Do we really need new chiefs?

Like other previous letter-writers on the issue did, let me assure everyone that I am also not a member of any organization that has been involved in this federalization fever that has been hovering over us for quite a while now. Even when I was still working as a paralegal for Dekada’s counsel last year, I never joined the group or any other group allied to it, believing that I can best maintain my objectivity and impartiality in expressing my views that way. Nonetheless, I believe that my choice does not make me less of an affected guest worker. Hence, I would like to express my opinion on the issue of the propriety of forming a new coalition of guest workers at this time.

I do not intend to offend the leaders of this new group because I know that they are well-meaning and may have the interest of the guest workers really in their mind. On the other hand, I cannot blame the doubters. I always consider doubt as a healthy sign. As one Stanislaw Leszczynski (1677-1766) said, “To believe with certainty we must begin with doubting.” And it is also through doubting that we learn. Wilson Mizner (1876-1933) said, “I respect faith, but doubt is what gets you an education.” I myself is in doubt and thereupon expect to be made certain and be educated by those concerned.

I disagree that we should hide behind the cloak of our own language so as not to be understood by others for fear of embarrassment of what is happening. We should be as brave in exposing our dissension, as we are courageous in making them. After all, dissension is not something to be ashamed of because it is a hallmark of democracy. Besides, dissension is not [yet] our monopoly, although it’s fast becoming a habit for some people. I also do not believe that you would know that division is emerging elsewhere by simply being present in every meeting of the new group. While the new group espouses unity and cooperation among guest workers, it seems the opposite is resulting. Just feel the emotion attached to various letters to the editors recently, as well as various posts online. You can feel the strain and tension. The polarization among guest workers, Filipinos in particular, is obvious. Anyone who would dispute this may have either been suffering from a momentary glaucoma or loss of smell or is simply not being truthful and honest. The nudge is felt from the outside, not from within. Listen to the guest workers outside and you will hear diverse views and positions on this. As you know, there are already two Filipinos both surnamed “Franciscos” clashing on the issue. If you still call that unifying, I wonder what dictionary you are using. I also disagree that this is a plain and simple issue of right to form an organization in a democratic society. This is a fundamental truth—so plainly true that its use is frequently abused as an excuse. The more important question is whether or not forming a new group at this time is healthy, respectful, and would really promote the interest of the guest workers.

In any event, I have observed that most of the leaders of the new group are the same people who marched on the street side by side with Dekada leaders at the famous Unity March. Aren’t you the same leaders who were erstwhile singing one common tune in the same choir? Were you not successful to a certain extent in being heard? What went wrong? Had the voices of the choir simply became so discordant and lost symmetry? Or do some people, as one letter writer seems to imply, want now to be baton leaders? We are your subject and we are in doubt. Can you please make us certain?

I also observe that the new group’s mission is “to seek legal means to improve the lives of the guest workers and our families in the CNMI.” Isn’t this the same goal advocated by Dekada and all its erstwhile allied groups, i.e., to seek “improved status” for guest workers? Is that not simply duplication? Does this new group know of other “legal means” to achieve the same goal that have yet been left unexplored by the original group? Please educate us what “legal means” are available. And if there is a new tune that you want us to sing, please advice so we can fine-tune our voices so we can sing with you a la Pempengco.

I also would like to ask why only now? Other than a vague reference to “changing times” and “[the need for a] coalition that is run by guest workers and for alien workers,” it has not been made clear yet why is there a need to form a new coalition at this very late hour. Isn’t it that the most critical time has already passed, when everything was yet on the drawing stage, when leaders, including leaders of this new group, were on the hot seat in various forms? Is in’t it that there’s already a glimpse of hope achieved that simply requires continuing, cultivating, and nurturing? Or are there new tracks that should require us to change our horse midstream? What peculiar characteristics or fields of specialization which the other leaders and their counsel lack and which you have and which is required to address any perceived changed circumstances brought about by “changing times”? It is not wise to euthanize a horse midstream, especially if it’s leading. And it is doubly unwise to be ungrateful to the jockey, who although not a horse, has been guiding the horse professionally and expertly in his desire to give the horse an improved image. Allow me then to thank Attorney Woodruff, and all the other non-guest workers who have been helping the leaders in their thrust for improved status for guest workers.

I agree that inviting Dekada to be a part of the coalition is good, but not necessarily respectful. Would that not cast insult to the leaders of this group which was in the forefront from Day 1, at which time the going was very, very, very rough. Is that not like Robin, who after gaining some success in their mission, would suddenly bolt out of his tandem with Batman and form a new coalition with Superman. And then in the call of unity, Superman and Robin invited Batman to join their team to continue exactly the same mission. Would it not be more acceptable and appropriate if Dekada and its remaining allied groups instead invite Ms. Tantiado and the “new but old” leaders to join and rejoin them in their successful endeavors. Or perhaps, Ms. Tantiado can take the initiative to mediate and conciliate whatever differences, if any, between the “new but old leaders” and the leaders of Dekada and its allied groups, try to bring them together in a dialogue and embark once more in their continuing quest for the betterment of the guest workers. Isn’t that a more sincere act of unifying as opposed to forming a new group? Unless there are other valid reasons which we, guest workers, are not aware of at this time, I cannot see the wisdom of forming another new group at this time. I do not see the need to change a winning formula.

As I said, I do not mean to offend the leaders of this new coalition. I am aware that some of you have sacrificed a lot for us guest workers. But can you not just pick up the broken pieces, have a dialogue with your co-leaders, then come up with a more responsive and unified approach so that that you can lead your flock properly and effectively? As Ms. Tantiado accurately pointed out, “[t]he clock is ticking and the time to stand alongside each other is right now.” Hence, there is no time for re-inventing the wheel, re-shaping, and forming a new organization.

I express my thanks and respect to leaders of both groups for all what you have done for us and for what you are doing. But we, your subjects, deserve respect as well. We do not like to be treated as chess pieces. We do not want to be confused nor be blinded with false promises. Guest workers have long been united, but the unity seems to be hibernating somewhere among some leaders—hopefully not too long for it might be too late.

In closing, I have read an article online which is very relevant. It is titled “Too Many Chiefs…Not Enough Leaders (action needed more than planning) so eloquently written by a woman leader named Julianne Malveaux. You may want to read it online at www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-54938047.html.