Anarchy wears two faces, both creator and destroyer. Joe Ajaero, the current leader of the Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC), embodies both. Through his actions, he topples established norms, creating a canvas of muck and rubble from which he seeks to spirit out Eden – the same way, a magician pulls a rabbit from his hat.
Amid his professed passion to improve workers’ plight, the means of negotiation is rancorous, and overshadowed by avoidable suffering of the workers he claims to protect.
Ajaero renders the collective aspiration of Nigerian workers to earn a decent minimum wage, a pitiful hostage to his flawed tactics and personal demons. His desperation to lead the labour union on another industrial strike during wage negotiations with the government severely hampers the NLC and Trade Union Congress (TUC)’s bid to renegotiate a realistic minimum wage for workers.
The labour union’s reckless decision to cut off electricity supply, plunged the country into darkness including crucial sectors like aviation and health thus endangering lives. It also affected both big and small business owners, particularly society’s vulnerable divide, like the struggling grocer whose livelihood depends on selling perishable goods.
More damning are the allegations that the labour union’s monitoring and compliance team swooped on electricity workers, like goons, beating and forcing them to shut down the national grid – a claim Ajaero has since denied.
Despite his denial, the spectacle of labour leaders wielding canes to beat and chase staff of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) out of their offices undermines the credibility and moral authority of the labour movement. Such thuggery betrays the principles of democratic advocacy, painting Ajaero and his followers as anarchists rather than champions of workers’ rights. Their actions disrupt daily life and erodes the trust and support of the common man.
If Ajaero orders a resumption of strike action in the coming days, the negative impacts on Nigerians will be severe and far-reaching. The first and most immediate effect would be an intensification of fuel scarcity. This scarcity would disrupt transportation and cripple the operations of businesses and services reliant on fuel for power generation.
The country, already struggling with intermittent power supply, would be cast into complete darkness. The blackout would affect hospitals, schools, and businesses, further deteriorating the quality of life and stifling economic activity.
Crime rates would escalate as frustration and desperation grow. In times of severe hardship, individuals who struggle to meet their basic needs are more prone to resorting to criminal activities. The combination of darkness and economic stagnation would create a perfect storm for lawlessness, making it increasingly difficult for security forces to maintain order.
The impact on the informal economy, which millions of Nigerians depend on for their daily sustenance, would be devastating. Petty traders, whose livelihoods depend on a thriving daily enterprise, would suffer immensely. The informal economy, characterised by commercial transport, neighbourhood grocery sales, and other fringe livelihoods, rely on a steady flow of goods and customers.
An indefinite strike would disrupt this delicate balance, leading to a significant loss of income for those who are already living hand-to-mouth. Frustration would spread and escalate, creating an atmosphere of widespread discontent and instability.
This scenario might well be the script the Ajaero-led labour union is acting out. Ajaero’s partisan entanglements with the Labour Party (LP) and fervent support for its candidate, Peter Obi, during the 2023 elections, indicate a deep-seated political bias. His relentless attacks on the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and his unsubstantiated claims of electoral fraud further expose his partisan agenda.
His actions during the governorship election in Imo state, where he attempted to instigate a strike on the eve of the election, further illustrate his political machinations.
Ajaero’s behaviour mirrors that of an actor playing out a script handed to him by vengeful cohorts, still nursing the wounds of their electoral loss. His tactics—strikes, violence, and intimidation—reveal a thuggish approach, more befitting a street-level enforcer than a national labor leader. The narrative he crafts, of a besieged patriot fighting for justice, crumbles under the weight of his own actions.
The recent demand for a N494,000 minimum wage smacks of childish insolence and a profound disconnect from reality. This exorbitant figure starkly contrasts with the economic capabilities of several Nigerian states, many of which struggle to pay the current N30,000 minimum wage.
The labour union’s resort to industrial strike, nonetheless, addresses the sad reality of the federal minimum wage. The request for an increase of the minimum wage from N30,000 ($22.4) to N494,000 naira ($369.6) represents a 1,547% increase vis-à-vis the government’s proposed 100% increase to N60,000 ($44.89), which the unions rejected.
Yet, it’s nothing but sheer grandstanding for the incumbent government to label the labour union’s demands as unrealistic while public officers luxuriate in vulgar opulence. Nigerian lawmakers, who are among the highest paid in the world, earn about N13.5 million monthlies in allowances, excluding their base salary. Governors and their deputies enjoy similarly lavish salaries and pensions, with some states guaranteeing life-long benefits that are nothing short of abominable. The executive also draws substantial salaries and benefits, further draining the public treasury.
If Ajaero had channeled his energies towards mobilising the labour unions to compel government to slash public officers’ outrageous benefits and curb their egregious looting of public funds, his stance might have been defensible.
On his watch, the labour unions could have pushed for legislative work to become a part-time job, where lawmakers receive allowances only for actual sittings, thereby reducing the financial burden on the state. Such measures would resonate with the populace and demonstrate a genuine commitment to fiscal responsibility and governance reform.
By pushing for strike in the midst of ongoing negotiations, Ajaero undermines the potential for constructive dialogue and resolution. Instead of advocating for sustainable and pragmatic solutions, his tactics risk plunging the country into deeper crisis.
Contrary to popular belief, Ajaero and other labour leaders do not share the everyday struggles of the people. They are more insulated from the skyrocketing inflation; their pantries are well-stocked, and their bank accounts are brimming with patronage and cash. The ongoing negotiation is merely another meal ticket for its leaders.
The current crisis, however, should spur public officers to aspire to more humane and patriotic representation of the interests of the masses. It is cruel and self-serving to expect the citizenry to endure hardship fostered by selfish, desperate, and impractical leadership while those in power indulge in lavishness.
No degree of sophistry or rationalisation by paid courtiers in the media and civil society can justify such cruelty. The stark reality is that millions of Nigerians struggle to access basic necessities like food, water, and shelter, while their elected representatives live in luxury and excess. This glaring disparity in wealth and privilege underscores the need for systemic change and accountability within the government.
Nigeria faces numerous economic challenges, including the devaluation of its currency to record lows in recent months and a cost-of-living crisis marked by soaring prices for food, transport, and healthcare. With inflation at 33.69%, the highest in nearly three decades, the current wage is atrociously low.
However, the labour unions’ proposed wage increase would have severe economic consequences, including significantly higher inflation, hyper-inflated food prices, school fees, and unavoidable mass retrenchment by public and private enterprises unable to afford the wage increase.
While the grievances of the labour unions are valid, the path to resolution must be carefully managed to avoid worsening the very conditions they seek to enhance.
