Labour Act provides for wage review at intervals, says Ajulo

The Federal Government recently inaugurated a committee to look into the recent call for review of workers wages, and salaries. This followed agitations by labour unions for increase in their salaries to mitigate the effect of high cost of living occasioned by the hike in petroleum pump price and the resultant inflation. An Abuja based lawyer and former National Secretary, Labour Party, Dr. Kayode Ajulo, in a chat with BRIDGET CHIEDU ONOCHIE, highlighted some of the reasons for renewed agitations. In fact, he is canvassing a minimum wage of 120,000 a month.

What is the position of labour law with regards to the agitation for salary increase?
The agitation for salary has a legal backing. I want to point out that whatsoever that might be said about the past administration, it succeeded in signing the issues surrounding the minimum wage into law. If you remember what happened, many state governments took it up with federal government for signing the law on their behalf. But while that was on, some states increased their minimum wage from N18,000 to N22,000 monthly. By and large, the fact remains that even the N18,000 cannot buy a bottle of champagne that is served in government house.

The take home pay of workers is so small and that is the reason the Act stipulated that there should be a review of the wage at intervals because it is subject to inflation and other fundamentals. So, it is expected that after the four years anniversary of minimum wage, workers are supposed to be discussing on how to give effect to the provision of the Act in increasing workers salary. Unfortunately, may be because of politics and the situation of the country, much was not said about it, although we heard a committee has been set up to that effect.

But I believe that law must take its course. Even though heaven threatens to fall, the provision of the law must be followed. As it is today, workers supposed to be enjoying a new regime of minimum wage. I think Nigerians should be thinking of a minimum wage of a N120,000 a month. It is not too much considering the new pricing that comes with the N145 pump price of fuel. Sometimes, I ask myself, in a situation where the Power sector is having issues, the N18,000 cannot run the generating set of some families for a week. So, you can imagine what workers are going through. And I am afraid of a new trend where we use politics to over cloud the position of law. If workers begin to ask for increase in salary, people will link it to one political tendency or the order. I want to believe that workers also need to get up to agitate, they need to start the affirmative action and with that, God will answer their prayers one day.

How feasible is the review when some states cannot pay salaries?
Where there is a will, there is a way. If workers voice is collective, if only they can speak with one voice, it is achievable. The government is programmed to be responsive to its citizenry but that responsiveness will not come if people are divided. There must be a unity of purpose and they must know how to marshal themselves. Today, if you check the social media, on every issue, you will see nothing less than 20 to 200 divergent opinions. Society cannot grow like that. I believe there are some places where we suppose to speak with one voice, like the issue of workers salary.

Whichever political party you belong, you have workers and to me, that is one vital area where workers need to speak with one accord rather than concentrate efforts at pitting one government or the other. They should assert that they deserve their wage. I believe that if they learn to speak with one voice, even if the government is the type that is adamant, it will respond one day.

What do you think is the implication of the trial of Bukola Saraki and Ike Ekweremadu’s on the polity?
It depends on the way we look at it. As far as I am concerned, I dont think there is any course for alarm. It is just unfortunate that we always look at things from the negative perspective. Accusing anybody before any court of law should not be an issue. So far as it is the court that will decide, there should be no reason to worry; it is in order. The question you should ask is, is there any offense or crime committed? The second question should be, who is guilty of that crime? All these must be determined by the court. If Saraki and others know that they have not done anything wrong, theirs is to assemble their legal team and quickly get to the court, prove their innocence and let everybody go. But because people believe that government always have overriding influence over any court process it commences, it appears as if once a person is taken to court, he must be indicted. I think we should take that off our mind.

However, it also behooves on the government to ensure that people have confidence in the judiciary. Let us allow the courts to do their work, if at the end of the day, it is discovered that they did not commit any offence, the court should exonerate them, they should be discharged and acquitted, and that is the way I want us to see it. I don’t want us to see it from the angle that it will affect the activities of governance. If we are really serious, everything could be done within three days but because of the entrenched problem we have in everything about Nigeria, no one knows when it will end.

Whatever we say today, Saraki and Ekweremadu, despite being the number three and four citizens respectively, do not have any immunity and that is the way we should begin to look at it. They, at any point in time, could be accused and arraigned before the court. It is the duty of the court to exonerate and discharge them or to convict them and sentence them, that is the position but one thing we should focus our minds is how to do that now and do away with it.

What happens should they be found guilty?
If that happens, we have areas of authorities that can settle that. They were a lot of instances where the court had asked people in authority to vacate their seats. If today, the court indicts Saraki and he is asked to go, all what he has done remain. We have to take his person away from his office. When Saraki is performing his functions, he does so as a President of the Senate and not as Bukola Saraki. So, if tomorrow he is asked to go, his going cannot nulify his former actions. There are functions and duties of the office of the Senate President and those cannot be attributed to his person, except he acts beyond his power. For instance, if he slaps anybody, it is not part of his functions to do that and so, he is on his own. He has acted beyond his power.