Original article: Trabajadores del Colegio Bradford de Vitacura inician huelga: Denuncian intransigencia de la corporación y falta de transparencia financiera
Over 150 workers from the Bradford School Workers’ Union, representing teachers, administrative staff, and auxiliary personnel at the institution located in Vitacura, have initiated a strike starting Monday, October 26. This action follows the unsuccessful collective bargaining process and mediation conducted under the Labor Directorate (DT).
In an interview with El Ciudadano, a union member—who requested anonymity—explained the reasons behind the workers’ decision.
Unusual Negotiation in Over 70 Years of History
Bradford School is a non-profit corporation with over 70 years of experience in the Vitacura community. Its long-established union has historically maintained cordial relations with the institution. However, according to the union member, this negotiation has seen a significant breakdown.
«We are a school with around 70 years of history, and the union has also been around for many years; this is the first time we face collective bargaining in such adverse conditions concerning the initial proposal presented in response to the union’s initial request,» he stated.
The leader directly attributed the shift in the labor relationship to the new administrative figures introduced in recent years: «We see that there are situations related to new management or leadership that perhaps do not fully understand the school’s history and its relationship with the union,» he suggested.
«This time, the situations have escalated, and the workers felt compelled to vote for the strike and enforce it starting Monday, despite the mediation with the Labor Directorate this week, which failed to yield any favorable outcomes for both the workers and the school’s demands,» he added.
Financial Conflict: Inconsistent Figures
A central issue in the conflict stems from discrepancies regarding the corporation’s financial situation. According to the leader, the reports presented by the administration do not match the balances provided to the union.
«The financial reports they have presented do not add up for us as a union because it states that the total salary cost for the union members is around 6 billion pesos per year, while our figures based on the balances they provided yield 4.5 billion, resulting in a difference of 1.5 billion annually that remains unjustified, and they have refused to provide more information on this,» he explained to El Ciudadano.
This discrepancy, according to the workers’ representative, was the «breaking point of the mediation and the possibility of reaching an agreement, because the proposal from the school does not even meet the minimum standards.»
He emphasized that the legal nature of the institution makes the employer’s position even more perplexing. «It is a non-profit corporation that does not even respect the minimum standards, which were even contested in this negotiation process,» he stated.
«The Labor Directorate sided with us, yet the latest mediation efforts did not exceed the minimum standards of the contract and the contractual conditions we currently have in place,» he stressed.
Timeline of the Collective Conflict
The union informed El Ciudadano that on September 3, they submitted a democratically constructed collective contract proposal supported by the Federation of Unions of Confessional Educational Institutions of Catholic and Related Entities (Feseduca), but the school responded on September 14 with a flat rejection, citing a lack of funds and labeling the existing 2023 agreement as «insane,» despite the fact that two of their current negotiators had signed it.
In this response, unilateral clauses were eliminated, and benefits were consolidated. During technical meetings, the union insisted on extending deadlines to address critical labor safety issues—such as workers being forced to traverse unsafe roofs to access warehouses—and challenged the elimination of the 1.75 salaries bonus, a key benefit that constituted the legal minimum for negotiations.
The agency ruled in favor of the union, compelling the school to maintain that bonus as a minimum standard. However, on October 16, the corporation presented a «final offer» that continued to violate the legal minimum, leading to a rejection from over 99% of the members and the approval of the strike.
During the mandatory mediation that began on October 21, the union demonstrated with institutional financial reports the school’s sound economic situation, but the institution persisted with proposals that undermined the legal minimum; the members reiterated their rejection in a second vote on October 22. On October 23, the school unilaterally closed the negotiation table and refused to continue discussions, despite the union formally expressing their willingness to negotiate over the weekend. Faced with the administration’s shutout and exhaustion of legal avenues, the effective strike was scheduled for the upcoming Monday, October 26.
Unheard Demands
Regarding the proposals in the union petition, the leader outlined the main demands that were not addressed by the corporation.
«A readjustment based on the CPI was requested, which is rather minimal, we could say about 3%,» he stated.
Additionally, he indicated that the workers from Bradford School requested «the respect of the annual bonus that is granted because it has already been raised by the school to reduce that annual bonus, which is a gratification paid to all members at the end of December equivalent to 1.75 salaries.»
The employer’s proposal, according to the union representative, includes significant regressive conditions such as «freezing their salaries for three years.»
«This harms many already acquired rights, such as bonuses and gratifications that are historic in the union and have resulted from successful negotiations for the workers,» he accused.
«They propose not to pay this gratification and to reduce it to 1.5 in coming years and gradually increase it to 1.6, but subject to fulfilling certain requirements related to student enrollment,» he explained.
Call for Transparency
When asked about the union’s message to the corporation and the educational community, the union member was emphatic in calling for transparency and understanding.
«The union’s message is primarily to call on the educational community, especially the parents of students, who will be affected by the literal loss of classes, as there is a call from the school for parents not to send their children. We want to ask for understanding and hopefully, the parents can be informed through formal channels and also make the necessary inquiries to the union leadership via email or the union’s social media to provide responses from the workers’ perspective and not just receive the information that the school presents, which is clearly quite biased,» he stated.
«We want transparency, we want information to be provided, we want that information to flow from the school to the union and that they are willing to sit down and include others from the board or administration at the table because those already present begin to take a too intransigent position,» he reported.
«This is Not an Isolated Case»
The leader emphasized that the Bradford School case is not isolated and warned that this situation is becoming repetitive in various institutions where «there is clearly a tendency from the institutions to undermine the rights already acquired by workers.»
«We urge that reason prevails regarding what is being discussed at the table and that situations like those in other schools are not imitated, schools that historically also never faced strikes,» he expressed.
Obtén tu Pasaporte y apoya a El Ciudadano
Elimina la publicidad, accede a contenido exclusivo y sé parte de la comunidad.
Cancela en cualquier momento · Sin permanencia
