Each time the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) embarks on strike to press home demands from government, it is lamentation for students, parents/guardians, members of ASUU and, even government because it is unavoidably disruptive of academic activities of the university system. But almost always ASUU is blamed by all other parties in the vain understanding that there must be alternatives to strike and that the union should think out of the box.

This argument is sterile and presupposes that ASUU has predilection for strike. Even the press, in reportage, often sensationalises the frequency of strike by the union without situating the phenomenon within the context of recurring unresolved conflict between it and the government, thereby portraying the union as intransigent and not the government as insouciant.

But what are the issues? Consequent upon take-over of all universities in the 1970s by the federal government, it abolished tuition fee in 1975 and the policy subsists to date. Thus what students pay in federal universities is other charges not tuition fee. Often people mistake increases in other charges as increase in tuition.

ASUU, at no time compelled government to sustain the policy on free tuition. Yet, tuition is the central element in the business of the university in teaching, laboratory, workshop, and corresponding infrastructures that must be provided for the students in the gamut oflearning processes. If tuition is free for students, the cost implication for all of these must be borne by government and where provisions in this regard are inadequate the learning processes are undermined.

The university cannot deliver on the curricula for academic programmes and students are shortchanged, reflecting poorly on the quality of graduate. This is an aspect of the crux of the matter. Those who think that the quality of graduate stems from poor or outdated curricula in the university miss the point, having armchair understanding of curriculum and the delivering processes. The fundamentals of curricula for programmes world-wide remain largely unchanged.

On free tuition policy of the Federal Government, it is instructive to recall provisions of Section 18(3) of the 1979 and 1999 Constitutions, Chapter II, on Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy, which states inter alia: Government shall strive to eradicate illiteracy; and to this end Government shall as and when practicable provide free, compulsory and universal primary education; free university education; and free adult literacy programme.

The phrase, ‘when practicable’ in the provision is conditional and government cannot be held to account on default. Nevertheless, the free tuition policy of government is in sync with the spirit of the provision. Over the years it is glaring that non-practicability of no-tuition policy has been the case empirically demonstrated by inadequate funding of public universities by government to cater effectively for tuition.

Non-admittance by government of this reality smacks of insincerity and deceit. The dilemma for ASUU as a union that is pro-people is that it cannot advocate for re- introduction of tuition fee for students many of whom have very poor parents/guardians who can barely afford the nominal increases on other charges by universities.

Furthermore, the union is aware of enormous wastages and high cost of governance coupled with intractable corruption all of which, if curtailed could free up funds to meet the funding needs of federal universities and sustenance of free tuition policy.

I am aware that state universities charge modest tuition fee, the reason they are more expensive than their federal counterparts. The private universities charge higher tuition since they have no subvention from government. Thus, although there are now 274 universities – 74 federal, 67 state and 159 private – the latter much higher than the combined number of the public ones, student enrolment is much higher in public universities on account of affordability.

Since education is a social service, government at all levels must substantially increase budgetary allocation to it, guided by the benchmark minimum of 26 per cent recommended by UNESCO. The policy which puts on hold establishment of more universities by the federal government is plausible. But there is the need to introduce government scholarships and bursary for students in tertiary institutions in addition to the extant loans scheme.

On the current FGN/ASUU face –off, it is on record that the union embarked on an 8-month strike in 2022 for failure of the President Muhammadu Buhari government to sign a negotiated agreement on funding of universities and conditions of service for its members. This was after a series of re- negotiations of the 2009 agreement involving three successive committees of government headed by Dr Wale Babalakin, Professor Jibril Munzali and Professor Nimi Briggs in this order beginning from 2017.

By executive/judicial conspiracy, the 8-month strike was truncated and the issues unresolved. In the twilight of Buhari’s administration, there were increases in salaries by 25 and 35 per cent for different categories of federal government workers which include academics. In addition, it made provision of N50billion in the 2023 budget for payment of earned academic allowances to university lecturers.

The latter was released by the President Bola Tinubu government this year, albeit short-changed by 20 per cent to accommodate the allowances for non-academic staff members of universities. But the Nimi Briggs negotiated document now before the Tinubu administration needed to be reviewed in light of the prevailing macro-economic realities and to be signed for implementation in accordance with agreed memorandum of action.

Accordingly, some adjustment had been made to the document with Alhaji Yayale Ahmed as leader of the government’s team awaiting the approval of government since December 2024. The union has waited patiently for government to act on the document not minding the restiveness of its members contending with excruciating conditions of service. Amid this, federal government, without any form of negotiation increased the salaries of judges by 300 per cent.

Now, the same government, through the Minister of Education, Dr Tunji Alausa, whimsically offered 25 per cent on the ridiculous salaries of academics which had elicited public outcry over the years, as against the proposed salaries in the negotiated agreement. This action is provocative, condescending, and runs against the grains of the principles of collective bargaining which the union holds sacrosanct.

What are the demands of ASUU? They are, among others, (1) Adequate funding of public universities for their re-vitalisation and functionality in the national interest. This recognises the pivotal role of the University in all aspects of national development, (2) University autonomy for greater latitude to run its affairs unfettered, (3) Payment of out-standing salary arrears for one year (January – December, 2023) arising from 25 and 35 per cent increases on salaries of federal government workers, (4) Payment of third party deductions from salaries of members which are, de facto, savings in cooperatives, and (5) Improved conditions of service, in the main, improved salaries for academics.

The reaction of government to a warning strike by ASUU, in the invocation of no-work-no-pay, is hasty, futile and ineffectual. The minister who announced it is not a student of history, otherwise he would have known that the need for the university to function effectively has been the kernel of ASUU’s struggle for decades covering periods of military interregna characterised by intimidation, persecution, proscription and de-proscription.

The union has remained undeterred and focused in the hope that the political class will come to a realisation of the need to address the issues. The need to address the demands of ASUU with all sincerity of purpose is urgent and compelling. The president is not unaware of the overriding purpose of the struggle by the union and in the spirit of his renewed hope agenda should approve the agreement reached with the federal government headed by Yayale Committee expeditiously in the national interest.

Prof. Eromosele is a former Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta.