Only people from outer space would not have seen the present imbroglio between Nigerian workers as represented by their unions, the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), and the Trade Union Congress (TUC), and the Federal Government, coming. The truth of the matter is that Labour has left undone those things it ought to have done and has almost always done those things it should not have done. I have said it several times on this page that it would profit Nigerian workers more to fight for good governance than to be asking for unrealistic minimum wage whenever the issue comes to the front burner of national discourse. If we have had good governance, our currency which exchanged for two Naira to one Pound Sterling in 1973 would not be exchanging for N450 to one Pound today. This would naturally have negated the urge for the steep rise in minimum wage whenever we remember that salaries must be reviewed..
It is not that salary reviews are alien to Nigeria. Indeed, its history predates the country’s political independence in 1960, and several commissions had been set up, including the Hunt Commission (1934), Bridges Committee of Enquiry (1941) and the Public Service Review Commission (Udoji Report) (1974), with a view to evolving an enduring pay structure and incomes policy in the country.
This time around, the Minister of Labour and Employment, Dr Chris Ngige, on Thursday, gave an insight into what it would cost the Federal Government to implement the new wage on Labour’s terms – a whopping N580billion more annually. The minister has said it point blank: “There is no problem with disagreement in the labour system, we can sometimes disagree to later agree, on the national minimum wage, it will translate to an additional N580billion if government agrees to the consequential adjustment labour is proposing.
“Government cannot afford that kind of money now, besides, the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari is more interested in the lowest cadre of workers which are those on grade level 1 step 1 and level 6 step 1, these are the ones who the N30,000 will have greater impact on.”
If you ask me though, when we juxtapose the N580billion against what our National Assembly (NASS) members alone earn in the year, it is not much for the hundreds of thousands of workers that would benefit from the pay rise. I will return to this shortly.
Before then, however, is labour aware of the need to tie salaries and wages to productivity? I doubt if many people in this country think along that line. And we are not thinking along that line because we have steady flow if income from the oil-rich Niger Delta where everyone runs to at the end of every month for cash. If state governments are to pay their workers based on their internally generated revenue (IGR), how many of them will in true conscience agree to pay N30,000 minimum wage? How many of them can afford it?
Another issue is Labour’s reluctance to accept the reality of retrenchment when wages have to be reviewed upwards. Ngige gave that as condition to meet the workers’ demand. What some of us would want to see is a situation where Labour would take on the governments with facts and figures, instead of singing solidarity songs and embarking on road shows across the country and at the end achieve nothing. Agreed, minimum wage is just the benchmark below which employers of labour cannot go. But then, what says workers in Kogi or Adamawa must earn the same minimum wage as those in Lagos, or Port Harcourt, or Kano? Are states equally endowed? You may say the state governments were well represented on the panel to review the wages; much of what happened was political agreement. Apparently, the N30,000 was ‘agreed‘ to by many state governments because elections were approaching when the negotiations were going on. And not many state governments could afford the wrath of Labour then. Now is time to face reality. It is either workers are retrenched or we return to the era when salaries would be paid in arrears, or paid according to what each state government earns.
Again, nothing I have said should be misconstrued to mean support for the Federal Government’s position; or that there is no profligacy in government. Far from it. Indeed, one area we should take seriously, as I said earlier, is the humongous pay that our NASS members take home. It is sickening, ungodly and inhuman for anyone to be taking home such money and yet be telling workers and other less fortunate Nigerians that there is no money to meet their own demands. What are our NASS members doing that other lawmakers are not doing in other parts of the world? What entitles them to such outrageous pay, which several people have said to be the highest in any civilised part of the world? Parliamentarians in Britain and the United States go about in public transport, including trains and buses. They live in moderate apartments. But our own NASS members want the best of exotic cars; they want very expensive apartments which they can also buy at rock-bottom prices after their stint in the National Assembly. What special contributions are today’s NASS members making to legislation that their predecessors did not do far better on part time basis?
For me, this is one place for Labour to begin the crusade against bad governance. A government fighting corruption should be sensitised (if it cannot see the need itself) to the fact that this NASS members’ pay is intolerable and it is corruption by some other means. What annoys me is that, when you challenge them on this score, they simply tell you to beam the searchlight also on the executive arm of government. Yet, we have an idea of what these categories of public officials should get monthly given what is recommended by the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC).
Labour leaders would do well to realise that their proposed strike might not be total because the government has been able to satisfy the lowest cadres in the public service, that is those on Levels 1 to 6, step 1. Tell me, how those ones would be interested in strike when their interest has been taken care of. This might be a deliberate attempt to break the ranks of the workers, or it was just a coincidence because government’s intention is to reduce the gap in the wages of the different categories of workers. At any rate, I do not know what exactly the Labour leaders want; are they saying they want the same percentage rise for every worker as it has been done to those on Levels 1 to Six? That cannot work. Oftentimes too, salary adjustments are done to reduce the gap between the lowest and highest paid workers. Not to talk of now that the government said we cannot afford it.
Let workers embark on strike in some states till thy kingdom come, nothing would come out of it. In the first place, elections are far away and many of our political leaders only do good when elections are approaching. So, whatever you want to get from them make sure you get it when elections are approaching, or forget it. Once the elections are over, the people that you saw before elections without filling any forms you would now have to wait in their offices (if you are lucky to get that far) only to be told after sitting for hours that you should come back some other time. What we cannot lose sight of is the fact that some of the state governments, the way things are, cannot pay the new wage the way Labour is demanding from the Federal Government. And if they must pay, something must give. And that something is that some of Labour’s members would lose their jobs.
Let no one get me wrong. I am not saying there is anything inherently bad in asking for minimum wage increase. Or that Nigerian workers should still be earning N18,000 minimum wage which, by today’s standard, is hopelessly inadequate. No. That, indeed, is the standard practice all over the world: workers’ wages are usually reviewed or adjusted periodically in many countries, to reflect inflationary trends and ensure that workers’ take home pay can really take them home. In many countries, wages are reviewed every five years.
Be that as it may, as Ngige noted, it is in everybody’s interest for the government and Labour to agree on a meaningful review for those on Levels 7 to 14, and 15 -17. But Labour would do well to align with non-governmental organisations like the Socio-Economic Right And Accountability Project (SERAP), which has been championing the democratic cause and the need for transparency and accountability in government. I have always said it; and I repeat it, that governments would always find it convenient to grant minimum wage than want Labour getting seriously involved in asking for good governance. It is just that this time around, Labour seems to be asking for too much for the Federal Government not to grumble. We need no soothsayer to tell us that some state governments would soon join it to grumble aloud.
