Business
Employers Reject NLC’s Plan To ‘Shut Down Economy
Employers Reject NLC’s Plan To ‘Shut Down Economy
The proposed strike by the Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC)will be counter-productive if it goes ahead, private employers of labour cautioned yesterday.
According to them, the NLC should seek better opportunities for its members to cushion subsidy removal pain through dialogue with the government.
Early in the month, NLC President Joe Ajaero called out workers on a two-day warning strike, but it attracted mixed compliance on September 5 and 6.
Announcing the warning strike, Ajaero, who shunned a meeting called by Labour Minister Simon Lalong, said a “total shutdown of the economy” would follow in 14 days unless the government reversed the pump price of petrol to pre-May 29, among other reasons.
The Trade Union Congress (TUC) which declined to join the NLC for the warning strike opted for a dialogue with the government within two weeks.
In a September 8 letter to the government, the TUC said it is expecting a response from the government on its proposals.
The NLC has, however, opted to go ahead with its plan to mobilise workers for an indefinite strike.
But, a former Vice President of the NLC Comrade Issa Aremu said the industrial action is preventable.
Aremu, who is Director General of Michael Imoudu National Institute for Labour Studies (MINILS) said: “Strikes are just the means not to an end. The end is improved welfare for working men and women at these challenging times.
“I know that President Tinubu is concerned about the plight of all. His quotable quote is ‘let’s the poor breath.’
Aremu said Lalong has demonstrated commitment to dialogue with NLC and TUC.
He stressed: “Strikes are, therefore, preventable. I think both government and organized labor will soon find a common ground.
“Strike is certainly not inevitable, indeed it is preventable but rewarding negotiations and compromises by the two parties.”
The Director-General of the Nigerian Employers Consultative Association (NECA), Mr. Adewale-Smart Oyerinde, who was featured on a Television programme last night, said the proposed strike will be counter-productive, adding that it will hurt employers and employees.
The NECA boss, who applauded the Federal Government for the steps taken so far, however, said there was a need for the government to do more.
He said: “The approval of N5billion to each state is a step because if the money is well spent in a state economy, it will trigger some level of consumption, which will also go back into production.
“We are also aware that the government is sharing rice. But, these efforts are not enough.”
Oyerinde said the strike will not in any way address the challenges confronting employers, employees the generality of Nigerians.
In his view, it is possible for parties in the dispute to renegotiate already agreed terms.
Oyerinde added: “Our position remains the same on the issue. And that is, if you negotiate, courtesy demands that you live up to the terms of negotiation.
“But, if anything arises that makes it difficult to live up to the terms of the negotiation, there is opportunity to renegotiate the terms that have been agreed upon, if you don’t have the capacity to implement.”
The DG said going on strike will distress stakeholders.
He stressed: “For us as employers, though we are paying beyond the minimum wage and we have also gone to provide succour, palliatives, welfare packages to make life easier for employees in the private sector, notwithstanding the fact that employers are currently bleeding and facing multi-dimensional challenges.
“But, we have done well, as the President had also commended the employers in his August broadcast. A strike at this point will do two or three things.
”One, it will hinder the ability of the employers to meet their obligations and this will affect, not only the public sector, but even the workers.
“When you go on strike, it will put the employers in double jeopardy, especially when we are not the protagonist and antagonists. And that remains our position.”
Oyerinde urged the government to do everything possible to avert the industrial crisis.
He said: “We are calling on the government to do all that is necessary to avoid the strike.
“But if the strike should happen, it will be counter-productive for both employers and the workers.”
Oyerinde said government should look at the payment of multiple taxes, VAT on diesel and petrol, creation of an enabling environment, and the forex challenge.
NLC Head of Information Benson Upah said the planned nationwide strike by the NLC was on track.
But the Director of Press and Public Relations, Federal Ministry of Labour, Olajide Oshundun, said the ministry was yet to receive any notice of strike from the NLC.
A member of the National Working Committee of the NLC said there was no need for a fresh notice as the communique issued at the end of the NEC meeting of the Congress on September 1, was enough for the government.
Upah said the government had “not done anything to suggest that it was committed to the promises it made.
”The government has not done anything which will suggest that it was committed to the promises it has made. Our plans remain on course unless something dramatic happens,” he added.
TUC awaits govt action on proposals
FEDERAL Government’s action on some of the proposals by the TUC to cushion the impacts of fuel subsidy removal is still being awaited, the union has said.
On September 4, Lalong asked for two weeks from the leadership of the TUC to communicate the proposals to President Tinubu and the Federal Executive Council (FEC).
The two-week window expires on Monday.
But international engagements in New Delhi, India and Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates (UAE) have kept the President busy since last week.
An official of the Labour and Employment Ministry told The Nation that Lalong has been unable to table the proposals by Labour before the appropriate authority.
It was further learnt that government representatives and Labour leaders have not met since the September 4 parley, which was shunned by the NLC.
The government called the meeting to avert the two-day warning strike called by the NLC.
The Federal Government promised to work on the TUC proposals.
The ministry official said: “No official discussion between government and Labour. But we are hoping that very soon the discussion will start again.
“You know the minister requested for two weeks for the President to come back. The minister will take the proposals by Labour to the President. There are demands on the president’s table.
“The president is already aware that there was a two-day warning strike by the NLC and there are discussions behind the scenes. I am sure the President will tell Nigerians what to expect.”
Some of the TUC proposals are the implementation of palliatives; wage awards; tax exemptions and allowances to public sector workers; modalities for the N70 billion for Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs); the Road Transport Employers Association of Nigeria (RTEAN) and Nigeria Union of Road Transport Workers(NURTW) crisis, among others.
Osifo told The Nation that the congress was waiting for the outcome of the minister’s response.
The TUC letter dated September 8 reads: “I convey to you, compliments from the National Administrative Council (NAC) of the Trade Union Congress of Nigeria (TUC), especially the President, Comrade (Engr) Festus Osifo and wish to draw your attention to the above subject matter.
“This letter is a follow-up to the last meeting held in your office on the 2nd day of September 2023. You can recall that in the last meeting sir, we promised not to wait until the expiration of two weeks before reaching out but will bring any information that could further add value to your pending presentation before the Federal Executive Council (FEC) meeting presentation.
“We equally raised the issues of Taxation and the need for the government to grant tax waivers to employees that earn low income in public and private sectors as well as those in the informal sector.
“We highlighted the need for effective collaboration with the minister of Finance and the coordinating minister for the economy who has made some comments around these in the past.
“It is critical to resolve this urgently as we also implore your Excellency to bring the attention of the Taiwo Oyedele-led committee on taxation and fiscal reforms recently set up by the President to this.
“Honorable minister sir, another critical issue that should be reviewed is the collection of levies in dollars on petroleum products imported into the country by NIMASA and NPA.
“This act tends to lead to a further upward surge in the prices of PMS whenever the naira depreciates against the dollar as recently noticed during the floating of the naira.
“We hereby call on your office to liaise further with the above-mentioned reform committee or bring this to the attention of the FEC which could compel the two agencies to immediately start charging their levies and taxes in dollars.
“While we await your intervention, please accept the renewed assurances of our regards.”
Tinubu’s Economic Agenda in Crisis: North-South Divide Strikes Again
By George Omagbemi Sylvester
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, elected in 2023 on the wings of political calculation and elite manipulation, has now found himself caught in the snare of Nigeria’s enduring historical curse: the north-south divide. His ambitious economic reform agenda, intended to liberalize the economy, remove structural inefficiencies, and reduce government expenditure—has hit a legislative wall. But this isn’t just about policy. This is about power, patronage, and the ancient scars of a fractured federation.
The rejection of critical aspects of Tinubu’s economic proposals by lawmakers is a stinging rebuke, not only to his administration but to the very idea that Nigeria can be reformed from the top down without confronting its structural imbalances. In many ways, Tinubu’s presidency is now facing the same nightmare that has haunted every Nigerian leader since independence: how do you govern a country that was never truly united?
The Crumbling Reform Agenda
At the center of the storm is Tinubu’s proposal to centralize and streamline federal subsidies and remove what he termed “wasteful duplication of agencies.” This was meant to continue the subsidy removal narrative started in June 2023, and reduce fiscal leakage. However, the backlash, particularly from legislators representing the northern states, was swift and coordinated.
The northern bloc, comprising lawmakers from Kano, Katsina, Kebbi, Sokoto, and Borno, objected on the grounds that Tinubu’s proposals disproportionately affect their regions, where federal allocation remains a critical lifeline in the absence of strong internally generated revenue. But critics argue this is a strategic form of sabotage, aimed at retaining an unsustainable status quo that prioritizes political patronage over national progress.
As Prof. Wale Adebanwi of Oxford University has argued, “Nigeria’s northern elite have historically benefited from the spoils of a rentier state, with oil wealth redistributed without the burden of productive contribution. Any move to reverse this equation is seen as existential.”
Tinubu, a southerner from Lagos, with strong Christian support from the Southwest and Southeast, is now facing the very brick wall that has impeded reforms since the First Republic. His own political survival now depends on how much compromise he’s willing to make—or whether he can break the mold entirely.
A Century-Old Fracture
The rejection of Tinubu’s reforms by northern lawmakers is not new. It is deeply rooted in a century-old tension embedded in the structure of the Nigerian state. The 1914 amalgamation, engineered by British colonialists, fused two vastly different regions, the industrializing, Western-educated Christian south and the feudal, Islamic north, into one artificial political entity.
From independence in 1960, this contradiction has remained unresolved. “Nigeria was created not to function as a cohesive nation, but as an economic convenience for its colonial masters,” noted historian Max Siollun. “What we’re seeing is the consequence of a nation built on convenience rather than consensus.”
The economic priorities of the north and south remain deeply divergent. While the south boasts ports, oil revenue, industries, and a growing tech sector, the north has remained largely agrarian, dependent on federal allocations and political appointments. Any attempt to tamper with this redistribution—whether via subsidy removal or cuts in federal spending, provokes immediate resistance.
Reform vs. Redistribution
Tinubu’s administration promised reforms: subsidy removal, tax reform, and investment in critical infrastructure. But all reforms require sacrifices, and those sacrifices must be nationally distributed to succeed. What Tinubu is discovering, painfully, is that reforms without inclusive buy-in are dead on arrival.
Economist Dr. Obiageli Ezekwesili captured the challenge succinctly: “Nigeria’s political economy is structured around the sharing of oil rents, not the creation of wealth. Any attempt to disrupt this structure will provoke fierce opposition from those who depend on the current dysfunction for survival.”
Indeed, the loudest resistance to Tinubu’s reforms has come not from the opposition PDP or Labour Party, but from within his own APC, particularly from northern senators and representatives who feel alienated by the president’s southern-centric economic vision.
The Ghost of Buhari
Many Nigerians are now drawing comparisons between Tinubu’s presidency and that of his predecessor, Muhammadu Buhari, a northern Muslim who governed with overwhelming support from the north. Buhari’s policies favored heavy spending, a bloated civil service, and minimal economic restructuring, a model that created illusions of stability while deepening the economic rot.
“Buhari governed like a tribal chief, rewarding loyalty over competence, and expanding a culture of dependency,” said Prof. Kingsley Moghalu, former Deputy Governor of the Central Bank. “Tinubu’s efforts to break away from that legacy will require courage, strategy, and above all, an appeal to national interest.”
But appealing to national interest in Nigeria is easier said than done. The political class thrives on division. The north fears marginalization, the south resents over-centralization, and the middle belt remains trapped in identity crises. Tinubu, in failing to build a coalition around his reforms, is now paying the price of elite disunity.
The Danger of Ethno-Political Paralysis
The rejection of Tinubu’s agenda is not just a political problem, it is an economic time bomb. Nigeria is drowning in debt, with over 90% of its revenue now going to debt servicing. Inflation is running rampant, the naira has crashed, and unemployment remains alarmingly high. The country cannot afford to maintain the current level of government spending without reform.
But if every economic policy must first pass the tribal test, then reform is doomed. “A nation that filters every economic decision through the lens of ethnicity is a nation marching toward collapse,” warned Nobel Laureate Wole Soyinka. “If Nigeria cannot rise above its primordial divisions, it cannot survive the 21st century.”
What Next for Tinubu?
Tinubu’s next steps are critical. Will he revise his reforms to appease northern lawmakers and keep the political peace? Or will he double down, use executive power, and mobilize the Nigerian people behind a populist push for structural change?
There is a middle path, dialogue, renegotiation of the federal structure, and regional empowerment. Many have called for fiscal federalism, where regions generate and control their own revenues, sending only a fraction to the center. This model, already practiced in countries like Canada and the United States, could reduce the perennial tension around federal allocation.
Political economist Ayo Teriba suggests, “Nigeria must move away from revenue-sharing to revenue-generation. That shift requires not just policy but a new national consensus, and that is where Tinubu must lead.”
In conclusion: Lead or Collapse
President Tinubu is at a crossroads. He can continue playing the dangerous game of balancing regional interests with national imperatives, or he can rise above the tribal chessboard and lead with boldness. The north-south divide is not just a historical relic, it is a living cancer that must be addressed through structural reform, not rhetorical appeasement.
The economic reform agenda is not a southern agenda. It is a Nigerian necessity. If lawmakers continue to sabotage reform because it threatens their regional comfort zones, then the entire nation will suffer. As the saying goes, “A house divided against itself cannot stand.”
In the end, Tinubu must decide: will he be a president of compromise, or a reformer of consequence?
-
Business6 months agoComprehensive Media Audit Shows Flutterwave, MTN Nigeria, and Bolt Outpacing Competitors in Media Engagement
-
celebrity radar - gossips7 months agoHow Deji Adeyanju Secured The Release Of Speed Darlington
-
Politics7 months agoMy best is yet to come’ As Ambassador Adesina ‘Lanre Ogunsola affirmed at the APC APEX body, Obafemi Owode Local Government
-
Entertainment4 months agoAliu Gafar delivers stellar performance as Esusu in Femi Adebayo’s Seven Doors