some that are out of context, because each one has their role, and the role of the ministry is to be the rector of the country’s education, and that of the union is to defend the worker, but not to co -govern, because he does not have to give up, he is not responsible for anything.
They have to grab that articulate through the PGN, negotiate this before the CC and that it is pronounced. Once they are pronounced, if these articles are unconstitutional in the pact that is being discussed, they would not include them.
Where could the actions of the union against the increase announced by Minister Giracca go?
The minister says that she put a previous appeal and that she has the support of a court so that no unemployment is made or buildings. Obviously, he (Acevedo) always wants more, and that is a problem of collective pacts, because they say they are to improve, but what is improving is the entry of bureaucrats, not public services.
The coverage of education remains exactly the same. He is spending, he is not being invested. What are we going to do with technology, with the 21st century? You have to make a radical change and not think about what is going to be done with the union, because the union does not think about the future; Think only of money and privileges.
Are the agreements of the pact, outside the salary issue, are they really relevant to education?
No. A lot of money is being spent and children are not a priority. They only go for money and privileges. I do not know a collective pact of the public sector that is oriented to the improvement of public services.
I don’t think there is a collective pact that really improves the situation. Everything is money, holidays, awards, bonds, and for a country as poor as Guatemala, which needs both investment and development, this is not the solution to improve it.
We have to change, and our human resource is the most important. If we do not have technocracy, we are not going to change the country, and what we are having is mediocrity.
What path is now to follow in the negotiation of the collective pact?
The most important thing is that the minister proceeds quickly, that he manages to remove those articulated and that a discussion in Guatemala is started on a background reform of the educational system. In addition, you should start working in a law to limit collective pacts in the public sector, which are not those collective pacts that are leaving the country indebted.