Oliver Okpala

The spate of strike actions and labour disputes in our universities, polytechnics and other institutions of higher learning has reached an alarming proportion. These days, labour disputes appear to be the order of the day in our citadels of learning spread across the country. The frequency and regularity of these industrial actions has had negative impact on the tertiary institutions. It has also sent dangerous signals within and outside our shores about our universities and polytechnics.
It has become necessary to make an incursion into labour unrest in our institutions of higher learning. Currently, several unions in our tertiary institutions are involved in a face­ off with their employers over many burning issues. The Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) and the Non-Academic Staff Union of Universities (NASU) are interlocked in a war of attrition with their employers. Their grievances range from non-payment of salaries, allowances, entitlements to non-provision of research grants and an enabling environment for learning in the citadels.
It is to be expected that in an environment of intellectual endeavour, there must be decorum and decency. Anything short of these values will impact negatively and dangerously on the business of learning and character moulding which are the primary purposes of our higher institutions.
Industrial instability and squabbles do not make our higher institutions the appropriate and cognate centres of learning and excellence which they ought to typify. On the contrary, industrial actions distract lectures, the school calendar and pro• grammes, and throw the students into confusion. Academic activities are disturbed, while programmes are abandoned. The students are thus unable to undergo the training, learning and lectures scheduled for the session.
The result is obvious. The tertiary institutions eventually turn out students and graduates who did not properly undertake and undergo the prograrnmes and studies designed for their courses. This gives way to the production of half baked graduates who lack self-confidence and courage, and who cannot compete favourably with their counterparts from other climes.
Strike actions should be a weapon of the last resort by labour. It should not be the primary objective of labour to confront their employers. No worthwhile benefit comes from an industrial crisis. It is with dialogue the stake­holders are able to reason together and embark upon a cross-fertilisation of ideas which will move our higher institutions forward.
It is conceded that a labourer deserves his wages. ASUU and NASU members deserve to be paid for work done. But these bodies must realize that they should limit their demands on the various governments to the financial abilities of the governments.
To demand from the government what she cannot afford is to open the floodgate to disharmony and strife in the institutions of higher learning.
ASUU and NASU must appreciate the existence of the global meltdown. Nigeria is not an island. She is part and parcel of what has become a global village. Our nation is not immune to the adversities of the meltdown. The demands of labour should be in line with the present economic reality. The arms of the government must not be tied by ASUU and NASU.
Again, Government has a very wide obligation. The obligations are to Nigerians as a whole. Government has the runs to provide infrastructural facilities for Nigerians. Our roads need maintenance, our hospitals need drugs, standard of living must be improved, our air­ports need to be upgraded to ensure safety and we have our international obligations as well.
ASUU and NASU are not the only stakeholders in the Nigerian project. Indeed, all Nigerians are stakeholders. No group, body or organisation should arrogate to itself any claim to special privileges and no organisation should hold the country down or to ransom simply because of some group interests. The nation must come first in everything we do. This is what the re-branding project encapsulates.
ASUU and NASU should understand that their strike actions often entail closure of our higher institutions with its attendant consequences. Students roam the streets. They remain idle and they fall into various temptations. Some of them resort to the new fad of kidnapping, either to make ends meet or occupy themselves. The daring among them go into armed robbery. Yet, others resort to all sorts of crime and deviant conduct because of their idleness.
Our undergraduates are our future leaders and our future hope. Since a lot is invested in their training, a lot is expected from them. ASUU and NASU must not cut this national dream short. The two bodies operate in a very sensitive and delicate environment and they should not allow their actions and inactions to jeopardise the interest of the nation.
The billions of naira which the government pumps into institutions of higher learning must not be allowed to go down the drain. Nigerians owe this country the duty to be patriotic and to think of the next generation.
Unrestrained strike actions in the citadels expose our country to ridicule internationally. It puts a question mark on the quality of our graduates. A strike action is not a weapon in the hands of labour to dare government. It is an instrument of last resort. It is when extensive and exhaustive dialogue has failed that the option of a strike action can come in.
As a matter of fact, in sensitive institutions as our universities and polytechnics, a strike action should be completely ruled out. It amounts to sabotage for NASU and ASUU to continuously distort our educational programmes in the citadels by calling out their members on strike. There should be a stop to this practice.
Okpala wrote from Lagos