The Federal Government has announced on Sunday, June 2, 2024, that the planned nationwide strike by Organised Labour is premature and illegal.
It said the planned nationwide strike by Organised Labour is premature, ineffectual and illegal.
Also, the Federal Government stated that the proposed strike action contravenes the National Industrial Court’s ruling and undermines the ongoing mediation and settlement efforts aimed at resolving the issues related to the court’s order.
Mr. Lateef Fagbemi, the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, who stated the position of the government in a letter addressed to the leadership of the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and the Trade Union Congress of Nigeria (TUC), specifically said that the alleged issuance of an ultimatum to the government by labour for the conclusion of negotiations before 31 May 2024, does not satisfy the requirement of issuing a categorical and unequivocal formal notice of strike.
The AGF urged Organised Labour to kindly reconsider the declaration of strike action and return to the ongoing negotiation meetings, which has been adjourned to a date to be communicated to parties.
He said; “This would be a more civil and patriotic approach and will enable your Congress pursue its cause within the ambit of the law and avoid foisting avoidable hardships on the generality of Nigerians, which this proposed industrial action is bound to cause”.
Fagbemi further said that this latest declaration of strike action by organized labour is premature at a time when the Federal Government and other stakeholders involved in the Tripartite Committee on determination of a new national minimum wage had not declared an end to negotiation.
The AGF said; “You are aware that the Federal and State Governments are not the only employers to be bound by a new national minimum wage, hence, it is vital to balance the interest and capacity of all employers of labour in the country (inclusive of Organized Private Sector), in order to determine a minimum wage for the generality of the working population.
“I would like to draw your attention to Sections 41(1) and 42(1) of the Trade Disputes Act 2004 (as amended), which requires both NLC and TUC to issue mandatory strike notices of a minimum of 15 days. For ease of reference, these sections provide thus:
“41. (1) Without prejudice to section 18 of this Act, if any worker employed in any essential service ceases, whether alone or in combination with others, to perform the work which he is employed to perform without giving his employer at least fifteen days’ notice of his intention to do so, he shall, unless he proves that at the time when he ceased to perform that work he did not know, or had no cause to believe, that the probable consequences of his or their doing so would be to deprive the community or any part of the community either wholly or to a substantial extent of that or any other essential service, be guilty of an offence and be liable on conviction to a fine of N100 or to imprisonment for six months.
“42(1) Without prejudice to section 17 of this Act. it-
(a) any worker ceases, whether alone or in combination with others, to perform the work which he is employed to perform without giving to his employer at least fifteen days’ notice of his intention to do so; “- emphasis added, he said.
Fagbemi said that it is pertinent to observe that at no time did either the NLC or TUC declare a trade dispute with their employers or issue any strike notice as required by law for such strike action to be legitimate and lawful.
The AGF explained that it is not in doubt that the fundamental importance of the 15-day notice is underscored by the fact that Sections 41 & 42(1)(b) criminalize non-compliance with this requirement for a valid declaration of strike action.
In addition to the foregoing, the legality or legitimacy of the proposed strike action is also strongly called to question by the fact that both NLC and TUC failed to comply with the statutory condition precedents (dispute resolution procedures) provided for under Section 181(a) of the Trade Disputes Act 2004 (as amended) thus:
“An employer shall not declare or take part in a lock-out and a worker shall not take part in a strike in connection with any trade dispute where- the procedure specified in section 4 or 6 of this Act has not been complied with in relation to the dispute,” he said.
Furthermore, the AGF said the proposed strike action is also in breach of relevant conditions itemized under Section 31(6) of the Trade Unions Act (as amended) as follows:
“No person, trade union or employer shall take part in a strike or lockout or engage in any conduct in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute unless- (a) the person, trade union or employer is not engaged in the provision of essential services.
“The provisions for arbitration in the Trade Disputes Act Cap T8 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 have first been complied with: and in the case of an employee or a trade union, a ballot has been conducted in accordance with the rules and constitution of the trade union at which a simple majority of all registered members voted to go on strike”.
The AGF also drew the attention of Labour to the fact that the conditions outlined by our national legislations for exercising the right to strike are in tandem with the International Labour Organization (“ILO”) principles concerning the right to strike, adding that it is the position of the ILO Committee on Freedom of Association that the obligation to give prior notice, obligation to have recourse to conciliation, mediation and (voluntary) arbitration procedures in industrial disputes, etc are prior prerequisites for declaring a strike.
The Chief Law officer of the federation drew the attention of the Organised Labour to the pendency of the interim injunctive order granted on 5th June 2023 in SUIT NO: NICN/ABJ/158/2023 – FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF NIGERIA & ANOR V. NIGERIAN LABOUR CONGRESS & ANOR, which order restrained both Nigeria Labour Congress and Trade Union Congress from embarking on any industrial action/or strike of any nature.
Fagbemi said; “This order has neither been stayed or set-aside, therefore it remains binding on the labour unions – See: OSHIOMHOLE & ANOR V. FGN & ANOR (2004) LPELR-5188(CA) Per IBRAHIM TANKO MUHAMMAD, JCA (AHTW) at (Pp. 23- 27, paras. E-C)”.
The AGF noted that in the aftermath of the removal of fuel subsidy, both the government and labour consented to measures to ameliorate the adverse consequences thereto, by executing a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) on 2nd October 2023, adding that the MOU entails provisions for payment of wage award, setting up of the minimum wage committee, provision of CNG buses and conversion kits, tax incentives, etc.
He further said; “It is remarkable to note that in the same MOU, both NLC and TUC committed to henceforth abide by the dictates of social dialogue in all our future engagements,” he said.
Fagbemi guaranteed that the Government will maintain a collaborative stance in addressing worker and citizen welfare issues, upholding the principles of collective bargaining and fostering a harmonious relationship with the workforce.
