Opinion
As NLC Prepares For Ultimate Strike…
The issue of an increase in the minimum wage of civil servants has lingered for so long. So much that it has called for the need to truly scrutinize what it means, especially in the face of gnawing economic incapacitation and clearly dehumanizing standard of living in Nigeria for the average person, popularly called the “common man”.
There is indeed no doubt that life is becoming extremely unbearable for the common man in Nigeria, considering that on a daily basis it has become increasingly difficult for him to have a good meal a day.
Year in, year out, workers in Nigeria are made to demand for the execution of an agreement, a legal agreement, between them and the government, for the Federal Government to make slight adjustments to the earnings of its workers, in line with economic realities.
Each time, the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), the umbrella body of workers in the country, resorted to stamping its feet, most times at the expense of some of its leaders being tagged enemies to government and being dealt with accordingly, for any decision to be taken about execution of the agreement.
From all indications, at least, going by the body language of the Muhammadu Buhari-led Federal Government, the implementation of the agreed N30,000 minimum wage will end up a mirage, and the NLC will surely embark on the proposed almighty strike in January.
The question that readily comes to the minds of critical thinkers at this juncture over the issue, is why there is so much ado about salary increase for workers who sometimes can hardly boast of N35,000 in their accounts after serving the government for the maximum 35 years, no thanks to economic instability and non-standardization to goods and services in the country.
This is a major truth about the typical civil servant in Nigeria: that if he decides to be a dedicated and meticulous worker in order to serve his country or state to the best of his ability, giving his best in the maximum 35 years, he will be regarded as a failure in life by even the government he has so diligently served, especially going by the attention he gets after retirement: difficulty in payment of his retirement benefits, if it is paid.
At the end of the day, after his otherwise meritorious service to his fatherland, if he does not die fighting for his benefits, he’ll end up not getting it till death comes calling. This is mostly why most retirees die shortly after retirement, because not only are their earnings reduced, they can hardly get such monthly entitlements.
When you place the plight of the civil servant side-by-side with his politician counterpart, it is easy to appreciate who the politician truly is, and what he thinks of the civil servant.
Unlike the civil servant, the politician, at best, aspires to be President of the country and to remain there for the maximum eight years. Of course, before then, he may have occupied several positions. But for the National and State Assemblies and appointments, every other position has a maximum eight years’ time frame to serve.
Within this period, they have several increases in salaries, allowances (most of which are never enjoyed by the civil servant in his entire years of service), and fringe benefits. Such benefits include wardrobe allowance, travelling allowance, changes of official cars almost annually, and even holiday allowance.
This is in the face of sometimes clear deprivation of the leave bonuses and sundry fringe benefits of civil servants by the same government.
Within the reign of Rt. Hon. Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi as Governor of Rivers State, and Chairman of the Nigerian Governor’s Forum, for instance, provisions were made for ex-Governors to retire in comfort. Some of the benefits accruable to anyone fortunate to serve as governor (for maximum eight years) include being paid millions of naira as salaries monthly, owning mansions as houses in Abuja and their state of origin, having a change of cars ranging from three to five in stated number of years, etc. All of these are as of right, and MUST be provided by the state.
Meanwhile, part of why the civil servant is tagged lazy is because either his job has been taken over by oftentimes comparatively less qualified politician, or he is seen as not being a politician, and so would demand that due process be followed in handling official matters.
As civil servants in Nigeria prepare to embark on the indirect government-imposed January ultimate strike, therefore, there’s the urgent need for all, including the government, to begin to actually appreciate the plight of the civil servant deliberately imposed by the government.
For, no matter what lies told to civil servants under whatever guise, and no matter how the government seeks to incapacitate the civil servant, it does not remove their knowledge that the government only needs them as chattels to enable it attain self-aggrandizement, not real partners in the progress of the Nigerian Society.
If this is not so, the government needs to redefine who the civil servant is in the development of the Nigerian State. And there’s no better way to do this than giving the civil servant his due, at this point, the pittance in the name of “N30,000.00 minimum wage”, which will not even be enough for him in the present hard times made possible by the same government.
It is, indeed, a wonder that every year, and in all its endeavours, government at all levels seeks to borrow a leaf from the advanced climes on how to develop their country and state. We hear of alliances with foreign companies to develop infrastructures, but the same courtesy is not accorded the workforce. Barely little is done in terms of improving the living standard of the civil servant, at least, not as is done for the politician.
To, therefore, view the proposed January workers strike as anything else but a fight for the ridiculously deprived survival of the civil servant is to state in clear terms that the civil servant in Nigeria has to think of other more aggressive means of demanding for their right and due.
The assumption is, of course, that the government will not allow this to happen by doing the needful, of according to the same or similar benefits as it does the politician. Anything contrary can only portend the worst for the polity and, one way or another, the country will be the worse for it.
Soibi Max-Alalibo
From all indications, Nigeria possesses enough human and material resources to become a true economic powerhouse in Africa. According to the National Population Commission (NPC, 2023), the country’s population has grown steadily within the last decade, presently standing at about 220 million people—mostly young, vibrant, and innovative. Nigeria also remains the sixth-largest oil producer in the world, with enormous reserves of gas, fertile agricultural land, and human capital.
Yet, despite this enormous potential, the country continues to grapple with underdevelopment, poverty, unemployment, and insecurity. Recent data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS, 2023) show that about 129 million Nigerians currently live below the poverty line. Most families can no longer afford basic necessities, even as the government continues to project a rosy economic picture.
The Subsidy Question
The removal of fuel subsidy in 2023 by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has been one of the most controversial policy decisions in Nigeria’s recent history. According to the president, subsidy removal was designed to reduce fiscal burden, unify the foreign exchange rate, attract investment, curb inflation, and discourage excessive government borrowing.
While these objectives are theoretically sound, the reality for ordinary Nigerians has been severe hardship. Fuel prices more than tripled, transportation costs surged, and food inflation—already high—rose above 30% (NBS, 2023). The World Bank (2023) estimates that an additional 7.1 million Nigerians were pushed into poverty after subsidy removal.
A Critical Economic View
As an economist, I argue that the problem was not subsidy removal itself—which was inevitable—but the timing, sequencing, and structural gaps in Nigeria’s implementation.
- Structural Miscalculation
Nigeria’s four state-owned refineries remain nonfunctional. By removing subsidies without local refining capacity, the government exposed the economy to import-price pass-through effects—where global oil price shocks translate directly into domestic inflation. This was not just a timing issue but a fundamental policy miscalculation.
- Neglect of Social Safety Nets
Countries like Indonesia (2005) and Ghana (2005) removed subsidies successfully only after introducing cash transfers, transport vouchers, and food subsidies for the poor (World Bank, 2005). Nigeria, however, implemented removal abruptly, shifting the fiscal burden directly onto households without protection.
- Failure to Secure Food and Energy Alternatives
Fuel subsidy removal amplified existing weaknesses in agriculture and energy. Instead of sequencing reforms, government left Nigerians without refinery capacity, renewable energy alternatives, or mechanized agricultural productivity—all of which could have cushioned the shock.
Political and Public Concerns
Prominent leaders have echoed these concerns. Mr. Peter Obi, the Labour Party’s 2023 presidential candidate, described the subsidy removal as “good but wrongly timed.” Atiku Abubakar of the People’s Democratic Party also faulted the government’s hasty approach. Human rights activists like Obodoekwe Stive stressed that refineries should have been made functional first, to reduce the suffering of citizens.
This is not just political rhetoric—it reflects a widespread economic reality. When inflation climbs above 30%, when purchasing power collapses, and when households cannot meet basic needs, the promise of reform becomes overshadowed by social pain.
Broader Implications
The consequences of this policy are multidimensional:
- Inflationary Pressures – Food inflation above 30% has made nutrition unaffordable for many households.
- Rising Poverty – 7.1 million Nigerians have been newly pushed into poverty (World Bank, 2023).
- Middle-Class Erosion – Rising transport, rent, and healthcare costs are squeezing household incomes.
- Debt Concerns – Despite promises, government borrowing has continued, raising sustainability questions.
- Public Distrust – When government promises savings but citizens feel only pain, trust in leadership erodes.
In effect, subsidy removal without structural readiness has widened inequality and eroded social stability.
Missed Opportunities
Nigeria’s leaders had the chance to approach subsidy removal differently:
- Refinery Rehabilitation – Ensuring local refining to reduce exposure to global oil price shocks.
- Renewable Energy Investment – Diversifying energy through solar, hydro, and wind to reduce reliance on imported petroleum.
- Agricultural Productivity – Mechanization, irrigation, and smallholder financing could have boosted food supply and stabilized prices.
- Social Safety Nets – Conditional cash transfers, food vouchers, and transport subsidies could have protected the most vulnerable.
Instead, reform came abruptly, leaving citizens to absorb all the pain while waiting for theoretical long-term benefits.
Conclusion: Reform With a Human Face
Fuel subsidy removal was inevitable, but Nigeria’s approach has worsened hardship for millions. True reform must go beyond fiscal savings to protect citizens.
Economic policy is not judged only by its efficiency but by its humanity. A well-sequenced reform could have balanced fiscal responsibility with equity, ensuring that ordinary Nigerians were not crushed under the weight of sudden change.
Nigeria has the resources, population, and resilience to lead Africa’s economy. But leadership requires foresight. It requires policies that are inclusive, humane, and strategically sequenced.
Reform without equity is displacement of poverty, not development. If Nigeria truly seeks progress, its policies must wear a human face.
References
- National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). (2023). Poverty and Inequality Report. Abuja.
- National Population Commission (NPC). (2023). Population Estimates. Abuja.
- World Bank. (2023). Nigeria Development Update. Washington, DC.
- World Bank. (2005). Fuel Subsidy Reforms: Lessons from Indonesia and Ghana. Washington, DC.
- OPEC. (2023). Annual Statistical Bulletin. Vienna.
By: Amarachi Amaugo