The Association of Nigerian Railway Senior Citizens (ANRSC), has faulted claims by the management of the Nigerian Railway Corporation (NRC) that the Federal government has reversed its policy on the monetisation of railway staff quarters.

This is as the Nigerian Union of Railwaymen (NUR) said that efforts were ongoing to resolve the dispute, which is currently pending before the court.

The Chairman, ANRSC, Segun Esan, in an interview with The Guardian, said that the monetisation policy remained valid until formally reversed by the appropriate authority.

He explained that the monetisation policy was enacted by an Act of Parliament under former President Olusegun Obasanjo. He stressed that for the law to be changed or amended, it must also go through the same parliament.

He insisted that the management of NRC could not change the law by fiat, adding that the corporation could not be treated differently from other federal ministries, departments and agencies where the programme had been implemented.

Esan, who was also a one-time General Secretary, NUR, said the unions secured a favourable judgment at the National Industrial Court on January 6, 2016, but the NRC management, under its then Managing Director, Seyi Sijuade, appealed the ruling. He said the appeal had remained pending for a decade, despite several court sittings.

According to him, the latest proceedings took place on February 27 and May 5, 2026, when the management indicated its intention to withdraw the appeal.

He said the union’s legal representatives opposed the move, insisting that the case should proceed towards implementing the terms of an out-of-court settlement.

Esan declined to speculate on the reasons for the prolonged delay, noting that the matter remained before the court.

He, however, questioned the rationale behind suggestions that leasing the quarters could replace monetisation, arguing that the policy’s objective was to enable eligible workers to own their homes rather than introduce a temporary arrangement.

He said: “The policy does not say substitute monetisation with lease. The policy clearly and unambiguously says go and monetise. It is a directive that nobody has the right to bend, embellish or replan.

“The NRC management had partially implemented the policy in the past, particularly through the monetisation of certain benefits, including vehicles and components of workers’ consolidated salaries.”

He, however, wondered why the corporation had not fully implemented the accommodation component if the policy had been applied to other aspects of workers’ benefits.

He also argued that the policy was intended to help address Nigeria’s housing deficit by enabling public servants to acquire homes of their own, while reducing the financial burden associated with maintaining government-owned residential buildings.

The former union official further contended that developments in the railway sector had weakened the argument for treating the corporation as an exceptional case, pointing to the participation of state governments and private investors in railway operations.

Esan also raised concerns about railway lands and residential properties allegedly leased to private individuals and organisations, as well as quarters that were demolished to make way for new developments.

He cited developments in Kano and Bauchi states as examples of locations where, according to him, railway land had been allocated for other uses, questioning why eligible railway workers and retirees should be denied the benefits of the monetisation policy.

On the displacement of workers arising from railway infrastructure projects, Esan said government authorities and the corporation should provide replacement accommodation where existing quarters were demolished.

He recalled disputes involving railway quarters in Osogbo, Osun and Lagos states, where he said union intervention led to agreements for replacement housing.

In Osogbo, for instance, he said the union opposed the proposed demolition of staff quarters until alternative accommodation was provided, adding that replacement houses were subsequently built and affected workers relocated.

He also recalled negotiations involving the Lagos Metropolitan Area Transport Authority (LAMATA) and the Lagos State government over the redevelopment of railway quarters in Ikeja.

According to Esan, the agreement provided for temporary relocation to rented apartments while replacement accommodation was constructed within two years.

Esan explained that the workers received financial assistance to secure temporary housing, while replacement quarters were completed in Agege in less than two years.

However, Esan alleged that some retired railway workers who had occupied the demolished quarters were excluded from the subsequent allocation of replacement accommodation.

He described the alleged exclusion as unfair, arguing that retirees, who had served the corporation for decades, should not be denied housing benefits because of redevelopment projects undertaken during or after their service.

“The management was very unkind to a point that it only implemented the part of the staff quarters monetisation that paid them, while leaving the other side that would have benefited everybody across the board,” he said.

Esan maintained that railway redevelopment and urban renewal projects should not leave former and serving employees worse off, particularly when their families and dependants were affected by displacement.

He urged journalists to seek documentary evidence from those claiming that the Federal government had reversed the monetisation policy, insisting that any such decision should be supported by verifiable records.

Also, the President, NUR, Innocent Ajiji, said efforts were ongoing to resolve the dispute pending before the court.

According to Ajiji, the union was still appealing to the relevant parties to resolve the dispute amicably. “The matter is still in court and we are still appealing to them to resolve it,” he said.

The dispute over the monetisation of railway quarters has persisted for years, with labour representatives challenging the NRC management over the implementation of the policy and the entitlements of serving and retired workers.