FG sack order for lecturers I do not know why the Federal Government continues to use the same method in dealing with the Academic Staff Union of Universities—ASUU—and expect to get a fantastic result. The ultimatum it issued by the weekend for the striking lecturers to return to work on the 4th of December or face a mass sack is an old method that has never worked. Why the present state actors has opted for it is difficult to fathom. Is it that there are no competent advisers or that everyone in the corridor of power is bereft of pragmatic ideas? The stage the ongoing FG-ASUU negotiation has reached, and the circumstances surrounding the reluctance of the striking lecturers’ to call off the lingering strike, calls for more understanding on the part of both parties, rather than the reading of the riot act by the Committee of Pro-Chancellors of Federal Universities. Those who run the affairs of state and institutions of society should operate with a sense of history. When, in the past, the federal authorities applied the “no work no pay” order, announced the sack of the lecturers and advertised for new lecturers to replace the striking dons, the methodology did not resolve the impasse. In the first place, qualified lecturers who can truly deliver knowledge are not in large supply. Where do the Pro Chancellors hope to get qualified academics in the various disciplines to deliver lectures and drive the universities effectively? Already, the striking lecturers have not been paid salaries in the last five months. And if this measure did not deter them from continuing with the strike, is it the threat to be sacked, without possible replacement, which would force the lecturers back to work? If the university dons could survive without salaries for almost six months, is it the sack threat that would do the magic? If for the sake of argument, the threat compels the lecturers to resume work whilst the dispute has not been resolved amicably, do the Pro-Chancellors think that a healthy working environment would subsist in the universities? Would the nation fare well with a bunch of disgruntled, ill-motivated lecturers, coerced by the state to work against their will? A final amicable resolution of the matter, in my candid opinion, will pay all parties concerned including the numerous stakeholders in the education industry, especially the students who have been the greatest victims of the protracted industrial action by the lecturers. A few more days of sorting out the details and smoothening out the rough edges of the resolutions, including making a respectable pact that would not be treated in future as a document of “imperfect obligation,” would not inflict more damage to the system, than what had already been done. If the Federal Government had gone this far in reaching critical agreements with the lecturers’ union, it should sign the agreements and be willing to review the content in the next one year in tandem with a provision of the FG-ASUU Agreement of 2009 that it would be renegotiated at specified intervals. That, surely, is not asking too much of the FG. As to the allegation by the Supervising Minister of Education, Mr. Nyesom Wike, that ASUU is asking for more money beyond what government had offered is in bad faith because, to my understanding, ASUU had never said that the N40 billion released by the FG for payment of accumulated earned allowances was adequate to cover the outstanding unpaid allowances. The computation provided by ASUU indicated that about N92 billion would be required to pay up the outstanding allowances for the period from 2009 to 2012. The open contention by ASUU has been that the amount offered could not even pay half of the outstanding allowances hence the talks had been deadlock on a number of times. For the Supervising Education Minister to turn around now and accuse ASUU of making more unreasonable demands after an initial acceptance is misleading. More importantly, the Minister failed to mention the irreparable loss inflicted on the membership of ASUU by the reckless killing of one of its veteran spokesmen, the late Professor Festus Iyayi, in the course of the struggle to broker industrial peace and end the strike. That also complicated the matter as it opened fresh wounds and damaged frayed nerves. More unimpressive still is that the order to resume lectures by the Pro-Chancellors on the 4th of December or face a sack merely aggravates the situation because, it does not appear that there is anything to be gained by anybody with the decreed resumption of early December. For, shortly after that date, parents and families including the students will be up and doing for the Christmas holidays and celebrations. No reasonable academic activity can hold sway in the universities under the circumstances. Surely, this is not the time to be issuing threats and talking down on people, especially where the threats are likely to end up complicating matters. My point is that both parties should use the Christmas break to resolve all pending issues and ensure that lectures resume early next year after the New Year celebrations. That should give ASUU ample time to mourn its departed Comrade, reconcile its ranks and also provide opportunity for government to do an icing of the cake of the negotiation it has so well executed with the university teachers’ union. The Federal Government should withdraw the sack order.
Posted on: Sun, 01 Dec 2013 00:48:33 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015