Polytechnics: New scheme of service for fresh controversies?

Polytechnic graduates have experienced widespread discrimination due to perceived discrepancies in their certificates, which make it impossible for them to get similar treatment as degree holders from universities. The recent scheme of service released by the Federal Government for the sub-sector has again, generated controversies among stakeholders, who accuse the government of further widening the gap and relegating polytechnic education to the background, IYABO LAWAL reports.

There has been a long-standing debate surrounding the dichotomy between university graduates and their polytechnic counterparts due to the perceived value placed on the bachelor’s degrees (BSc), over the Higher National Diploma (HND).

Traditionally, BSc holders are rated higher in the job market and have access to a broader range of opportunities, even in the public sector than HND holders.
For years, polytechnic graduates have faced discrimination despite multiple pronouncements at unifying the BSc and HND certificates by the government.

The dichotomy is especially pronounced in the public service, where the rules state that officers with HND certificates cannot rise above Grade Level 14, as against the Grade Level 17 attained by their counterparts with BSc certificates.

The practice in federal and state civil services is that while an entry-level graduate with a BSc starts on salary Grade Level Eight, his HND counterpart has to go a level lower; in security service, a BSc holder emerges from training as a commissioned officer, while a HND holder does so as a non-commissioned officer.

In the private sector, some establishments like banks often overlook polytechnic graduates in favour of university graduates during recruitment. When they eventually decide on polytechnic graduates, they settle for the ones with OND certificates, not through direct recruitment, but through third-party recruitment, and with lower remuneration.

This development has led to several agitations among stakeholders in the polytechnic sector, who describe the discrimination as not only a great disservice to the country but also an action that is capable of making young people lose interest in polytechnic education.

In 2021, the Ninth National Assembly moved to end the dichotomy, by passing a bill abolishing the age-long disparity between BSc and HND holders. While the bill successfully scaled through the assembly, then President Muhammadu Buhari, failed to sign it into law, despite repeated appeals from stakeholders.

As the controversy over the dichotomy rages, the Federal Government, through the National Board for Technical Education (NBTE), recently issued a White Paper, titled: “Scheme of Service for Polytechnics in Nigeria,” signed by the outgoing Head of Civil Service of the Federation, Dr Folasade Yemi-Esan, which would guide activities and operations of polytechnic education in the country.

The Executive Secretary of NBTE, Prof. Idris Bugaje, said that the document recognised HND holders for the first time, as graduate assistants like their university counterparts.

Bugaje added that the document also requires chief lecturers to have doctorate degrees, noting that since there are calls for parity between BSc and HND holders, the highest academics in polytechnics should not be Master’s degrees only.

Stakeholders have, however, questioned the document, describing it as further setbacks for practitioners in the industry. Specifically, the Academic Staff Union of Polytechnics (ASUP) rejected the document and called on the government to halt its implementation, saying that there are many discrepancies and contentious issues that it, as one of the major stakeholders in the polytechnic education, is unhappy with.

In the new controversial scheme of service, the document named the office of the Head of Civil Service of the Federation (OHCSCoF) as responsible for staff employment in the polytechnics.

The document also elongated the career progression steps of polytechnic products as against their university counterparts, even as it also stipulated the mandatory inclusion of National Skills Qualifications (NSQ) as a prerequisite for academic staff career advancement.

While rejecting the new unified scheme of service, the National President of ASUP, Shammah Kpanja, said in an interview that several provisions in the document fell short of expected standards.

He called on the NBTE to suspend the implementation of the document and address grey areas identified by ASUP. The ASUP chief wondered why the OHCSoF should be preparing, or approving a document on the career development of polytechnic staff when she is neither an employer nor regulator.

He insisted that the document’s approval route, which gave rise to the contentious alteration is questionable, as the role of the office of OHCSoF as an approving authority is challengeable.

Citing Section 3 (1) of the Federal Polytechnics Act as amended, Kpanja noted that it is the responsibility of governing councils to oversee the affairs of the institutions.

He said that the status of polytechnics was settled in law by rulings of the National Industrial Court (NIC), which recognised governing councils as employers of staff in the said institutions, a development that was further buttressed by the Federal Executive Council in its letter of December 18, 2023, where the OHSCoF was excluded from any role in the employment of staff in tertiary institutions.

“Our conviction is that the OHCSoF cannot be preparing, or approving a document on career development of staff, including assessment of such staff for career growth when she is neither an employer nor regulator,” he said.

Kpanja emphasised that the new document grossly undermines the polytechnic education sub-sector, promotes discrimination against HND holders, and negatively distorts the established career structures and progression in the sub-sector.

He lamented that after a tortuous seven-year review journey following agitations by the union, polytechnics are left with a burden of contradictions that amplifies the identity crises rocking the sub-sector over the years.

Rather than carefully studying the document, Kpanja accused the agency of choosing the path of a lone-ranging celebration that will birth confusion, deepen dichotomy, accelerate brain drain, further reduce students’ enrolment, and detach polytechnics from the global community of tertiary schools.
Besides, he described the action as an attempt to trivialise the union’s past struggles to make career definition and progression structures in the polytechnics meet global standards.

“We equally see it as a subtle attempt to inject acrimony within the ranks of the staff trade unions in the sub-sector. So, to us, this is an unfortunate development, and we strongly advise the NBTE as our regulatory body to exercise restraint in the implementation of the various contentious provisions in the document until such are aligned with prevailing laws and standards in the tertiary education system.

He noted that several provisions in the controversial document eroded gains made in the union’s battle against the age-long disparity.  For instance, Kpanja noted that the contentious document elongated the career progression steps of the lecturer cadre from seven to a nine-step career development cadre, and at the same time, added an extra year for promotion to the final two levels.

This, according to him, implied that anyone in the lecturer cadre would endure a minimum of 26 years from the base to the highest level.
Describing it as unacceptable and a deviation from the norm, Kpanja stated that the unfair career progression guide in the sector, particularly as it affects the teaching and non-teaching staff cadres, is a recipe for crises as such is not reflective of the remuneration accruing to the cadres.

A former rector, Dr Ahmed Idris, objected to the mandatory inclusion of National Skills Qualifications (NSQ) as a prerequisite for academic staff career advancement, labeling it as irrelevant to the delivery of polytechnic curricula.

Idris reminded all that the status of polytechnics is settled in different laws and policy instruments, hence, the introduction of sub-tertiary level qualifications like the NSQ as mandatory conditions for academic staff career growth is a misnomer.

The former rector insisted that the possession of NSQ has no meaningful contribution to the delivery of the contents of the curricula of the different programmes being offered in polytechnics.

He also argued that the HoS is neither the employer of polytechnic lecturers nor the regulator of technical and vocational education in the country, hence, her attempts to impose career development paths on lecturers were unacceptable.

The immediate past President of ASUP, Anderson Ezeibe, argued that the scheme of service entrenched unwholesome and condemnable discrimination against HND holders as against their BSc counterparts.

He said: “We affirm that polytechnics cannot discriminate against its products in the manner prescribed in this document. This is evident in the provision of discriminatory entry points into the lecturer cadre for degree holders and HND holders, lowering of the career progression bar of holders of HND, both in the teaching and non-teaching cadres, discrimination against holders of HND in the appointment of registrars and bursars irrespective of their possession of higher-level certificates, and classification of technologists as non-teaching staff, among others.  He said despite submitting a draft for input, the contributions of ASUP’s national officers was not captured.

“Look at the issue of career progression, initially, it was 18 years, but with the scheme, we now have 26 years – meaning that even if you come in as Lecturer Two, you may not even get to the last part of the promotion before retiring.

“The controversial document, by its contents, further consolidates the discrimination meted out to HND holders in a system that produces them in favour of university degree holders. The peak of the injury is an outright denial of HND holders to attain the pinnacle of their careers, as evident in the requirements for the positions of bursar and registrar, which only consider BSc holders,” Ezeibe added.

Bugaje also admitted that there are so many areas in the new scheme of service that require amendment. The NBTE listed areas that require an amendment to include dichotomy against HND holders in other cadres, omission of some cadres, allowing at least one skipping for all cadres like it is in other tertiary institutions, and not elongating the waiting period for all promotions beyond three years.

“These observations from the Committee of Rectors of Federal Polytechnics, staff unions, and the National Association of Polytechnic Students (NAPS), have been forwarded to the Head of Service,” he stated.