Muhammed Ibrahim, the National President of the Senior Staff Association of Nigerian Universities, shares insights on various topics related to the nation’s tertiary education system, including the recurring strikes by academic unions such as SSANU and ASUU.
Why is it often observed that Labor Unions like SSANU, ASUU, and others resort to strikes without thoroughly exploring alternative methods to address their concerns?
Unions are an integral part of our society, serving to advocate for the welfare and interests of their members. If someone suggests that unions frequently resort to strikes, it might be due to a lack of understanding of our mission and how the system has evolved. Unions exist in even the most advanced countries like the United States, France, and the UK. They ensure that their members receive fair treatment and are not deprived of the benefits and welfare provisions they deserve from their employers. Unions also engage in various activities, including cooperative initiatives, to enhance their members’ well-being.
Strikes are essentially a lawful activity and are in accordance with International Labour Organization (ILO) regulations. When a union decides to go on strike, it doesn’t necessarily mean they are violating any laws. However, there are specific processes and procedures that must be followed when initiating a strike. In our case, when you hear about our union or any union going on strike, it often signifies a breakdown in communication or a breach of agreements made with our employers, typically outlined in Memorandums of Understanding or Memorandums of Action.
So, when our employers fail to honor agreements or disregard deadlines, what other recourse do we have? We can’t physically punish them. Our only option is to withhold our services until they pay heed. In SSANU, we don’t prioritize strikes; we resort to them only when it’s absolutely essential, when our employers place undue burdens on us, making it hard for us to function. We have to take a stand and seek a resolution. The notion that university unions, particularly SSANU and ASUU, engage in strikes casually is far from the truth and not the reality.
Many people believe that the frequent strikes by lecturers have had a detrimental impact on the quality of education in Nigerian public universities. What is your perspective on this?
I cannot agree with that perspective because it’s not always the case. It’s important to note that education is a public service. The decline in the standard of education is primarily due to inadequate funding. When you fail to provide proper funding for an educational system, you can’t expect miraculous outcomes. In the past, when the education system was considered to be of high quality, it was because it received sufficient funding. During that period, teachers and other staff were well-trained, lecturers received good salaries, morale was high, there were adequate facilities, electricity, well-stocked libraries, student accommodations, comfortable hostels, well-equipped clinics, conducive environments, security measures, and state-of-the-art lecture facilities with quality furniture and materials. These are the factors that create the foundation for providing quality education or what some might call a high standard. It’s not about the frequency of strikes or the absence thereof.
Even if there’s a prolonged absence of strikes, the absence of essential resources can undermine the quality of education. Properly funding education can result in excellent outcomes across the board. Presently, no public university in Nigeria can claim to have sufficient funding, whether for operational expenses or personnel costs. It’s common to encounter situations where workers toil diligently, yet their salaries are either delayed or unpaid. Numerous public universities, especially state-owned ones, have staff members who haven’t received their pay for six months or more, which has significantly dampened morale. When you visit their lecture theaters, laboratories, and classrooms, you’ll find them in a state of disrepair. These are the factors contributing to the decline in the standard of education. However, I can assure you that if the government is genuinely committed to delivering quality education, they must provide adequate funding.
Are you suggesting that the responsibility for the decline in the quality of education and its delivery lies with the government rather than the unions or lecturers?
Yes, the government holds the primary responsibility because they are in control. They hire the workforce, ensure a conducive environment, and provide the necessary equipment and facilities. So, if these essential components are lacking, it’s unfair to place the blame on lecturers or unions. When you witness lecturers going on strike, it’s typically due to unmet commitments and a consistent failure by the government to honor agreements. For instance, when allowances should be paid or certain provisions should be made, and agreements have been reached with the unions with agreed-upon deadlines, and these commitments are not fulfilled, what other outcome can you expect? The contribution of strikes to the decline in the standard of education is minimal; the government should shoulder 100 percent of the responsibility.
Do you believe there should be alternative methods for making demands from the government, rather than resorting to strike threats?
Strikes are typically a last resort. When a union like SSANU initiates a strike, it signifies that all other avenues, as you mentioned, have been exhausted. As I mentioned, discussions and negotiations would have failed, and both unions and management would have had significant disagreements before we resort to a strike. While there are other methods, strikes are usually the final means that unions employ to ensure their demands are addressed. It’s important to note that, unlike in this region, strikes are not viewed as antagonistic actions against the government; they are legal and continue to occur worldwide.
The Federal Government has expressed its intention to provide universities with complete autonomy in terms of funding. How do you anticipate this will affect the sector?
We will have to wait and see how this unfolds. While any university or union would welcome increased autonomy in funding, it’s crucial to distinguish between autonomy in financial resources and operational autonomy. If the government is considering granting universities full autonomy in funding, it implies that the government will still fulfill its responsibilities in funding personnel and overhead costs. In this scenario, the notion that universities should generate Internal Generated Revenue (IGR) and remit it to the government should be abandoned. The fees universities charge are typically service fees, and, in some instances, they receive additional funding to provide these services to students.
We are open to full autonomy in both funding and operational aspects. Universities should have the freedom to operate without excessive interference. One of the challenges we face is the continued intervention of government agencies in the day-to-day operations of universities, particularly concerning employment, promotions, and other matters. Universities have a unique and universal nature, so they should not be subjected to the rigid civil service framework. To attract the best talent, flexibility in hiring and decision-making is essential.
Universities should have the capacity to access funds for various services without going through a complex approval process involving multiple government agencies, which often becomes a hurdle to hiring lecturers, cleaners, or drivers. For instance, seeking clearance from government agencies, including the Head of Service, Federal Character Commission, Budget Office, Accountant General’s office, and the National Assembly, to get a budget passed just for employing university staff is a significant impediment to the smooth functioning of universities. Therefore, we eagerly anticipate full autonomy in funding and hope to see our Governing Councils empowered to function effectively.
When the government assumed office on May 29, they dissolved the Governing Councils of universities that had completed their four-year tenure. Dissolving university governing councils is a problematic practice because these councils have fixed tenures. When you do this, you disrupt the universities’ progress because they won’t be able to carry out promotions, recruit staff, or address crucial matters. The university council serves as the highest decision-making body for universities. Therefore, it shouldn’t be treated as something given with one hand and taken back with the other.
In terms of forming new Governing Boards for universities, my advice to President Bola Tinubu would be to ensure a smooth transition and continuity in the operations of these institutions. When forming the new boards, it’s vital to consider individuals with expertise in the academic and administrative aspects of the universities. These boards should be entrusted with autonomy and decision-making authority to enable the effective functioning of our universities.
We strongly disapprove of the recurring practice of dissolving university governing councils prematurely, preventing them from serving their full terms. In the event that new councils are to be appointed, it is imperative to recognize the unique nature of university systems and uphold global standards. The government should appoint individuals with a deep understanding of the education sector, rather than appointing politicians as council chairpersons who may primarily focus on awarding contracts. Active retired academics and experienced retired university administrators should be the preferred choices for these positions. When people with such backgrounds address issues, they will do so from a position of knowledge rather than ignorance. It is not advisable to appoint someone with only a diploma or certificate as the chairman of a university council that awards degrees. Such appointments can seriously disrupt the functioning of the system. Therefore, appointments to governing councils should be based on merit.
As for whether the composition of the governing board is sufficient to handle the affairs of universities, it is essential that these boards consist of qualified individuals who can effectively oversee university operations and decision-making processes.
Related News
- SSANU vows to join proposed NLC strike
- Nigeria @63: SSANU demands four months withheld salary
- Varsity workers tackle TETFund over suspension of oversea conferences
The university councils are typically composed of five external members appointed by the Federal Government, along with a representative of the Ministry of Education. The role of the Ministry of Education’s representative is to relay information about the council’s activities to the government. These appointees are individuals of integrity, possessing the necessary qualifications to manage the university system. However, there are reservations about certain appointments to these councils, as it has become a common practice to appoint politicians as chairpersons of governing councils. Therefore, the Office of the Head of Service should not interfere with university governance. These councils are appointed by the government with the aim of ensuring clear representation from all stakeholders, and they should be allowed to carry out their responsibilities without undue interference.
There was concern regarding vice-chancellors’ involvement in the management of TETFUND. Are you not worried that a similar situation may occur if universities are granted full autonomy?
In the case of TETFUND, it’s important to understand that vice-chancellors are not in control of the fund’s management. Their role is primarily to initiate projects and seek funding from TETFUND for these projects. This practice is generally acceptable. The critical question is about identifying the university’s needs within the parameters of what the fund is designed for.
One observation is that some vice-chancellors tend to focus more on specific areas within the institution while neglecting others. Their preferences often align with their background or expertise. For example, if an engineer serves as a vice-chancellor, they may prioritize acquiring equipment for the engineering faculty while possibly overlooking other faculties. This pattern repeats in various fields. To address this, the system should adopt greater transparency and foster more engagement with stakeholders.
I appreciate the current Executive Secretary of TETFUND. In a recent stakeholders’ meeting, we were encouraged to play an active role in monitoring and evaluating TETFUND projects. It’s crucial that the process of conceiving projects in universities becomes more transparent. Vice-chancellors and university management should involve the community for input. The TETFUND should seek input from union leaders before approving or funding any projects at institutions. Unions are currently the primary support for university staff.
There have been concerns about past mismanagement of TETFUND funds and irregularities in project delivery. To ensure that the agency effectively fulfills its mandate under the Tinubu-led government, there should be a focus on accountability, transparency, and thorough project oversight. Measures like regular audits, adherence to due process, and involving stakeholders, including unions, can help mitigate issues related to fund mismanagement and project irregularities.
I have experience in monitoring TETFUND projects. Delays in project execution often occur due to the lack of access to allocated funds. If you haven’t met the requirements for accessing those funds, the money remains unused. To address this issue, university management must be proactive and ensure projects are impactful and sustainable.
As for suggestions of free tertiary education to make it accessible to children from less privileged backgrounds, it’s a noble idea. However, considering Nigeria’s current economic challenges, it’s important to be realistic. Providing free tertiary education would require significant financial resources. The government should explore a balance between making education affordable and accessible while maintaining the sustainability of the education system.
Education has never been entirely free; there has always been a way to pay for it. However, it can be subsidized, especially since it is considered a social service. The government should not burden the masses with high education costs. The idea of raising fees at tertiary institutions is a response to the government’s failure to adequately fund the system. Currently, no institution in Nigeria can solely rely on government funding to cover its expenses. Some institutions increase fees to meet their financial needs. I don’t support placing extra financial burdens on the public to access education. It’s essential for the government to take its responsibility seriously. Education, along with housing, water, and security, are services the government can provide to ensure the well-being of the people. Education should continue to be seen as a social service, and subsidies should be maintained within the system.
The curriculum is a fundamental aspect of any education system, and its development should primarily be the responsibility of educational institutions. External interference should be minimized to avoid institutions being compelled to address areas beyond their expertise. Having a standardized curriculum is beneficial because it brings consistency to the educational system, ensuring that graduates meet the country’s workforce needs. However, issues can arise when confusion exists within the curriculum development process. We should have specialized institutions focusing on particular training or expertise to avoid confusion. Each institution should have a clear mandate and curriculum to guide students.
Regarding the gap between classroom education and real-world application, curriculum developers must include input from industry stakeholders. Professions are constantly evolving, and it’s essential to teach using up-to-date approaches and equipment. For example, medical institutions should acquire the latest machinery to prepare graduates for contemporary healthcare challenges. The curriculum should be developed in consultation with the industries to bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical application.
The low representation of women in leadership positions is not unique to the position of vice-chancellors but extends to various areas of life, including politics. The dominance of men in leadership roles is a long-standing issue. Globally, there are examples of countries, including the so-called advanced democracies like the United States, that have yet to elect a female president. While we have seen an increase in the number of female vice-chancellors, the challenge remains. Female academics need to step up, and men in leadership positions should provide an equitable environment for them. There are highly capable female academics who can excel in administrative roles. Notable examples include Professor Lillian Salami, the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Benin, who is performing admirably.
The issue of Nigerians leaving the country is concerning.
Migration has been a part of human history, but when there’s a significant increase in people leaving the country, the government should investigate the reasons behind it. If it’s due to an unfavorable atmosphere and a challenging economy, the government should address these issues. Many people, including myself, wouldn’t leave their home country to live as foreigners if the conditions were better. Despite all the shortcomings, there’s nothing like the freedom you have in your own country. You can move around Nigeria without needing an identity card as long as you act responsibly and avoid trouble. But abroad, you have to carry your passport and might face concerns about safety. I’d naturally discourage people from leaving, but if they plan to go abroad for development and intend to return to contribute to the country, there’s nothing wrong with it.
As for the embargo on recruitment, I’m not aware of any recruitment restrictions for academic staff, and professorship is generally achieved through promotions. The issue of a shortage of professors might relate to the pace of university establishment versus staff development. I’d advise the government to make access to education easier.
Regarding the licensing of rival unions to ASUU, I won’t comment on that as I’m not a member of those unions. The matter is already in court, and discussing it would be sub judice. While there’s freedom of association in Nigeria, having too many unions in the university system may not be beneficial. It’s important to consider what these new unions aim to achieve that isn’t already covered by existing unions, like ASUU. We’ll have to wait and see if they can sustain themselves over time.
