The Joint Health Sector Unions (JOHESU), yesterday, faulted the Federal Government’s recent circular reviewing the retirement age in Nigeria’s health sector, warning that the policy selectively favours one cadre.

The union also said the development threatens equity, teamwork, and efficiency in healthcare delivery. In an open letter to the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation (OHCSF), JOHESU expressed “deep concern” over what it described as a discriminatory implementation of a policy that was originally conceived to benefit all health workers.

“Healthcare delivery in Nigeria is multidisciplinary, and any policy that elevates one group above others undermines equity, teamwork, and system efficiency,” the union said.

JOHESU recalled that it has been at the forefront of the agitation for an increase in the retirement age of health workers for over 15 years, stressing that the demand formed a core part of all eight Memoranda of Understanding (MoU), signed with the Federal Government between 2014 and 2024.

“It has always been our cardinal demand,” the union stated, adding that the policy push was initially resisted by the Federal Ministry of Health and other professional bodies, which it accused of now benefiting disproportionately from the approved review.

The union said the issue was extensively discussed during negotiations that followed the June 2023 strike, when it drew attention to existing provisions in universities and affiliated institutions that allow staff to retire at 65 years, while professors retire at 70 years.

“On that basis, JOHESU demanded an increase in the retirement age of all health workers from 60 to 65 years, with health consultants retiring at 70 years, similar to professors,” it said.

Noting that the proposal was rejected several times, including as recently as December 2025, JOHESU maintained that it was its intervention that eventually led to presidential approval of the policy.

However, JOHESU accused the Federal Ministry of Health and Social Welfare of hijacking the process after the approval, alleging that a manipulative committee was constituted to advance a selective retirement age extension that largely benefits physicians.