Why ASUU is against Ngige

Though Nigeria has put behind the needless and thoughtless eight months strike by the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), the dust is yet to settle. Life is back to the campuses yet you can feel the academic tranquility but barely.  Hardly were the classrooms thrown open than lecturers began another round of chapter protests, […]

Though Nigeria has put behind the needless and thoughtless eight months strike by the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), the dust is yet to settle. Life is back to the campuses yet you can feel the academic tranquility but barely. 

Hardly were the classrooms thrown open than lecturers began another round of chapter protests, this time, over the pro-rata payment of their October salaries. Some boycotted lectures. Student unions were also enlisted in the protests in some universities.  

The formula of resistance has only changed though some of the disputes now lie in the province of the courts. Embarking on another strike may be fatal as it could earn ASUU the big hammer. 

The strike was unlawful before the law. Education is an essential service in the contemplation of Section 7 of the Trade Disputes Act , Cap T 9, mandating unions to give 15 days prior notice for strike. The February 14, 2022 strike didn’t comply with this.  The strike ought to have been called off also upon apprehension on February 22, 2022 in line with Section 18 of the Trade Disputes Act. 

The union hurt the law and the law took its course. It took the National Industrial Court to force ASUU back to work. Nigeria lost wholesomely from the exercise and ASUU, worse off, wounded. It lost its monopoly of academia unionism with the registration of CONUA and NAMDA.  

 In spite, ASUU has skillfully used victimhood to reverse its infidelity to the labour laws, hence, turning the federal government, especially the Minister of Labour, Senator Chris Ngige, the aggressor or “agent provocateur” as ASUU itself alleged. What proves  Ngige hates ASUU than play a victim? 

At the centre of what ASUU sees as victimisation is the law rather than the minister. It is the steely resolve to apply the law in a nation of laissez-faire . That is the sin of Ngige and that is why ASUU is against him. From the sidelines of deep knowledge in productivity measurement and labour standard, the allegation of bias by ASUU against him holds no water. 

The strict implementation of the provisions of the Trade Disputes Act and Trade Union Act hitherto treated with levity is the root of the grouse. There is nothing illegal in allowing the labour laws take their full course where the tripartite and tripartite-plus dialogue could not provide solution to the grueling strike. 

The National Inter-Religious Council led by the Sultan of Sokoto and President of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) couldn’t resolve the impasse. 

It is unthinkable, therefore, the minister would allow a total collapse of the university system to an unbending disposition of its employers. All the steps Ngige took in putting the strike on back foot accord properly with the law and align with the conventions of the ILO. 

Such dispassionate implementation of laws that was lax under previous ministers, would surely attract criticisms. 

Another issue is the pro-rata deduction from salaries for the period of strike which is obtainable worldwide. The Nigerian academics are wrong that this is peculiar and punitive and that it is an attempt to casualise them. In the United Kingdom, ordinary three days on strike attracts a three-day quantum pay deduction from the emolument! That is as serious as that. The unions take the responsibility of reimbursing their workers from special strike fund for the pro-rata deduction from salaries. 

It is majorly for this reason that  strikes do not last long in such climes, since the purse of the unions can’t sustain long action.  

Pro-rata pay is actually  part of no-work, no-pay, contained in Section 43 of the Trade Disputes Act, Cap T. 8 Laws of Federation of Nigeria.  It has been invoked on Joint Health Sector Union (JOHESU) in 2018 as well as on ASUU in 2020 and National Association of Resident Doctors in 2021. The only difference is that government reversed itself in clemency on ASUU in 2020. But this act of magnanimity neither renders this law defective nor in perpetual abeyance. 

Having sat as the Executive Director of the African Regional Labour Centre (ARLAC) as well as on the board of the International Association of Labour Inspection, labour had at different congresses agreed that no-work, no-pay is implied  by Convention 87 of the ILO that grants employees right to strike and the employer, the right to withhold payment. 

 At another level, it is the wrong interpretation of Section 17 of the Trade Disputes Act, Cap T8,  LFN, that made  ASUU accuse the minister of taking the union to court. Transmitting a dispute to the National Industrial Court is the next stage in a collapsed conciliation and arbitration process.  

As it is, Section 17 ties the hands of the minister by providing he should within 14 days of collapse of talks, transmit the dispute to a higher body which is either the Industrial Arbitration Panel or the National Industrial Court. In fact, Ngige was in breach of the law by delaying the transmission from 14 days to eight  months.  

 Having said this, it is reasonable the federal government re-considers its position on no-work, no-pay as it did in 2020. It has become harder to live in Nigeria today than it was under COVID-19. The prices of goods and services have taken to the sky and the pervasive poverty did not isolate the academia. 

But such goodwill by government should be reciprocated by ASUU by refraining from incessant strikes which is contrary to the spirit and provisions of the International Labour Convention No. 144 which strongly encourages social dialogue and joint consultation among the tripartite labour constituents and to which all parties in Nigeria have subscribed to by way of ratification. 

It is important that embarking on strike should be a collective decision of the generality of the membership of the union as provided in Section 6 of the Trade Unions (Amendment Act) 2005, and not left to a handful of union leadership.  

Unions are expected to conduct a ballot to determine if the majority of registered members are in support of a contemplated strike. 

 The prolonged ASUU strike is uncalled for because it was not mainly targeted at the employer but at the interest of the wider community of workers and their families who lost a lot as a result of the strike. 

Since education is an essential service established and required for the common good of society, one expected ASUU leadership to exercise restraint by not prolonging the strike. 

Time is here for a new leaf.  

 

Neburagho, is a former Director, Productivity Measurement and Labour Standard, Ministry of Labou, former