RESOLUTIONS reached at the engagement between the Trade Union Congress (TUC), Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and the federal government with the intervention of the Speaker, House of Representatives to resolve the dispute that arose from the withdrawal of subsidy on petrol is in the public domain. Therefore, there is no need reproducing them here. The resolutions caused parties to agree among other things, that the NLC should suspend the notice of strike forthwith to enable further consultations.
There are different reactions in the public domain with regards to NLC agreeing to suspend its notice of strike that was schedule to have commenced on Wednesday June 7, 2023. Some are praising NLC including TUC for suspending the strike while others are casting aspersions on the leadership and even going to the extent of calling them names.
“Neoliberalism is engaged at reducing trade union density, and working class militancy and confidence. These are ways of reducing protest/social movements. It is exactly what officials of the federal government did the moment the NLC served the notice to strike as a result of the announcement of the removal of the subsidy was made. What government officials said and did are in the public domain, so I don’t have to reproduce them here. Nobody should grudge them for their utterances and actions. The question is what was the response of the social partners of the labour movement when the labour movement came under the attack of their class enemies, whose actions and utterances were in support and protection of neoliberalism.”
In the first place, those casting aspersions on the leadership of the NLC for suspending the strike have failed to note the fact that a court of competent jurisdiction has restrained the NLC and the labour movement in general from embarking on a strike as a result of the removal of subsidy pending the determination of a case instituted by the federal government on the matter. One wonders if these critics expected the leadership of NLC to disobey the order of the court. Why the government did not engage the leadership of the labour movement before the removal of the subsidy is not a sufficient reason why NLC should disobey the order of the court. I therefore applaud leaders of TUC and NLC for obeying the order of the court against all the provocations from the government. If we intend to build a Nigeria of our dreams, one of the things we must all insist on is that Nigeria must be a country under the rule of law. No one or group of persons should be above the law.
Secondly, the federal government had opened the doors of engagement between the government and leaders of the two central labour organisations –TUC and NLC – to discuss the dispute that has arisen as a result of its action. It is my considered opinion, that the government should be commended for this despite the injunction it got from the court.
Our past experiences have always been that the federal government never responded to strike notices given by either unions or the central labour organisations until the strike had started, during which time a lot of negative effects of the strike would have happened to the economic life of the nation, citizens and the industrial relations atmosphere of the nation.
One thing that was clear to everyone in the country was that fuel subsidy was going to be a very contentious issue immediately former President Buhari handed over the administration at the federal level to his successor. His officials, especially his Minister of Finance, informed the nation that as from June 2023, fuel subsidy will go. Nobody asked them why it did not go during their tenure and had to go the next day after he had handed over the realms of governance.
Moreover, it was not also going to matter who the next president of Nigeria was going to be. If that person was going to be now President Tinubu, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar or former Governor Peter Obi. All of them, during their campaigns, said once they become president, subsidy will go. We all heard them loud and clear. What did we say to them and those of us crying now and calling labour leaders names, what was our strategies to checkmate them? Permit me to say none.
Those criticising NLC leaders for agreeing to suspend the strike notice are doing so out of ignorance. It is a fact that all over the world, the working class has been at the forefront of mobilisation against contemporary neoliberalism. In doing so, unions have gone beyond a narrow focus on the workplace to trade union-led forms of working class mobilisation, highlighting the continuing contestation of neoliberal capitalism.
“The role of NLC as a social movement mobiliser vis-à-vis its principal objectives has been misunderstood by nearly everyone including their comrades in the civil society. Their principal constituency is the workers they represent and those are the people they are accountable to. In every negotiation unions are involved in; their first interest is that of the workers. The labour movement has the war chest to stand against the excesses of political office holders and unjust policies. In this regard, they speak for the masses, no doubt, and remain the only hope of the people. However, the movement has a primary responsibility. Some individuals will disagree with me on this and they are entitled to their views.”
The NLC and indeed the labour movement in Nigeria has assumed the role of the apex leader in protest and social movement for the emancipation of the masses of the country from bad governance and bad policies of governments that impact negatively on the welfare of the people. Unfortunately, the world over, not only in Nigeria, a core aspect of neoliberalism is the move to depoliticise, discipline and demobilise any form of expression and social organisation that challenge, either directly or indirectly, the market.
Neoliberalism is engaged at reducing trade union density, and working class militancy and confidence. These are ways of reducing protest/social movements. It is exactly what officials of the federal government did the moment the NLC served the notice to strike as a result of the announcement of the removal of the subsidy was made. What government officials said and did are in the public domain, so I don’t have to reproduce them here. Nobody should grudge them for their utterances and actions. The question is what was the response of the social partners of the labour movement when the labour movement came under the attack of their class enemies, whose actions and utterances were in support and protection of neoliberalism.
The principal objective of labour unions is the regulation of the terms and conditions of employment of workers and to present a collective bargaining activities. Strikes mean the partial or complete concerted refusal to work, or the retardation or obstruction of work, by persons who are, or have, been employed by the same employer or by different employers, for the purpose of remedying a grievance or resolving a dispute in respect of any matter of mutual interest. A strike notice (or notice to strike) is a document served by members of a trade union or an analogous body of workers to an employer or negotiator stating an intent to commit an upcoming strike action. The document largely contains an overview of grievances and conditions.
NLC’s notice of strike was a request for a meeting to remedy its grievance on the issue. The meeting of June 5, 2023 was held in furtherance of the notice of strike. Resolution were arrived at and agreements reached, including a follow-up meeting scheduled for June 19, 2023. What did the critics of NLC, and by extension, the labour movement as a whole expect the NLC and TUC to do?
The role of NLC as a social movement mobiliser vis-à-vis its principal objectives has been misunderstood by nearly everyone including their comrades in the civil society. Their principal constituency is the workers they represent and those are the people they are accountable to. In every negotiation unions are involved in; their first interest is that of the workers. The labour movement has the war chest to stand against the excesses of political office holders and unjust policies. In this regard, they speak for the masses, no doubt, and remain the only hope of the people. However, the movement has a primary responsibility. Some individuals will disagree with me on this and they are entitled to their views.
The relationship between the NLC, TUC, the unions affiliated to them and the government is first that of employees and employer. In the power play that takes place in workplaces, the power of the employer is enormous against individual worker. Trade unions are there to represent workers to balance the power. They negotiate on behalf of the workers. That is what is going on right now with regards to the petrol subsidy dispute.
Other social partners of the labour movement, should not only stop at criticising the movement and its leaders, when it negotiates with government for the welfare of its members at critical times such as this. They should adopt the new trend of fighting neoliberal policies of a government rather than always waiting for labour strikes, which are just stoppage of work, meant to bring the employer to the negotiation table.
Having stated the above, it is only appropriate for me to add to the resolutions reached at the engagement of June 5. A critical segment of the workforce, senior citizens of this country who had put in tremendous hard work and made enormous sacrifices for the development and security of this country have always been left out in negotiations such as the ongoing one. Issues affecting pensioners should be on the table of the ongoing negotiations.
“The government has not been adequately funding the Retirement Benefits Bond Redemption Fund Account in the CBN from where the retirement bonds will be redeemed. This is the cause of delays in the payment of retirement benefits to the federal public service retirees and death benefits because the bulk of the benefits is in the bonds. The case of states public servants except about seven states is calamity.”
Some of the issues include the payment of pensions and death benefits as and when due. As there is a minimum wage law, the Pension Reform Act 2023 makes provision for minimum guaranteed pension and review of pensions in line with the provisions of the constitution.
The main objective of the pension reform carried out in 2004 is to ensure that every person that worked in either the public or private sector in Nigeria receives his/her retirement benefits as and when due. Unfortunately, 19 years after the enactment and implementation of the Contributory Pension Scheme (CPS), this objective has not been achieved. The issue is that employee’s right to accrued retirement benefits for previous years he/she has been in employment before the commencement of the CPS is guaranteed by Pension Reform Act 2014. In the case of the public service of the federation and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), where pension scheme was unfunded, the right was acknowledged through the issuance of “Federal Government Retirement Bond” to such employee. The bond will be redeemed upon the retirement of the employee.
The federal government established a Retirement Benefits Bond Redemption Fund Account in the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN). The government is expected to be making a monthly payment into the Fund, an amount equal to 5% of the total monthly wage bill payable to all employees of the federal government and the FCT. It is from the Retirement Benefits Bond Redemption Fund Account that Retirement Bonds will be redeemed. The money in the bond will be merged with the contributions in the retiring officer’s Retirement Savings Account before retirement benefits and death benefits are paid.
The government has not been adequately funding the Retirement Benefits Bond Redemption Fund Account in the CBN from where the retirement bonds will be redeemed. This is the cause of delays in the payment of retirement benefits to the federal public service retirees and death benefits because the bulk of the benefits is in the bonds. The case of states public servants except about seven states is calamity.
Secondly, there are pensioners in Nigeria today who are receiving as low as N15,000 as monthly pension under the CPS. This falls far below the national minimum wage. Section 84(1) of PRA 2014 makes provisions for guaranteed minimum pension as may be specified from time to time by PenCom.
Section 82(2)(a) provides that the minimum guaranteed pension is to be paid from the Pension Protection Fund, established and maintain by PenCom. The sources of funding the Pension Protection Funds shall be from: An annual subvention of 1% of total monthly wage bill payable to employees in the public service of the federation. Annual pension protection levy paid by PenCom and all licensed pension operators at a rate to be determined by PenCom from time to time. Income from investment of the Pension Protection Fund.
“To the labour leaders, they should bear in mind that apart from negotiating with government as their employer, they have a social responsibility as the apex leaders in social mobilisation who the masses of this nation are looking upon to, to speak for them on the table.”
Since 2004 when the CPS commenced, PenCom has not come out with what the minimum pension under the CPS is. The non-compliance with this provision in the Pension Reform Act 2014 should stop.
The third issue is the non-compliance with the provisions of Section 173(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended). The section provides that pensions of federal public servants shall be reviewed every five years or together with any salaries review, whichever is earlier. Section 210(3) of the constitution has the same provision for states public servants. These provisions are being implemented for pensioners under the old Defined Benefits Scheme (DBS). Unfortunately, pensioners under the CPS are not benefiting from these constitutional provisions.
In conclusion, I wish to remind labour leaders and government officials on the negotiation table that the eyes and hope of the citizens of this nation, citizens of other countries residing in the country as well as the international community are on them.
To the labour leaders, they should bear in mind that apart from negotiating with government as their employer, they have a social responsibility as the apex leaders in social mobilisation who the masses of this nation are looking upon to, to speak for them on the table.
The government, on her part, must realise that the constitution provides that the Federal Republic of Nigeria shall be a State based on the principles of democracy and social justice. It, therefore, declared among others, that the ‘security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government.’
Comrade Takor was a two term President of NASU, a two term National Treasurer of NLC and an inaugural member of the Board of PenCom. Comrade Takor retired as a Director in federal service and is now a Lagos-based legal practitioner.
