Govt should address system rot, not ban Benin, Togo varsities’ certificates – SSANU vice president

National Vice President, Senior Staff Association of Nigerian Universities, Dr Abdussobur Olayiwola, shares his thoughts with DANIEL AYANTOYE on the association’s plan to embark on strike over four months withheld salaries, among other issues

Y our association has threatened to embark on strike if the withheld salaries of members are not paid. What reasons has the government given for not paying?

Our contemplation of going on strike is not driven by a hunger for strikes per se, but rather by the grievances of our people and the sense of disillusionment due to how the government has handled the issue of our unpaid salaries, as well as the pending issues that initially led to the strike. Many assume we are threatening strike solely because of the arrears of four months’ salaries owed.

However, this is not the only issue at hand. We had an agreement with the government which has not been implemented or respected, which explains why we contemplated going on strike. We have issues concerning the non-payment of our earned allowances, the non-implementation of our 2009 agreement (which has only been partially implemented), and the lack of renegotiation of that agreement.

According to the 2009 agreement, negotiations were to occur every three years, but this has not happened since 2009. Over the past 15 years, there should have been at least five renegotiations, but none has taken place. Additionally, we have faced challenges with the IPPIS, which remains a pending issue despite the President’s (Bola Tinubu) directive to remove universities from the IPPIS. We also have issues with the funding of federal and state universities, which contributes to the Nigerian university system’s lack of global ranking.

No university in Nigeria is ranked among the top 1,000 globally. These are the reasons why we went on strike in 2022. As of today, none of the issues that led to the strike have been addressed. At the same time, we have been denied our salaries despite following all due processes outlined in the Industrial Act regarding going on strike. We have examined the old issues and are exploring all avenues to resolve them without going on strike. However, the government has not provided tangible reasons or explanations for why these matters remain unaddressed.

Occasionally, we hear vague statements from government officials, such as the Minister of Education, suggesting that the issues are being addressed, but these statements are ambiguous and lack substance. Even when invited to meetings, we only hear general statements and platitudes, with no concrete commitment to address any specific issue or provide actionable plans. Now, there has been no progress or movement on the part of the government, which remains our major challenge.

In your view as an association, what do you think is the problem?

Well, there are a myriad of problems. First and foremost, the fact that the government itself appears not to understand the issues that lead to industrial actions, and when I’m talking now, I’m not referring only to SSANU and the Non-Academic Staff Union. Even generally, when it comes to industrial or labour-related issues, I see that the government, in many cases, does not understand the issues. When they do not understand the issues and you have to either threaten a strike or take other actions, you also realise that there is this lethargy, this apathy about those issues, perhaps because they do not understand.

For example, you give notice of a strike and inform the government that you are not pleased with a specific action or decision. There are issues affecting your members that the government is dragging its feet on, and you expect some level of response. Responses do not come. You give notice of a strike, maybe 21 days’ notice, and nobody responds. Until the eve of that strike, about maybe 12 hours before, they start scrambling, inviting you for meetings. When they invite you for meetings, they make commitments. They make promises, and you write or sign memoranda of understanding, memoranda of agreement, or whatever terminology you choose.

At the end of the day, you have to suspend your strike because in the Trade Union Act, and Trade Disputes Act, when a strike has been intercepted, when the other party invites you for dialogue after you have given notice of a strike, it means that the strike has been apprehended. So, in this case, when they invite you for dialogue and you agree to some terms and conditions concerning the issues leading to the strike, you will find that at the end of the day, those agreements are never respected. Those terms, whether an MOU or an MOA, or whatever nomenclature you choose to call it, are never respected. At the end of the day, you find that the government has negotiated with you in bad faith. They have not negotiated with you in good faith. So, it is a myriad of problems.

What is seen most times is that whenever the university unions embark on a strike, it is the student who suffers. As the saying goes, when two elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers. How can these issues be addressed, and is there no alternative to strike?

Let me first correct an impression because I hear this all the time, and I keep asking myself who these elephants are. To the best of my knowledge, only the government is the elephant in this matter. Members of SSANU are salary earners. They depend on whatever stipend is given to them by the government.

Meanwhile, the same SSANU members cannot afford to send their children to school due to financial constraints. Look at the rate of inflation today. Look at our economic status. Years ago, members of SSANU and NASU used to be considered middle class but today, the middle class has been obliterated to a point where SSANU and NASU members are among the outright poor. So, when you talk about elephants, I do not consider SSANU or NASU members as average Nigerian workers; I do not consider them to be elephants in this fight.

SSANU and NASU workers are the downtrodden masses of Nigeria. So, I think we need to correct that impression. Don’t forget that the members of the political class and individuals who populate our government do not send their children to Nigerian universities. They are the ones whose children are in the UK, the US, France, or wherever. But the average Nigerian worker, except for those with illicit sources of income, cannot afford to send their children abroad. They have to send their children to Nigerian universities.

At the end of the day, we are the victims. As we speak, I have two children in Nigerian universities. If I go on strike due to my inability to pay their school fees, do you call me an elephant? Definitely not! I am a victim because my children are the ultimate victims. When we talk about the worker being an elephant, I do not see trade unions as elephants because they are victims. Now, I have had four months of my salary unpaid, and you call me an elephant. How am I an elephant? I am a victim.

We are victims of the ineptitude of the government, we are victims of corruption, and failed state. The Nigerian worker is the biggest victim. Talking about what can be done, let me say that SSANU and NASU, as case studies, are not strike-happy. We are not unions that want to go on strike. When our members go on strike, they are at home doing nothing.

This means that at the end of the day, they lose social relationships that they find at the workplace. When our members go on strike, they are denied salaries. They lose financial capital, which can be used to cater for themselves. When our workers go on strike, they are humiliated by the government and the organs of the state, such that at the end of the day, their sense of dignity and pride is trampled upon.

What is the solution to end incessant strike actions?

Firstly, the government must be committed to industrial issues in the university system. Secondly, the dichotomy of divide and rule, pitting one union against another, should be jettisoned because that has always been the bane of the university system. In the end, you find the trade unions in the university engaging in what we call rolling chairs. One union goes on strike, the issues are temporarily resolved, and it resumes, while another union takes over the baton.

Thus, you see a continuous relay race. It is deliberate by the government to continue to pit unions against each other in this divide-and-rule approach. For me, I believe the government must show more sincerity, good faith, honesty, pragmatism, and creativity. I can tell you without batting an eyelid that successively, we’ve had governments, especially those who have led the education sector, that are lacking in initiative and creativity to resolve industrial issues. That is why you will continue to see industrial issues in the university system.

Has the government contacted your association since you revealed the plan to go on strike?

Yes and no because we have had informal contacts. But when it comes to formal interaction, we have not had any. We embarked on a national protest about two months ago. Following that national protest, the Minister of Education assured us that we would be paid our four-month arrears of salaries. Two months later, we heard that our memo was at the Villa.

The next day, we heard that the memo was in the office of the Minister of Finance. The next day, we heard another update. You keep seeing this back-and-forth dance. As far as we are concerned, we have only had an informal engagement. There has been no formal engagement regarding the issues. That is really where we are. But more fundamentally, we have deep-seated issues. We keep looking at the surface while nobody is looking at the roots.

There are reasons why we went on strike. Those issues have not been addressed. I do not want people to always focus only on our issue regarding unpaid four-month salaries. There was a reason why the four-month salary was unpaid; it was because we went on strike. Why did we go on strike? There were issues. Have those issues been addressed? Definitely not!

As I mentioned, we had an agreement from 2009 that stipulated a renegotiation every three years. The year 2024 makes it 15 years. Nothing has been done. According to our 2009 agreement, we should have had no less than five renegotiations. We have been using the same salary structure since 2009, meaning that effectively, we have not had any fundamental change in our salary structure in the last 15 years.

Do you think that the government’s style of managing the education sector is responsible for the challenges the sector is currently facing?

That is the foundation of the problem. How does the government perceive the education system? Is the education system a business, or is it a social service? If it is a business meant for generating income, then it is a different matter. As far as we are concerned, education is a social service; it is to emancipate, enlighten, and create a better society. The bane of everything that has affected us as Nigerians is the product of bad education.

Awolowo, for example, who was a champion of free education, never saw education as a favour to individuals. Rather, he saw education as a benefit to society. That was why he advocated free education when he had the opportunity to hold the reins of government. I think the foundation of this problem is that our leaders and managers of the government have a twisted understanding of what education should be, what it should represent, and to whom its benefits accrue. Is it to individuals or society?

If education, as you said, is supposed to be a social service, doesn’t this mean it should not be as costly as it is today?

Exactly! That is the argument. You have removed the fuel subsidy. Nobody is saying you should not remove the fuel subsidy. But the reality is that in every society, there are subsidised things. Education in Nigeria should be highly subsidised to make it affordable for everyone. The student loan is not a subsidy. NELFUND may look like an innovative idea, but it is also a capitalist idea because whoever is collecting the loan will have to pay it back. We should look beyond the issue of giving loans.

Education should be subsidised because by creating the loan, they have given a platform for managers of tertiary institutions to increase the cost of their services. With the loan, there is a stranglehold of a loan that you have to pay back under the National Education Loan Fund. So, what we have seen is a change of approach, allowing universities to increase the price of their services so that, at the end of the day, for an average Nigerian to access those services, they have to go through a loan, which will ultimately have to be repaid.

There must be a proper education summit where we start from the basics, from the foundation. What is the reason education exists in Nigeria? What is the purpose of our education system? We need a national conversation around these issues. If we do not do that, the system will continue to have problems. We must also ensure that the issues discussed are those that, through implementation and actualization, have a larger impact on society.

What is SSANU’s assessment of the student loan?

For now, I think it is early days for us to be doing an assessment. We have had many policies in Nigeria, starting at least from when I was born, which is a little while now, but we have had many policies that appear very good on paper. They start with very good ideas. Look at the special interventions of the last two to three years and how they ended, particularly with the immediate past Minister of Humanitarian Affairs.

So, it is early days, as far as I am concerned, for us to say hallelujah or to jubilate. But as I told you, is the loan doing Nigerians a favour or keeping them indebted? That is why I advocate that there should be subsidy in education so that people do not necessarily have to take loans. This is because now that you have introduced loans, you have also permitted institutions to increase the charges for their services so that at the end of the day, the government will supposedly bear it through a loan.

I do not think one can start talking about how successful the loan scheme is at this stage because we have seen enough deception in the past, where things start off looking beautiful, only to later discover a pool of corruption, sleaze, and negativity. So, it is early days yet. I do not feel it is time for a union like mine to start either condemning or applauding the loan scheme.

Recently, the Federal Government through the Ministry of Education revealed its intention to ban students below 18 years from getting admitted into university. What is your take on it?

Let me say that it is unfortunate that such an issue could become one that draws so much attention. The reason I say so is that, for me, it is a misplacement of priorities on the part of the minister. Is this the most important issue that has beset the university system in the last 10 years? It should not even be his priority. As far as we are concerned, it should not be his priority. We have a challenge with a high number of out-of-school children all over the country. It used to be in the North, but it has spread all around, with a large number of children out of school.

I think those are the areas that the Minister of Education should focus on. We have challenges concerning the funding of tertiary education, primary education, and secondary education. What is the correlation between the 18-year age prescribed by the minister and the declining performances every year? Every year, we see a reduction in cut-off marks. That should be what concerns the minister. They should ask why we are seeing a reduction in cut-off marks. About 10 years ago, to enter university you needed no less than 200. At one point, it became 180, then 160, and now it is becoming 140. We are not concerned about that. We are concerned about the ages at which children go to school.

I think it is a wild goose chase. We have always adopted 16 years, and 16 years has worked for us as a nation. How many people get into university at 18? Most do not. They enter university at a much earlier age. For me, the debate is not so much about the pros and cons of the 18 years. It should not even be the priority of the minister. There are many more important issues demanding his attention.

We are talking about a situation where there are many out-of-school children, a decline in standards, and where no Nigerian university is among the top 1,000 universities in the world, yet, we are talking about age issues. I think it’s a misplacement of priority. Why is it that today, many of our children are traveling out of the country to universities in Ghana, the Benin Republic, or Togo? One reason is that there are no industrial actions in those countries.

Another reason is that any parent who sends his child to Ghana or Togo for a four-year course is likely to have his child complete it within that period. That is not the case in many Nigerian universities. So, I feel that it’s about looking inward to understand what is wrong with our system that makes our children go to Benin Republic. If we assume that the UK, the US, and many European countries are developed, the Benin Republic should not be our model in terms of development. But if parents are sending their children to Benin Republic, Chad, and Togo, then there is a fundamental problem affecting our educational system in Nigeria.

The minister should address these fundamental concerns. It is not enough to just talk about banning or proscribing certificates from those universities. We should look at the fundamental issues affecting our university system, including resolving the industrial concerns of trade unions, funding issues, facilities, and strikes. For instance, this government came into power in 2023 and within a month, announced the dissolution of governing councils. I won’t delve into whether that dissolution was legal or illegal.

But even if it was legal, did the government need to wait a whole year before reconstituting those councils? The delay in reconstituting the governing councils caused significant impairment to the universities. It is not enough to proscribe certificates from those universities; it is much better to address the defects in our system.

You are advocating that Benin should not be a model for Nigeria, but currently, their electricity, security, and currency have more value than those of Nigeria. What do you make of this?

Ideally, when you talk about developed countries, the Benin Republic is not a developed country; it is a developing country. Also, when you consider Nigeria’s status, without glorifying Nigeria, which country in Africa can be at par with Nigeria? None! Is it in terms of human resources or natural resources? So, that is where I am coming from. There is something fundamentally wrong when you find people travelling to the Benin Republic when you find people traveling to Togo. It means that there is something fundamentally wrong with Nigeria.

If we look at it on a holistic level, no country in Africa is Nigeria’s equal, so to speak. We now have countries that can even rise to Nigeria, and they are neither Egypt nor South Africa. Why should it be the Benin Republic? Why should it be Togo? Why should it be Niger? It means there is something fundamentally wrong with us. When our junior partners; those we have assisted, are now becoming better than us.

Electricity in the Benin Republic is derived from where? Nigeria. But at the end of the day, they have better supply. They have a better electricity distribution than Nigeria, from where the electricity itself is generated. These are issues. So, that’s why I said, let us look in the mirror. If our educational system is not working to the extent that people want to study abroad, what is wrong with us? Students and parents want to travel to Benin Republic to acquire a university education. So, we must reflect on ourselves. What has gone wrong with us?

UNICEF recently raised concerns over the increase in the number of out-of-school children, which you have also mentioned. What do you think should be done to tackle this issue?

First and foremost, there are many challenges affecting us, and one of them is the issue of out-of-school children. For me, the problem of out-of-school children is very critical because it is largely related to our security issues in the country. The state of insecurity is a function of the fact that we have many children whom we have failed to train. When you fail to train the children of others, they become a menace to your own trained children. That is where we find ourselves.

So, the issue of out-of-school children should be a major concern for all stakeholders, not only in the education system, because it touches on national security. It affects our existence. Those children who are left out can be manipulated and indoctrinated to engage in suicide bombings and other activities. They are the ones who may readily carry the flag of another country without understanding. They will say they are fighting bad governance. This should be a matter of national concern.

However, there are societal, historical, and cultural issues that make some parts of the country more reliant on feudalism, where some people are dependent on others because they have been subjugated and oppressed. There is also a lack of continuity. During the (Goodluck) Jonathan era, there were Almajiri schools. Where are those schools today? They have disappeared. We see a lack of continuity because every government introduces new policies with no continuity to ensure that these good ideas are sustained.