Get Guardian on GoogleDemands new wage talks to start immediately
As negotiations for a new national minimum wage gather momentum, the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) has distanced itself from the controversial N40,000 consequential adjustment granted to federal workers in 2024, insisting that the responsibility rested solely with the unions in the public sector.
Also, it accused the Federal Government of ignoring the statutory timetable for the next national minimum wage review, insisting that negotiations should already be under way rather than waiting until 2027.
NLC said its mandate in the minimum wage-setting process was limited to negotiating the national minimum wage with the Federal Government and employers’ representatives, while consequential adjustments to existing salary structures were the responsibility of unions in the respective sectors.
The clarification comes as organised labour prepares for another round of minimum wage negotiations, with the NLC warning workers against attributing the outcome of previous consequential adjustment exercises to the national leadership of the congress.
The acting General Secretary of NLC, Benson Upah, stated yesterday that claims that it negotiated the N40,000 across-the-board addition for federal workers were false and amounted to a distortion of Nigeria’s collective bargaining framework.
According to the congress, the national minimum wage is determined through a tripartite process involving organised labour, government and employers’ representatives, but the implementation of the agreed wage and adjustment of existing salary structures are subsequently negotiated at sectoral levels.
It explained that in the public sector, the Joint Public Service Negotiating Council (JPSNC), comprising government representatives and approximately eight trade unions, negotiates with the Federal Government on the implementation of the minimum wage and consequential adjustments.
At the state level, corresponding negotiating structures engage individual state governments, while industrial unions in the private sector negotiate with employers’ associations based on the peculiarities of their respective industries.
Citing the food and beverage industry, the NLC said the Association of Food, Beverage and Tobacco Employers negotiates with the National Union of Food, Beverages and Tobacco Employees on the implementation of the national minimum wage in the sector.
It maintained that although it represents workers across the public and private sectors, it does not negotiate consequential adjustments on behalf of the various unions.
“The N40,000 outcome was the sole responsibility of the leadership of the unions in the public sector,” he said
Upah said the clarification effectively places responsibility for the 2024 federal public service consequential adjustment on the unions that negotiated its implementation with the government, rather than the NLC’s national leadership.
The distinction was important to prevent confusion over the respective responsibilities of labour institutions, as discussions on a new national minimum wage approach.
He also argued that the division of responsibilities was an established feature of collective bargaining in Nigeria, noting that the JPSNC had historically handled consequential adjustments in the public sector, while Joint Negotiating Councils of industrial unions performed similar functions in the private sector.
According to Upah, the N70,000 minimum wage was agreed on July 28, 2024 and backdated to May 1, 2024, but argued that the backdating did not alter the three-year review cycle introduced by the 2024 amendment to the Minimum Wage Act.
“In our estimation, the negotiations ought to have been on the way, or ought to be on the way, because the economic realities have since wiped out the value of the N70,000, upon which the minimum wage was premised,” Upah said.
He said the 2023 amendment changed only two things: the wage figure, from N30,000 to N70,000, and the review cycle, from five years to three years, adding that neither change authorised government or labour to shift the commencement date of the three-year cycle at will.
“The principal act was not amended, and there was nothing in the amended items that states that the three-year cycle can be abridged by either of the parties.”
Upah argued that, on the NLC’s reading of the law, the three-year period should be counted from the earlier wage cycle, meaning negotiations ought to have started in June. He said the NLC had already alerted government to that position.
He said: “But if you want to follow the government’s logic, which is an error, that because it took effect from May, the three years will start from May, the negotiations ought to start in November, because the act talks about starting six months before the process.
“So, in our view, there is no reason to do tomorrow what can be done today.”
