THE UNIVERSITY has until March 27 to explain its compliance with the distribution of the faculty’s legally mandated share in tuition hike proceeds, which, if found in violation, may result in repercussions, potentially including the non-renewal of UST’s autonomous status, a Commission on Higher Education (CHEd) official said.
On March 7, CHEd ordered UST to explain its compliance with Republic Act 6728 (the Government Assistance to Students and Teachers in Private Education Act), which requires schools to set aside 70% of tuition increase collections for the salaries and benefits of teaching and non-teaching personnel.
A copy of the order, penned by CHEd Executive Director Cinderella Benitez-Jaro, was received by UST on March 12, making March 27 the end of the 15-day deadline for the school’s explanation.
READ: CHEd orders UST to explain compliance on distribution of faculty’s share in tuition hikes
Jaro said penalties would still depend on the findings and decision of the CHEd en banc, or the full, five-member commission.
In general, the implications of not complying with the 70% share include rejection of a school’s application for a future tuition increase, but this applies only to tightly regulated institutions.
“‘Yong compliance mo doon sa previous increase mo should be taken into consideration when we allow an institution to increase their tuition, [but] that’s for regulated institutions,” Jaro told the Varsitarian in an exclusive interview.
UST is an “autonomous” institution and is not subject to the same level of CHEd oversight.
Such schools, if found to be non-compliant, risk losing their autonomous status in the next evaluation cycle, according to Jaro.
READ: UST gets fresh 3-year autonomous status from CHEd
“One of the criteria so that an institution can be given an autonomous status is that there should be no violation. It’s a pre-requisite that there should be no violation of existing rules and regulations of the commission and, of course, violation of the law pertaining to higher education,” the CHEd executive director said.
“So, there is a possibility that in case UST has [been] found to be in violation of any existing regulation of the commission, then that will be a ground for disqualification in the next cycle,” she added.
The Varsitarian tried to get UST’s side through Vice Rector for Academic Affairs Cheryl Peralta but she has yet to respond as of press time.
CHEd granted UST a fresh three-year autonomous status in September 2024.
Certificate of Compliance
CHEd’s show-cause directive was in response to a request from the UST Faculty Union (USTFU) in December for a legal opinion after its appeal for the partial release of teachers’ tuition hike share was denied by UST.
In its letter to the commission, the USTFU also requested the release of the school’s Certificate of Intended Compliance and Certificate of Compliance, which state that tuition hikes are “being used for the payment of increase in salaries, wages, allowances and other benefits of its teaching and non-teaching personnel.”
The UST administration released on Tuesday answers to frequently asked about collective bargaining agreement (CBA), where it addressed questions regarding these two certificates. It said the show-cause order is merely a notice to explain and not an indication of wrongdoing.
“The University takes great pride in its status of being compliant with all CHEd and DepEd (Department of Education) rules and regulations,” it said.
UST has certificates of compliance or intended compliance covering the following: a portion of tuition increase collections for AY 2020-2021, and collections for AY 2021-2022, AY 2022-2023, and AY 2023-2024, it said.
UST has argued that distribution of faculty’s 70% share in tuition hikes could only be done through a ratified CBA, citing a section of the CHEd memorandum that states that the amount must be used “as may have been provided for in the [CBA].”
The ball is now on CHEd’s court to determine whether UST’s argument — that a ratified CBA is required before releasing teachers’ share in tuition hikes — is correct.
