Nigerian labour stands at an important crossroads. Nigeria is a developing country, but a successful country with a burgeoning private sector.. In developing countries the major employer, by far, is the national government. The wages, working conditions and benefits are regulated by the government according to its development agenda and variations to national schemes are in a very narrow band around the national medium. Until now, the Nigerian labour movement has followed this path and, despite friction and disappointment, has generally managed to compel the national and regional governments to provide a steady living standard for those who are employed.
However,
Nigeria
has now reached a higher level of economic development. Not all the workers are civil servants, although they continue to behave and are treated as if they were. There are a burgeoning number of employees who are, in reality, employed by the private sector. They are employed in banks; breweries; communications; transport companies; construction firms; car assembly lines; major retail establishments; electronic assembly plants; textile firms; cement mills; oil service firms; and, the most important, in the oil and gas industries – upstream and downstream. Their employment and prosperity depends primarily on the success or failure of the enterprise which employs them. In many cases, at this stage of development, these private sector firms are partnered with, controlled by or operating as agents for major global corporations. The complex interaction between host country and investing foreign corporation has a very high labour component. Even this distinction of foreign versus domestic company is diminishing as Nigerian companies of stature, as in the banking, insurance, transport, oilfield services and construction industries have developed without foreign ties or majority investors.
The main governmental activities in the private sector have been carried out through parastatal corporations; companies like the Nigerian National Petroleum Company (NNPC) and the Nigerian Liquefied National Gas Company (NLNG). These were set up by the state to interact with the international oil and gas industries and to create a system of licensing, management and marketing which would preserve the interests of the state in the exploitation of its national resources. These have operated, with varying degrees of success and transparency, in the country for a number of years. However, since 2003 the Government has declared its intention that the oil and gas sector will be deregulated. It will sink or swim according to the exigencies of the market rather than on the aims and machinations of politicians. The build-up to this deregulation has been slow and painful. It has been the cause of strikes, petitions and legislative disorder, but the government has finally had its way and deregulation is progressing and expanding. This will have a profound effect on the industrial sectors and upon the labour movements.
When the deregulation is completed, the oil and gas sectors will be primarily within the private sector. The parastatals will continue but will serve more as political and financial conduits to the Government and its Treasury than as partners with the operators. The government is also trying to ‘privatise’ the parastatals so that they act commercially in the market.
There are several key features which differentiate African labour movements from those in
North America
and
Western Europe
. Appreciating these differences is very important to understanding the role of these unions in the political and economic lives of their countries. This is particularly true in
Nigeria
.
- Nigerian unions are primarily unions in the public sector. Throughout its history the unions which have developed in
Nigeria
have represented workers in the public sector. In major industries and sectors there have been relatively few private employers. Those that did exist were usually in some form of partnership with a state agency or department and functioned through that department in its relations with workers and their unions. Because these unions must operate within the public sector it is the government, federal or state, which is the employer. This has had several important consequences:
- The unions have to seek improvements for their members from ministries or political figures. The budgets from which they have to derive their wages and benefits are determined, for the most part, by legislatures and political leaders. Wage and manpower costs tend to be one line item in a budget which covers all aspects of the industry and is rarely a high priority item.
- This is especially true in the oil and gas industry where questions of joint-venture costs, production sharing agreements, exploration costs, marketing and transport are dealt with by the government agencies in addition to the human relations costs. The actual contracts of employment may be with private companies but the terms and conditions are largely determined on an industry and regional basis.
- So, when seeking higher wages or improved working conditions and job security the unions turn to political interaction with politicians, legislatures and regional bodies to make their case. There is a distinction made between what might be available from the private company who is technically the employer and that which might be available from the government or agency.
- The legislation which circumscribes their ability to function tends to cover everyone in their particular labour sector irrespective of the employer. The grievance procedures, industrial courts, arbitrators and review bodies tend to be identical throughout the energy industry. Such distinctions which are made are between white-collar and blue-collar employees.
- Another aspect of these unions is that they tend to be less ethnically distinct. Nigerian unions initially formed from urbanised workers from different ethnic groups in major cities and were composed of relatively well-educated workers who spoke English in addition to their normal ethnic tongue. They were civil servants who achieved status and job stability under the British rule by adapting a non-tribal style during the workday in which they worked peacefully alongside others from different ethnic backgrounds and faiths. Like the army and the students they were the first ‘national’ organisations with a national constituency.
For a variety of reasons these organisations have never been as strong as they hoped. For a trades union organisation to flourish it needs three basic requirements.
- A primary requirement is some elemental feeling of solidarity among the workers; the development of a sense of group affinity or coalition behaviour. This is relatively easy to achieve on a small scale but is progressively harder to achieve on a wider or national scale. In Nigeria, although the unionists were effectively deraciné in the workplace, they were still ethnically less integrated in other aspects of their lives. This has militated against a broad feeling of solidarity.
- A second requirement is the continuity of the leadership in creating and maintaining union policies. It is a traditional source of weakness in Nigerian unions that the leaders of these unions often did not stay very long in their union posts Since the requirements of union office at any middle or upper level required basic literacy, numeracy, fluency in a language understood widely in the nation these union positions tended to be filled by educated, urban men. This is the same pool from which the political leadership has been drawn and many who had their start in union work soon found a faster route to the top in political party work and/or stepping on to the ministerial ladder. Others were just jailed for political activity. This has made continuity in union office a relatively unusual occurrence.
- The third requirement for success is the acquisition and management of the resources to allow the union to function on a national basis. Although there is dues check-off operating within the Nigerian labour movement, the costs of operating in a large country with such a geographically spread out membership is very burdensome for the meagre resources available to the union. Most of the unions have local branches but the main activity takes place at the national headquarters. This is particularly onerous in
Nigeria
as the main work with the oil companies takes place in
Lagos
and
Port Harcourt
but the interaction with the government is both in
Lagos
and the new federal capital,
Abuja
. The costs of operating in
Abuja
are very high so the unions have people stationed in
Abuja
and travel from the headquarters in
Lagos
to
Abuja
as required. The communications costs and the costs of living in
Lagos
leave very little available for training programs, workshops, occupational safety and health work or, indeed, arbitration. The unions are operating very close to their financial margins.
Nigerian workers, except members of the Armed Forces and employees designated essential by the government, may join trade unions and strike. Essential employees include fire-fighters, police, employees of the Central Bank, the Security Printers (printers of currency, passports, and government forms), and Customs and Excise staff.
Nigeria
has signed and ratified the International Labour Organization's (ILO) Convention on Freedom of Association.
- Political parties and communal associations were banned during the military rule of the late 1960s, so labour unions posed a potential organized threat to the government. The military government's decree in 1969 forbidding strikes was repeatedly defied during the next four years, most notably in 1973, when the regime gave in to demands by striking postal and telecommunications workers, about one-fifth of the federal civil service. Labour activities and internal strife among four central labour organizations on ideological and Cold War grounds continued up to 1975, when the military government attempted, unsuccessfully at first, to merge the four bodies into one unit, the Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC).
- The government dissolved the four central unions, prohibited union affiliations with international labour organizations, and in 1977 banned eleven labour leaders from further union activity. Under terms of a 1978 labour decree amendment, the more than 1,000 previously existing unions were reorganized into 70 registered industrial unions under the NLC, now the sole central labour organization.
- The military leaders decreed a single central labour body, the Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC) and de-registered other trade unions. Under Nigerian law, any non-agricultural enterprise that employs more than 50 persons must recognise trade unions and pay or deduct dues for union members. In the past, the government has threatened to withdraw the dues check-off provision and make union dues voluntary if unions pursue strikes. The ABUBAKAR administration accepted an ILO fact-finding mission and took other steps to correct the abuses that led to ILO censure during the ABACHA regime.
- Collective bargaining is common in many sectors of the economy. Nigerian law protects workers from retaliation by employers for labour activity through an independent arm of the judiciary, the Nigerian Industrial Court (NIC) Trade unionists have complained, however, that the judicial system’s slow handling of labour cases constitutes a denial of redress. The government retains broad authority over labour matters, and can intervene forcefully in disputes it feels challenge political or economic objectives. In fact the government allows an appeal to the Minister of Labour of an award issued by the NIC or by arbitrators
In the oil industry the Nigerian state-run oil giant NNPC agreed to take over sole operational control of six rich oil fields under a ground-breaking deal with the Anglo-Dutch oil group Shell and US oil giant ChevronTexaco. The NNPC is in joint partnership with these multinational oil companies for the production and exploration of a daily output of some two million barrels. Until now, although the NNPC has a majority stake in these joint ventures, their actual operation has hitherto been carried out solely by the oil majors, with
Nigeria
only contributing money. Shell and ChevronTexaco agreed to cede control of the Egbema West/East, Utapake, Orogho, Aroh, Oghareki and Yorla South oil fields off the Niger Delta, with total reserves of 457 million barrels, to an NNPC subsidiary, the Nigerian Petroleum Development Company (NPDC), according to an NNPC statement.
Nigeria
intends that this NPDC operate as a private sector oil operating company in other oilfields as well. The refineries are becoming privatised and the new refineries on the drawing boards are al private.
Until recently the main player in the labour- government nexus has been the national union centre, the Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC). The NLC was created as the sole recognised national union centre, although there are two others in existence; the TUC and the CFTU. The NLC, until recently led by Adams Oshiomhole, has been a gadfly to the Government and has led, or tried to lead, a number of political strikes over the last three years and has largely pre-empted such collective bargaining that exists.
The national unions, especially in the private sector, are not happy. They point out that their industries are thriving and can well afford to pay the workers a wage based on productivity, performance and profits. There is no reason why the national unions shouldn’t enter into real collective bargaining with their employer in the private sector.
There is also some pressure by the Government on the NLC to stop calling strikes. A key point is, as is regularly pointed out, there is nothing under Nigerian law which gives the NLC the right to strike. However, the NLC often has popular support for their strikes and these strikes are often on issues that engage the populace. This was the case of the strikes against the fuel tax.
The Expectations Of Privatisation:
The Nigerian national unions are just awakening to their responsibilities under the private sector. Now that they represent workers who are gradually becoming employed in private sector employment they are considering what they must do to adjust to these new realities. They are facing a broad review of government policies towards labour organisation and structure and recognise that they have an opportunity to take the next step up the development ladder and match their unions’ structures to the changing corporate structures. Interestingly, although the government is slow to recognise the fact, the growth of private sector unionism is an important positive political adjunct to government policies towards the companies.
A union which is recognised as the bargaining agent for a particular company or group of companies will have representational rights for the employees. As the representative union it often has a legal right to have information about many things in order to do its job:
· Employment policies, such as numbers and grades of employees; their wage and emoluments; the numbers and conditions of foreign workers; the system of job classifications, promotions, transfers and hiring, working conditions.
· Investment policies; what the companies earn; what the companies spend; where the companies send their money; what the fiscal situation of the company is; where the company sources it materials and subcontracts.
· Occupational safety and health programs of the company; the standards of environmental control over the work processes; and the social policies of the management; the pensions and insurance programs for domestic and expatriate workers.
This type of information is vital to the union and, as an adjunct, is also of great interest to the government at all levels. When the government takes the time to think this through they will see that the development of private sector unionism is a great boon to the country
· It relates wages and remuneration to productivity and output
· It allows a workplace organisation to develop (as in works councils, local union shops, comites de enterprise) which can conduct a real grievance procedure (unlike the current chaotic and political system). The introduction of a real grievance procedure will inhibit wildcat strikes and allow management to manage.
· It will allow improved job security with the introduction of seniority. This will have an effect on promotions, transfers and may even be portable within branches of the same company.
· It will provide a revenue stream for private pensions and health plans which can be funded, as they are everywhere in the developed world, by joint contributions of worker and employer.
· It will give the government, the industry and the unions a fair comparison of the companies’ performance. The same rules will apply for local companies as for the multinationals. The standards of the workplace must be the same. This is a very positive way of forcing local companies to compete fairly with their competitors.
· Most importantly, it will allow the depolitisation of the workplace in a nation where everything is political, ethnic or both.
One of the key tasks facing the Yar A’Dua administration will be the linking of economic privatisation with the emancipation of the unions from their shackles of governmental (political) control.
|
# 
Your Comments
Please make The Square an enjoyable experience for everyone by refraining from gratuitous ad-hominem contributions, defamatory comments and off-topic posting. Such posts will be removed.