Proposed NLC/TUC Strike: Why It is Illegal

Introduction

The Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC) and the Trade Union Congress (TUC) recently announced an indefinite nationwide strike action, eliciting a strong response from the Federal Government. In a letter penned by the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef O. Fagbemi, SAN, the government labeled the strike as premature, ineffectual, and illegal. Let’s delve into the details to understand the intricacies surrounding this contentious issue.

Challenges of Premature Strike Declaration

The crux of the Federal Government’s argument lies in the timing of the strike declaration. The government asserts that the strike action was prematurely announced before the conclusion of negotiations on a new national minimum wage. The absence of a formal declaration of trade dispute coupled with the failure to adhere to mandatory 15-day strike notice requirements raises significant legal questions regarding the legitimacy of the proposed strike.

Legal Framework and Compliance Obligations

Fagbemi highlighted crucial sections of the Trade Disputes Act 2004, emphasizing the necessity for proper compliance with statutory conditions precedent for industrial actions to be lawful. Sections 41(1) and 42(1) underscore the importance of giving employers a minimum of 15 days’ notice before embarking on a strike. The failure to follow these stipulations not only calls into question the legality of the strike but also risks criminal consequences for non-compliance.

Read also: TUC, NLC Demand Reversal of New Electricity Tariff Hike 

International Labor Standards and Right to Strike

The Attorney General also drew attention to the alignment of Nigerian legislations with International Labour Organization (ILO) principles regarding the right to strike. Prior notice, mediation procedures, and adherence to arbitration mechanisms are fundamental prerequisites for a lawful strike. The absence of these essential steps renders the proposed strike action inconsistent with both national laws and international labor standards.

Judicial Restraints and Memorandum of Understanding

Furthermore, Fagbemi referenced an interim injunctive order issued by the National Industrial Court, which prohibits the NLC and TUC from engaging in industrial action. The order, stemming from previous legal proceedings, remains binding and complicates the legality of the current strike call. Additionally, the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the government and labor organizations underscores a commitment to social dialogue and collective bargaining, urging a return to negotiation tables rather than resorting to industrial action.

Conclusion

In light of the legal intricacies surrounding the proposed NLC/TUC strike, it is evident that adherence to established procedures and compliance with legal frameworks are imperative. The Federal Government’s stance underscores the significance of upholding the rule of law and engaging in constructive dialogue to address labor-related issues. As the parties involved navigate this complex terrain, prioritizing lawful and amicable resolutions over confrontational measures will undoubtedly pave the way for sustainable progress and harmonious labor relations.