Why Owe ASUU?

The dimension of the ongoing strike action by members of the Academic Staff Union of Federal Universities (ASUU) that is worth a second look is the Government policy of “no work, no pay”. The negotiating party on the Government side is insisting on taking advantage of this policy to deny the striking workforce (ASUU) the right to their salaries for the period of the work to rule action embarked upon by ASUU, since the 14th of February, 2022. On its face value, the government may appear justified in its attempt to deprive the striking workers the salary due to them, on the ground that they did not do the work they were engaged to perform in the first place. To state it more clearly, the lecturers did not go to class to teach students enrolled by the Federal Government into the various institutions of higher learning for the purpose of acquiring knowledge, which is the statutory responsibility of the lecturers. The lecturers did not teach the students for the period in contention, so how come they are demanding to be paid for a job not done? This is a simple logic: “no work, no pay!” On what ground could anyone fault the Government position here? In the first place, the primary responsibility of the aggrieved lecturers is to impart knowledge to the students placed under their custody by the Federal Ministry of Education. If the Federal Government can be seen as the defector employer of the “erring” lecturers, how would anyone expect the Government to pay salaries for work not performed? Are the lecturers contending this point? If so, on what grounds?
The logic in the Government’s  position on this subject matter is clear: ASUU is an employee of the Federal Government, assigned the sole responsibility of imparting knowledge to students placed under its tutelage. From the beginning of the strike action to date, the lecturers have not performed this contractual obligation, recognised by law. On the contrary, the students have been sent home to their parents and guardians. In search of what next to occupy themselves with, these hopeless victims of the strike action are daily roaming the streets of our cities. Some of them have reportedly, resorted to criminal activities; while the more responsible ones among them  have constituted additional burdens to their parents and the society at large. The presence of these idle students at home for this length of time (seven months, and still counting) does not in any way endear the rest of society to sympathise with the “noble” objectives of the striking lecturers, no matter what! Among the stated objectives of the striking workers is the quest to improve the lot of the students, in terms of the environment under which learning is imparted in the various public universities; ASUU also is seeking to improve the quality of education, through proper funding for research and other deliverables. These indeed, are commendable efforts which have, to a large extent, gained the support of the student population for the leadership role ASUU is playing in this direction.
On the other hand, the protracted nature of the strike action tends to dampen the hopes of the students; how long would it take to graduate from the university? What is the economic cost of overstaying one’s welcome in the various faculties to which these students have been enrolled? What happens to the academic calendar of the Nigerian universities? Higher education in Nigeria has become increasingly elusive, since a course of study originally billed to last for three academic years can now drag on to periods exceeding four to five years, due to incessant strike actions. Who pays the price for all these discrepancies in our university system? It is the common man who cannot afford to send his child to study abroad. It is the unfortunate student whose parent is not economically buoyant enough to send him abroad for higher education. It is the entire society that bears the brunt, when nothing is done to stop the elitist class from exploiting the nation’s wealth to train their children and wards in foreign institutions of higher learning, at the expense of the masses. What can be done to create a level playing ground for the education of our children in tertiary institutions? It is for government to legislate against the practice of sending our children to foreign universities for the purpose of tertiary education; especially to obtain the first degree certificate. Any child that graduates from the secondary school must be made to compulsorily take his/her first degree courses in a Nigeria institution of higher learning. Thereafter, parents who can afford it can send their children out  for higher degrees beyond the borders of Nigeria.
It is frequently argued that those in government and public service in Nigeria who, ordinarily, ought to ensure that our university system works, are in the habit of sending their children and wards to foreign countries to pursue their post-secondary school education. Hence, they don’t really care what happens to our university system in Nigeria.  As a fall out of this ASUU strike, the National Assembly must see it as its statutory responsibility to investigate this trend, and put up an appropriate legislative constraint against this unpatriotic development. Now, does the demand of ASUU that Government pays all arrears of salaries denied its members for the period of the strike, as a condition for calling off the current strike action,  actually make  sense? If so, how? Yes, I see ASUU making a legitimate and sensible demand here. In the first place, they did not just wake up one day to embark on strike. And based on the numerous demands put forward by ASUU, no reasonable observer would dismiss their action as frivolous. The reasons postulated for their action have been overwhelmingly  upheld by various parties, and interest groups, in both the public and private sectors of the nation’s economy. Most significant is the warning strike executed in support of ASUU strike by the Nigeria Labour Congress, less than a month ago. The NLC did not mince words as to the legitimacy of the strike action embarked by ASUU, and has  gone a step further to threaten that it is ready to give full backing to the demands of ASUU, should the Government fail to do the needful within a reasonable time frame. Government officials dragging the strike have not come out with any concrete evidence of any falsehood or breach of trust committed by the leadership of ASUU in the course of prosecuting its  grievances. The argument proffered by the Government in insisting on the policy of “no work, no pay” is, to say the least, untenable.  Those orchestrating the Government’s position in this regard have not come out with any tangible reason for denying the striking lecturers their earned salaries. The position of the Government in this regard can best be described as frivolous.
In any trade dispute, there are procedures to be followed by the parties in conflict. Is there any critical procedure ASUU failed to observe in the course of prosecuting its grievances that would disqualify it to its entitlement to earn the salaries of its members? Could ASUU be single handedly held liable for the prolongation of the strike action? Did ASUU give adequate notice of its intension to go on strike?  Did it first embark on what is popularly termed “warning strike”? Did ASUU seek and follow through the prescribed arbitration process and procedures? If indeed ASUU followed due process in pursuing its legitimate grievances against the Government in the course of its strike action, then there is no basis for Government to refuse to pay the striking lecturers their earned salaries. The salaries indeed were earned; and the government’s  decision to stop their pay, in the first instance, was wrong and punitive in intent. If ASUU was not focused on its main objectives for the strike, one would have expected the leadership of the academic union to take the Federal Government and its agent to court over the protracted demand for the payment of members’ salaries withheld by the Government.
Nothing in the books would have stopped it from seeking legal redress against Government’s unilateral action in stopping the salaries of its members, in the course of their legitimate action. That ASUU is not considering this option is, indeed a demonstration of the highest level of patriotism by members of the academic union in the face of unprovoked aggression by the Government.  If salary stoppage was not aimed at primarily threatening the lecturers to abandon their legitimate demands, the best option left for government was to embark on mass retrenchment of the “rebellious” workforce. This should have been the appropriate way of letting the “erring” employees come to grip with the realities of their “ill-informed” action. The other alternative was for the Government to take the leadership of ASUU to court. I am sure that there is room for industrial court arbitration in disputes of this magnitude. Luckily, the FG has decided to toe the line at last. By experience, no genuine problem, in the public domain, ever gets solved through the committee system of conflict resolution. This is more so, if such a committee is the brain child of Government. It is an indirect way of allowing Government to arbitrate in a case preferred against it. In the light of all the factors ex-rayed in this write up, it may be safe to conclude that Government has an obligation to pay the striking lecturers their earned salaries.

By: Pius Obute
Obute is an Abuja-based writer.