By Modesto P. Sa-onoy
Last week I reacted to the claim of Vallacar Transit Inc. regarding their defense of taking back 50% of the tripping allowance of their drivers and conductors. The VTI spokesman said that everybody in the company is doing their share in helping the company. We take this as admission that the company is in dire straits that even the lowest of their employees had to suffer financial loss to cover a deficit from operation or whatever.
Have the drivers and conductors not done enough when their work time was slashed to bare minimum – working only seven days a month? Is that not sacrificing enough that 50% of their allowance from these reduced trips had to be taken back? Is not this action of the company indicative of a very poor financial condition or perhaps siphoning of company funds?
A month ago, a friend told me that the Ceres Bus trips to their town have been cut by half. Sometime later another friend asked, how can VTI recover its expenses when every time he sees the Ceres bus pass by their town there are only a few passengers?
If we add the information that VTI is also paying indebtedness to two Chinese bus manufacturers, the financial situation of VTI is critical indeed.
In the social media exchange of people inside VTI is another set of information. The exchange is in Cebuano so I will translate it to English for our non-Cebuano readers.
“The 30% deduction from your vacation leave is the deduction of your cash advance of the 15 days at the start of the pandemic. Also about the 6 days bonus the drivers and conductors should have known about it because there was a briefing about it at the start of work.”
This is an explanation and a defense of the actions of the VTI management, but it is also a revelation. It appears that the company was not generous as it wants the public to believe when the drivers and conductors were laid off temporarily at the start of the pandemic. It gave a cash advance but even before the situation has normalized the company quickly deducted money from the drivers to recover its advances.
Could the company have at least waited until operations normalized and collected? Does it not seem VTI is in great need of money that once the drivers and conductors had a little more the management took back what could have helped a bit under the underemployment situation?
No wonder a riposte to this explanation was also quick to say, “Do it because you have no sensitivity. Even the wives are killing themselves sleeping late and waking up too early waiting for the wages. Please just be kind. There are too many deductions without the right computations.”
Indeed, for the heartless and uncompassionate management of VTI, beggars cannot complain because the management apparently needs all the centavos it can collect to pay its obligations to Yutong and King Long and whatever else.
On the other hand, if the management is scrapping the bottom of its financial barrel, how come its presumptive president, Leo Rey is reported and being lambasted in media for intervening in the election of the Negros Press Club with alleged vote buying through his candidate for P1,000 per voter? That is just for vote buying. The amount given by Leo Rey could be more for “other expenses.”
I have not received any report denying this allegation, but still if anybody representing Leo Rey wants to make a public denial, this column is willing to accommodate.
The VTI explanation was for the 30% cash advance but it also exposed another heartless action of the management. It revealed that aside from the 50% the company took from the tripping allowance, it reduced the take home pay of the drivers. That did not appear in the news report. To recall, the work stoppage in Victorias was for the 50% reduction of their tripping allowance, not the cash advance. So then, VTI took back more than what the drivers and conductors complained about.
It is yet unclear. Is there a rift between Leo Rey and Ginnette or worse?
We continue tomorrow.
