The House of Representatives has initiated amendment to the Labour Act with a view to criminalising casualisation by employers of labour. TONY AKOWE examines the issue.
THE law frowns against it, but man employers, including financial institutions and blue-chip companies, break Section 7 of the Labour Act. It forbids any employer from retaining a worker beyond three months without spelling out their terms of employment.
The law forbids employers of labour from employing workers beyond three months without issuing them employment letters detailing the conditions of service among other provisions of the Act.
Unfortunately, the Act did not specify any penalty for violation, which explains why it is only obeyed in the breach. The trend, which is very rampant in the private sector, is believed to have crept into some public sector organisations.
According to the International Labour Organisation (ILO), workers in casual jobs are exposed to several hazards, which include job insecurity, lower average earnings that are far less than permanent workers’ even though they are given the same work load. The drawback includes reduced access to adequate training and career advancement opportunities, low organisational commitment, lack of social benefits, poor working conditions, detachment from jobs and lack of social protection, like the pension scheme.
Incidentally, the ILO believes that casual employment has become a prominent feature in labour markets in developing countries, and has continued to grow in industrialised countries.
For example, in Bangladesh and India, nearly two-thirds of wage employment is casual while in Mali and Zimbabwe, one in three employees is casual. However, in spite of the legal provisions and conventions on decent work, casualisation, which is the transformation of a workforce from one employed on a permanent contract to one engaged on short time basis, has been on the increase in Nigeria.
In recent times, outsourcing has become one of the major causes of crisis between private sector actors and organised labour in Nigeria.
The International Labour Organisation, the UN body responsible for labour matters, describes the practice as slave labour. Employers of labour in the country are increasingly trying to remove the burden of paying various entitlements to their workers, while enjoying the wealth created by the same workers.
In particular, employers of labour in the banking as well as oil and gas sectors in Nigeria have often been accused of engaging in casualisation and outsourcing. This has continued to trigger industrial actions, particularly by unions in the oil and gas sector.
Huge resources are always lost to such frictions. Unfortunately, government appeared handicapped in handling the matter. Worried by the ugly trend, the House of Representatives has initiated moves to ensure that the nation’s labour laws are obeyed by those granted operational license to operate and make wealth in the country.
The lawmakers are prepared to criminalise the action in line with the clamour by organised labour over the years. They are worried that employers of labour, especially those in banking, telecom as well as oil and gas sectors, often resort to casualisation and in recent times, outsourcing; thereby making Nigerians slave workers in their own country.
This has been a recurring issue that has continued to generate heated debates yearly. In the last couple of years, agitation against casualisation and outsourcing has featured prominently in annual celebration of workers’ day.
It has been followed by several industrial actions, especially by workers in the oil and gas sector. And if the bill pending before the House of Representatives gets passed and assented to by the President, violation may attract a jail term of not less than two years.
The law, which is receiving attention at the Lower Chamber, has already gone through first and second readings. A public hearing will be conducted on the bill anytime soon.
Leading the debate on the necessity of the legislation, Wale Raji (APC, Lagos) accused multinational companies operating in the banking, telecom as well as oil and gas sectors of contributing to the economic crisis in the country by outsourcing jobs in their core mandate areas to foreign nationals even when such jobs can be successfully handled by Nigerians.
This practice, he argued, has worsened the unemployment situation and triggered series of labour unrests that have led to huge financial losses by government. The bill seeks to mandate the employers to regularise their employees’ employments within six months of being engaged. The bill recommends two years jail term or a fine of N2 million or both for offenders.
According to him, the bill also seeks to amend the extant Labour Act, with a view to prohibiting the concept of outsourcing of employment in the employer’s core areas of operation.
Raji further explained that a worker is said to be in a state of employment when he is being employed or being remunerated for work done. He argued that in some employments, employees may receive other benefits that go with their employment. He listed such benefits to include health insurance, housing scheme, and disability insurance, among others.
The lawmaker described unemployment as a situation where employable applicants are unable to secure job placements. This, he said, may be as a result of limited vacancies and other factors.
Raji said: “A worker can be said to be in a state of disguised unemployment when such a person is temporarily engaged and can be laid off at any time by the employer. An example can be seen in the context of a contract staff, which is merely employed temporarily and can be laid off at any point. In such a situation, the worker will always be looking out for a better job that is permanent and suitable for his/her skills.”
The lawmaker said the rate of unemployment in Nigeria is currently estimated at 33.5 per cent, which does not include workers in disguised unemployment, largely made up of workers in casual/contract employments. He said Section 7 of the Labour Act provides that not later than three months after the beginning of a worker’s employment, the employer shall give him a written statement of employment containing the terms and conditions of employment.
He, however, deplored a situation where punishment is not prescribed for non-compliance by employers. The envisaged law also seeks to compel employers to pay the employee entitled full salary and other benefits due to regular workers at the point of disengagement.
This, however, is premised on the condition that the affected worker has not been found liable of any criminal act involving fraud or financial loss to the company. Upon the breach of the above provision, the proposed section 8(3) paragraphs (a-b) provide the punishment for individual and corporate bodies as well.
And while the lawmakers were debating the bill, the Federal Ministry of Labour and Employment and other stakeholders were also brainstorming on the matter. They were seeking amendment to some existing labour laws, with a view to ensuring best practices in labour administration and work environment.
Among the issues raised by the ministry and others were elimination of sexual harassment in the work places, labour migration; elimination of child labour, promotion of gender equality, occupational safety and health.
Other bills expected to be tinkered with by the stakeholders are those dealing with the restructuring of existing institutions such as the Industrial Arbitration Panel, (IAP), The National Labour Advisory Council, (NLAC), and the office of the Registrar of Trade Union to ensure better and effective performance.
According to the Minister of Labour and Productivity, Chris Ngige, the bills expected to be reviewed for enactment seek to promote the right to work. Others include encouraging development opportunities for women and men in conditions of freedom, equity; security of human dignity and enhanced social protection for Nigerian workers. They were, however, silent on casualisation of workers.
In a communique at the end of its National Administrative Council meeting, the NLC decried the continued violation of labour laws by some employers. It also bemoaned the lack of capacity by the various regulatory bodies to enforce the laws. The labour body complained that in most cases, the regulatory bodies would rather fawn over foreign direct investors and trade off the rights of workers at the point of investment.
The organised labour insisted casual workers are highly vulnerable as they cannot belong to unions neither can they benefit from collective agreements. They are also denied job security, social protection, promotions, leave, safety and health considerations.
It described casualisation as short-sighted and counter-productive, adding that it creates work-place hostility, industrial disharmony that threatens economic development.
Leave a Reply