ASUU: Same old story
By Levi Obijiofor

IF the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) were to be a popular musical group that found fame three decades ago, everyone would have become bored by now listening to the lyrics of that tune entitled "Strike, Strike and more Strike", which would have taken the group to the number one position. However, in every aspect of life, repetition kills initiative. It is a message that the ASUU leadership has not heard or heard but chose to ignore. Ever since the return of democracy in 1999, the ASUU leadership has been singing the same old tune, telling the same old story and using the same old tactic to achieve its objectives or to draw public sympathy to its cause. But there is a time for self-reflection and evaluation of every strategy, including the strategy of embarking on strikes as a weapon to end industrial relations disputes. An industrial strike in the Nigerian university system is like a boomerang " it will hit its target when properly delivered or it will return to the sender with adverse consequences if thrown improperly. University students are the main victims when ASUU leaders throw their boomerang carelessly and miss their target.

It does not seem that ASUU leaders have bothered to evaluate the effectiveness of strikes as an industrial relations short gun in Nigeria. If ASUU had done so, the leadership would have realised that it is time it changed its strategies. If ASUU has not yet conducted an evaluation of its strategies, some of the key questions that should be included in the questionnaire are: One: are industrial strikes the only option available to ASUU to improve the quality of university education in Nigeria? Two: to what extent have industrial strikes helped ASUU to win, lose or stall its war against the government? Three: are strikes harmful or useful to the advancement of teaching, learning and research in the universities? Four: are industrial strikes disruptive of academic calendars of universities, including the calendars of other institutions that are serviced by graduates of universities? Five: should ASUU continue to use strikes as essential tools to draw the federal government's attention to the poor quality of infrastructure in the universities? Six: are strikes really beneficial to university students and their parents, the direct and indirect victims of ASUU strikes, even if ASUU wants everyone to believe that the long-term outcome of its fight with the federal government is an enduring education system that would serve the interest of all stakeholders?
Regardless of the nature of the responses to the preceding questions, the Nigerian public is increasingly getting sick of being drawn into a conflict with an organisation that has run out of steam and ideas, as far as industrial relations dispute settlement is concerned. Why should strike be the only option available to ASUU leadership to settle its quarrel with the federal government? The problem of under-funding of universities, the lack of basic infrastructure required for the advancement of teaching and learning in the universities are problems well known to anyone who has been following the history of higher education in Nigeria. But the problem has continued to worsen. The federal government must take a large chunk of the blame, in the same manner that ASUU must cop public anger for disrupting academic calendars and the future of innocent students of Nigerian universities.

In an editorial opinion published on Tuesday this week, The Guardian pointed out meticulously how federal funding for university education has plummeted from 11.12 per cent in 1999 to the abysmal figure of 4.54 per cent in 2004. In 2000, according to The Guardian, budgetary allocation to university education was at 8.76 per cent (down from 11.12 per cent in just one year), 7 per cent in 2001, 6.1 per cent in 2002, 4.75 per cent in 2003, and 4.54 per cent in 2004. If anyone wanted proof that the federal government has consistently devalued university education in Nigeria since 1999 when President Olusegun Obasanjo was voted into office, these figures constitute damning evidence.

On a moral turf, one would argue that ASUU is perfectly justified to be upset over the federal government's failure to respect an agreement it signed with university academics, including the federal government's consistent strategy of delaying proceedings at an Abuja High Court by refusing to appear before the court. But ASUU must resist the temptation to adopt ludicrous measures simply because the federal government has behaved in the most irresponsible manner. There is no question that the federal government has shown infantile bravado by its deliberate attempt to stall proceedings at the High Court. But ASUU must not bare its ugly side because the federal government has done the same. A tired clichZ reminds us that two wrongs do not add up to one right. A federal government that consistently breaks its own pledge is like a prodigal father. That father " the federal government " should never be trusted and should never be taken seriously. By dishonouring its agreements with ASUU (with irritating regularity), the federal government is disrupting rather than promoting industrial harmony in the universities. Perhaps more important, the government has demonstrated, in such a contemptible manner, that it is not in the least interested in advancing teaching and learning at the university level.

The Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Education, Alhaji Ibrahim Talba, was right when he urged ASUU leaders to explore alternative means of settling disagreements with government rather than embark on industrial strikes. This is really the key to public disenchantment with ASUU leaders whenever they adopt strikes as their last option. Many parents, including university administrators, are not convinced that strike is the only alternative available to ASUU to resolve its disputes with the federal government. There must be other avenues of engaging the government in useful dialogue. ASUU leaders may not realise this but by resorting to industrial strikes whenever there is a logjam in negotiations with government, the university teachers inadvertently hand to the federal government the legal weapon to break, disrupt or halt any strike by ASUU members. The federal government has never hesitated to remind ASUU of the government's determination to implement in full force its no-work no-pay policy. This weapon has proved to be as potent as the government intended. In the past, the no-work no-pay policy has helped to create division within ASUU. Some academics obey the call for strike. Others oppose and defy the call for strike. And yet other groups remain undecided and do nothing. In the constant dispute with government over conditions of service of university teachers, including inadequate funding for teaching and research, the no-work no-pay policy often achieves the same effect as you would have when you lob a cat into a basket of pigeons. A good industrial relations strategist would tell you that a divided and incoherent union is not in the best position to mount and sustain a successful industrial strike.

Sometimes officials of the Federal Ministry of Education have not been helpful with their comments. Take, as an example, the comment made this week by the permanent secretary in the ministry, when he shifted the blame to ASUU leaders: "Apart from the publications in the media by various zonal branches and the National Executive Council of ASUU, no attempt has been made to canvass the issues in contention in a formal manner with the government. Government has, however, taken steps towards creating an avenue for discussion of the issues with the leadership of ASUU." This is the kind of comment that could upset rather than calm ASUU leaders. Why, for goodness sake, should the government wait for ASUU to canvass the issues? Shouldn't the government do the right thing by honouring its agreement with ASUU? Among ASUU's reasons for threatening to go on strike is this key point: the federal government's refusal or inability to implement its own side of the agreement with ASUU. It seems to me the federal government is playing hide-and-seek with the ASUU leadership. It is the kind of game that would eventually blow up in the faces of those three monkeys that occupy the high offices in the Federal Ministry of Education and pretend to see nothing, hear nothing and perceive nothing.