“The Price of Teaching and Civil Servantship in a Corrupt System”
In the shadow of grand promises and polished speeches, a quiet crisis deepens across public schools and government offices. As shown by recent protest actions, teachers and civil servants voices out concern if not opposition as serious issues ranging from low salaries, less benefits, to that of rampant corruption in the bureaucracy and social injustices that really affects them as government employees. However, it is not surprising that being civil servants, it is predictable to those who are "against voicing their concerns" end sounding "they shouldn't bite the hands that feed them". And the accusations come swiftly and predictably: “You’re always against the government.” “This isn’t even about teachers, is it?”
These lines are weaponized whenever educators, or any public servants, dare to speak out—delivered with a casual dismissiveness that paints legitimate concern as mere personal animosity or political bias. As if demanding accountability were a vendetta, or as if teachers had somehow violated an unspoken rule by refusing to stay silent in the face of systemic neglect.
But the truth is far simpler and more urgent: this has never been about blind opposition. It has always been about survival, dignity, and the relentless erosion of a profession—and a public sector—that shoulders immense societal responsibility while being stripped of basic protections, fair compensation, and job security.
In 2026, the challenges for educators and government workers have intensified rather than eased. Policies enacted in prior years are now taking full effect, exposing their real human costs under the guise of reform and fiscal prudence.
Central to this is Republic Act No. 12231, the Government Optimization Act (often referred to as the Government Optimization Law), signed into law by President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. on August 4, 2025. Marketed as a tool for “efficiency,” “streamlining,” and “optimizing” the national government for better public service delivery, the law grants the President authority over a five-year period to reorganize the executive branch. This includes merging, consolidating, transferring, splitting, scaling down, abolishing, or creating agencies to eliminate redundancies and overlapping functions.
While proponents highlight potential improvements in transparency, agility, and service delivery through digitalization and e-governance, critics—including labor groups and affected workers—warn that it opens the door to widespread displacement. Thousands of public servants who have long sustained under-resourced institutions now confront uncertainty, potential layoffs, or forced retirement, even as the law excludes teaching positions, military, and uniformed personnel from its coverage. What is presented as modernization risks becoming a mechanism for downsizing without adequately addressing chronic understaffing or providing genuine pathways to stability.
Compounding this insecurity is CSC-COA-DBM Joint Circular No. 1, series of 2025, issued on December 15, 2025. This revised set of rules governs the engagement of Contract of Service (COS) and Job Order (JO) workers across government agencies. Far from advancing regularization—as long demanded by unions and advocates—the circular effectively caps the number of COS and JO workers at end-2025 levels while allowing continued hiring within that limit. In practice, it perpetuates subcontractual arrangements through third-party agencies or manpower providers, sidestepping meaningful absorption into regular plantilla positions.
Over one million contractual government workers nationwide feel the impact most acutely. Instead of pathways to secure employment with benefits, tenure, and retirement protections, they face deepened precarity: no job security, limited or no access to social benefits, and vulnerability to abrupt termination. What officials frame as “sustainable workforce planning” and “fiscal discipline” amounts, in reality, to institutionalized instability—flexibilization of labor that shifts risks onto workers while shielding agencies from long-term commitments.
The proposed (and ratified) 2026 national budget further entrenches this retreat from public sector responsibility. Key concerns include reductions or realignments in the Miscellaneous Personnel Benefits Fund (MPBF), which funds salary adjustments, benefits, and new positions. Reports of slashes—such as over P34 billion in some allocations—threaten even the modest third-tranche increases under Salary Standardization Law VI (implemented via related executive orders and budget circulars). These cuts limit new regular hires, exacerbate reliance on contractual labor, and jeopardize timely release of allowances and other entitlements.
A stark betrayal preceded this: roughly ₱43 billion originally earmarked for personnel services—including salary upgrades (around P10.77 billion) and retirement/terminal leave benefits (around P32.47 billion)—was transferred from guaranteed programmed funds to unprogrammed appropriations in the final budget process. President Marcos later vetoed a related line item under unprogrammed funds labeled “Payment of Personnel Services Requirements.” Official explanations cited fiscal constraints and realignments (e.g., to agency-specific budgets or subsistence allowances for uniformed personnel), with assurances that existing salaries and benefits remain secure.
Yet the contradiction remains glaring. There is never “no money” for priorities that benefit the powerful or connected—vast infrastructure projects often riddled with allegations of padded costs, ghost projects, substandard materials, and patronage. These ventures, frequently criticized as fertile ground for corruption, receive billions while educators and civil servants are told to tighten belts.
That ₱43 billion could have delivered tangible relief: an additional ₱3,000–₱4,000 monthly for teachers, or a doubling of the Personnel Economic Relief Allowance (PERA) from ₱2,000 to ₱4,000 for government workers. These were modest, survival-level demands—enough to offset inflation, cover out-of-pocket classroom supplies, reduce debt burdens, and ease the daily grind of unpaid overtime and personal subsidies to education.
Instead, teachers continue absorbing the system’s shortfalls: funding supplies from their own pockets, managing overcrowded classrooms, and accepting wages eroded by rising costs—all while being lauded as “heroes” or “nation-builders.” Symbolic praise costs nothing; structural support does.
This pattern reflects broader neoliberal approaches under the Marcos Jr. administration: hollowing out public services, flexibilizing labor through contractualization and outsourcing, and weakening social protections in the name of efficiency and growth. Promises of economic progress remain disconnected from the lived realities of ordinary Filipinos, who face deepening hardship amid persistent inequality.
Corruption, meanwhile, escapes genuine accountability. Scandals—from infrastructure anomalies to misused funds—drain resources that could fund wages, benefits, and services. Instead of prosecution and reform, the system often shields those who benefit from poverty and patronage, while bolstering repressive measures against dissent.
Educators are uniquely positioned as custodians of truth and critical thinking. Public servants, in turn, hold the public trust. When systemic corruption and precarity become normalized, neutrality is complicity. Speaking out is not partisanship—it is civic duty.
Calling for accountability rejects the notion that exploitation equals efficiency, layoffs equal reform, and corruption is an inevitable byproduct of governance.
The fight against corruption is inseparable from the fight for decent wages, job security, humane conditions, and a public sector that serves rather than sacrifices its workers.
A government claiming fiscal poverty while enabling theft cannot demand trust. A state undermining its educators cannot credibly champion education or national development.
This is not opposition for opposition’s sake. It is a demand for responsibility, justice, and a future where public service means dignity not endless sacrifice and enforced silence.
When corruption goes unchallenged, it steals far more than funds. It robs stability, dignity, and the promise of a better tomorrow especially for those shaping the next generation and those who promised efficient service.
Educators—and all government workers—cannot, and will not, look away.