University lecturers’ strike ’ll end if
By Dayo Adesulu Amid hopes that the Federal Government and the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) teams will meet this week to try to resolve the issues that led to the strike by university lecturers across the country, ASUU President, Professor Biodun Ogunyemi, says the implementation of seven issues with timelines was crucial to the resolution of the dispute.
ASUU had shunned a meeting with the government team last week on the grounds that it was still consulting with its members on the contending issues.
In this interview,
Ogunyemi believes the industrial action will be called off if the Buhari
administration was willing to transform the university system.
According to him, “university education is too important to be treated
with levity”.
Please take us through the genesis of the current dispute between ASUU
and the Federal Government?
In November 2016, ASUU went on a one-week warning strike. That strike
was a culmination of our persistent call on the Federal Government to
address issues bordering on how to re-position the Nigerian university
system, based on our desire to deal with the rot and decay in the
system. We reached some understanding on the issues leading to the
warning strike, but government went to sleep after we suspended the
strike action. Our advocacy for restoring the dignity of tertiary
education, particularly university education, has a long history.
Sure it has a long history
Let me just take you back to 2012, when Federal Government conducted the
Needs Assessment of public universities in respect of the level of rot
and decay. The report was submitted in July 2012. It documented steps
that government must take to concretely revitalize public universities
for global reckoning. Broadly speaking, such measures would involve
massive injection of funds as well as addressing governance issues. The
needs assessment exercise was carried out by a National Committee headed
by the present Chairman of the Independent National Electoral
Commission, INEC, Professor Mahmood Yakoob. When the report was
submitted, government was almost going to ignore it. ASUU had to write
several letters, hold countless meetings as well as embark on a number
of warning strikes to make the Federal Government implement the
recommendations of its own Committee. Our agitations for the
implementation of that report came to a head with a nationwide strike
action from July to December 2013. As part of the process leading to the
suspension of the action, government signed a Memorandum of
Understanding, MoU, with ASUU on 11th December, 2013.
Was ASUU a part of that National Committee?
Yes, ASUU was fully involved. We had called for government to
comprehensively address the problems associated with universities, but
government always said our claims were exaggerated. Mind you, there was a
2009 agreement that also had its own history. You know, since 1992, we
had always talked of the need to address the issue of brain-drain and
make our universities competitive with other universities around the
world. Way back in 1992, we started talking about remuneration and
welfare issues, because of the exodus of the best and brightest from our
universities. That gave rise to the issue of conditions of service.
Beyond that,we talked of the issue of funding. We also talked about
university autonomy and academic freedom. The last issue we advocated on
are categorised as “other matters” and these are associated with the
general working and living environment for university academics. These
four components were directed at addressing issues affecting the
Nigerian university system in order to make it internationally
competitive. After initial disputations, the then government negotiated
and agreed with us on these four cardinal areas – that was under General
Ibrahim Babangida. That agreement was very comprehensive.
So, since 1992, we have had other levels of negotiations – about four or
five agreements: 1999, 2001, and then 2009, apart from 1992. These had
been going on and it came to a head in 2009, when government was trying
to dispute our claims. At that point, we implored the Federal Government
to go into the universities and investigate because lecturers were
leaving in droves and the state of facilities was on steady decline. In a
nutshell, the four areas earlier highlighted could be broadly
classified into two: the working environment and motivation for
lecturers.
So, in 2012, government did its own assessment…
Yes, they carried out their own investigation into our assertions on the
rot and decay in the public universities. The report was by the
Committee On Needs Assessment of Nigerian Public Universities, submitted
in July, 2012. It had to take another set of agitations for government
to pay attention to implementing its own report and that was what led to
the 2013 Memorandum of Understanding. You would recall the strike
action our members were forced to embark on then in 2013.
So, we can safely narrow the issues to financial and non-financial?
Yes, the financial aspect talks about massive injection of N1.3 trillion
to be spread over six years, starting with N200billion, released in
2013 and subsequently, N220billion every year for the next five years.
We also have the non-financial aspect of the Needs Assessment Report
which deals largely with university governance issues – role of
governing councils, university administration, students’ welfare, etc.
You said in 2016, you had a warning strike because government wasn’t
listening but government is claiming that there was a panel, headed by
Wale Babalakin, in place to discuss these issues.
Since 2013, government has not done anything again on the Needs
Assessment Intervention Fund. Apart from the initial release of N200
billion, funds for 2014, no additional kobo for 2015 and 2016 as
specified in the MoU of 2013 has been released. We have other issues
like withdrawal of funding support for University Staff Schools,
non-registration of university-based PFA called NUPEMCO, and guidelines
for implementing the provision of the 2014 Pension Reform Act with
respect to professors retiring with their salaries. We also have issues
of fractional salaries, arrears of earned academic allowances, EAA, and
exemption of aspects of university grants that hinder university
operations from TSA. These seven issues were among the key elements of
the understanding reached at the National Assembly with officials of the
relevant MDAs in the wake of our warning strike in November 2016. So
they are actionable issues to which we had timelines attached. For
instance, government promised to complete a forensic audit on the N30
billion released to address part of the EAA in 2013 within six months.
We agreed to that proposal, but eight months after, we are just learning
that the promised forensic audit had not be conducted. Again,
government said ASUU should await a court judgment on the issue of staff
school which was to be delivered on 5th December, 2016. The judgment
came in favour of another university-based staff union that took
government to court and it was in line with ASUU’s insistence that
government could not unilaterally abrogate our agreement in respect of
staff school provision as part of welfare package for university staff.
Also, for more than seven months, government failed to revert to our
2009 Agreement on this matter.
The Babalakin Renegotiating Committee was set up to address the 2009
FGN/ASUU Agreement in entirety. The ongoing action by our members is
not, strictly speaking, about the Babalakin Committee. We do not have
any serious problem with the Committee for now. The concern of our
members in the ongoing strike action is the implementation of the
understanding reached with government in the wake of the 2016 warning
strike – those actionable issues with timelines. A key provision in the
2009 Agreement is that it would be renegotiated every three years. Part
of our demands in the 2016 warning strike also the renegotiation of the
agreement which had been due for review since 2012. Based on the
pressure to review the 2009 agreement, government went into the issue of
the Needs Assessment, which does not cover the entirety of the
agreement of 2009. The Babalakin Committee is now for the 2009 Agreement
and we don’t have any problem with the Babalakin Committee for now. We
are in talks with that committee.
So, what necessitated this on-going strike?
As I said earlier, our members were forced into the current strike
action because government failed to implement the actionable issues on
which we reached understanding at the instance of the Senate last year
November. You will remember that, last year, we moved to the National
Assembly because the Senate President intervened and we brought out all
these issues that were pending – payment of fractions of lecturers’
salaries in federal universities and non-release of subvention to state
universities by governors; non-release of operational license of
NUPEMCO; arrears of EAA; fund for revitalization; withdrawal of funding
for staff school; retirement benefits of professors; TSA; and
renegotiation of the 2009 Agreement. Government agreed to do certain
things which were time bound.
Like?
For example, the issue of Earned Academic Allowances. Government said
before it could release any additional fund, it would carry out a
forensic audit and that would be competed within six months. We said we
didn’t have any problem with that. Eight months after, that has not been
done. What we are saying today is that there were areas that were
actionable based on our understanding of last year for which nothing is
being done within the time frames. An issue like paying lecturers a
fraction of their salaries was not something to be re-negotiated. When
you talk of registration of NUPENCO – our pension fund administrator –
that was not something new. We also believe that the need for
revitalization of public universities has been settled scientifically by
a Committee set up by government itself. Why not follow the negotiated
timeline for the release of the revitalization fund? Government started,
paid only once and stopped. This is unacceptable.
But some people would argue that N220billion every year in the light of
current realities is unrealistic…
The realistic thing we are talking about here is the time that has
passed, since 2013. If you cannot do all, there is always provision for
review. It’s only going to be fair that for four years we have not
insisted on faithful implementation. Look, it is not about funds being
available, it is about government seeing education as a priority, that
is the issue here. Within this period, government has bailed out the
banking sector, power, aviation to the tune of trillions of Naira. If
government sees education as a priority issue, it would be given the
desired attention by government.
Okay, is ASUU open to negotiations with government on the issues because
of the economic situation in the country now?
We have always discussed with government as patriots. We are discussing
this now because four years have passed. for instance, we are not
insisting that the whole outstanding N825 billion for revitalization
fund should be released now. We are open to ideas on what government can
do in the immediate, while new plans can be worked out for releasing
the balance. Our point, however, is that government cannot repudiate the
revitalization fund on the excuse of the so-called economic recession.
What we are saying is that government should show commitment by paying,
at lease one year, after four years of non-payment.
There’s the notion in town that you have already submitted your new
proposals to the federal government that was why you didn’t show up for
the follow-up meeting (last week)…
Nothing like new proposal. Please let’s not get it mixed up. What
happened was that the Federal Government in their letter of 16th August
gave us its new positions on issues that we had reached an understanding
on before – last year. And what we said was that now that you have new
positions, we needed to go back, as is the practice with ASUU, to all
our members to to take inputs from them. We practice bottom-top model of
decision-making in ASUU. And that was what we did. We have consulted
our members and they have made input into our response on every issue
that government put forward. We conveyed this feedback to government
vide a letter on 28th August, 2017 as promised at our meeting with them
on 17th August. Deliberations were still going on the content of our
letter where pressures were coming that we should attend a meeting at
the office of the Minister of Labour and Employment. That meeting was
premature and the concerned Minister himself later agreed with us on
this position.
*Would it be fair to say, as some are saying, that this government met
the mess on ground and it could not be directly held responsible for it,
without prejudice to the understanding reached last year?
Well, governance is a continuum. Every new government inherits both
assets and liabilities. From an objective assessment, I don’t think we
can honestly absolve any particular government of blame in respect of
their lackadaisical attitude to the matter of education since the return
to civilian administration in 1999. Look at the budgetary allocation to
education, for instance. Allocation in the last two years of this
government hovers between 6% and 7%. Although they will claim that there
has been increase naira-wise, this pales to lesser funds when the twin
factors of inflationary trends and devaluation of the currency are taken
into account. So, we have not seen any radical departure from the past
trends of relegating educational financing, particularly the issue of
revitalization of public universities, to the background in the
reckoning of the Nigeria’s political class.
Can we be privy to some of the new positions of government on some
issues?
These are issues under discussion. We don’t want to prejudice the
process. The issues will soon be public knowledge, once our discussion
on them resume very soon again.
What was the reaction of your members upon discovering that the
understanding already reached last year is being reviewed again?
Naturally, our members nationwide were angry. They felt that we were succumbing to pressure and blackmail from government. For them, nothing should be taken away from the minimum promised upon which we stopped short of proceeding on full-blown strike action as from November 2016. Honestly, it was really difficult convincing them the need to take another look at some of the issues. But, certainly, there are issues which are not ‘negotiable’. For instance, there is not to re-negotiate about outstanding arrears of salary fractions or the allowances our members have already earned. Same goes for Staff School, NUPEMCO, entitlements of retired professors, outstanding subventions for State Universities. What is the way our in the immediate term and what do you think is the long term solution to this crisis? Government needs to take immediate steps to arrest the crisis in university education with particular reference to the public university system. Diligent implementation of our outlined issues in the ongoing dispute would assist in this respect. The long-term solution, however, is for government to reappraise its understanding of the crisis of education in Nigeria. For rather too long, successive administrations have been relying on prescription of external agencies such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. The slogan of these agencies and similar ones has always been less government in social services like education and health. It is religious adherent to this slogan that has almost killed public primary and secondary education sub-sectors in Nigeria. But, for ASUU, our public universities would have also been heading for complete obscurity like the lower levels. What I am saying in essence is that government should declare a state of emergency on Nigerian education for the next five years during which we take complete stock of such issues like the philosophy that should drive public education, curricula being implemented, financing and governance. In other words, we need a complete overhaul of the entire sector in order to make our education drive our development as a country. ASUU members are also parents, what would you have to tell other parents some of who think ASUU is being self-centred? University education is too important to be treated with levity. The quality of education our children are receiving in the universities is more important than issuing them worthless paper qualifications. We should all support ASUU to restore the integrity of our children’s degrees to what they used to be in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. And the best way to do this is to prevail on Federal Government to remain focused on revitalizing our universities for quality university education and national development. This is what is being done in some other African countries like Ghana, South Africa and Kenya where Nigerians migrate in search of university education. But you will surprised to know that, in most cases, these African universities rely on seasoned academics who have been frustrated out Nigeria to enhance the quality of the university education. What is the irreducible minimum your members want from this government? Operators of this government of “change” should transform Nigeria’s public university system by addressing the welfare needs of academics who constitute the heartbeat of the system. They should also diligently address the needs for facilities, equipment, services and governance as outlined in the 2012 Needs Assessment Report.