Osifo: ‘We Didn’t Betray You By Not Participating’
THERE appears to be disagreement between the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and Trade Union Congress (TUC) over strikes or protests in the country.
Recall that TUC backed out of the NLC-organised nationwide protest on Tuesday, February 27 on the eve of the action.
In reaction to the TUC decision, NLC President, Mr. Joe Ajaero, said it is not compulsory for the union to work with the TUC in its struggle for workers’ welfare.
Speaking to journalists in Abuja shortly after the protest. Ajaero said NKC decided to go ahead with the planned two-day nationwide protest so that NLC members could “breathe.”
He stated: “The NLC has been a labour centre from 1977/’78. We are not contesting with anybody on power, rivalry or even occupying the industrial space. Whatever we do is independent, and each time we talk, we say the NLC’s NEC. That is our organ.
“When they (NEC) directed us on what to do, as NAC (National Administrative Council), we obeyed. We will not come up with our own agenda.
“If we want to hold a meeting with the government or any of the labour affiliates, it will be based on the direction given to us by our highest decision-making body, which is the highest before the National Delegates’ Conference, that comes up every four years. So, we rely on it.
“If the NEC decides that we take an action, we will take the action. We can look for those who have the same feeling to take the action jointly, but the NEC cannot mandate us to look for people who will help us in this instance.
“There are about 54 affiliates of the NLC and everyone of them acts independently. If you check, NUPENG, an affiliate of the NLC, when they want to take action, they act independently. The NLC can never question NUPENG when they do so. The same thing with the NUT and NUEE. That independence is respected, even when you are under a centre. But I am not sure the NLC is under any centre; the NLC is not under any centre.
“We may decide to collaborate with anybody, any organisation, NGOs, human rights organisations, but we don’t owe them any explanation on the action we decide to take. Those organisations can still take their actions and we will not query them.
“In signing all those agreements, I sign for the NLC; people from the government sign. It is a joint agreement where everybody signs for their organisations. But that doesn’t make you perpetually bound by the Minister of Labour or anybody else, because they signed the same agreement with you. Never!
“We signed on behalf of our organisations and we take decisions when we discover that such an agreement has been violated. I speak for the NLC.
“We can collaborate to take decisions, take actions, but instead of us to work together and die in suffocation, we will work separately and still exist independently.
“It is good for people to get it clear that instead of us to work together and suffocate and punish our members, we prefer to work alone so that our members can breathe.”
The TUC, on its part, insisted that it did not betray the NLC by its refusal to participate in the two-day protest declared by the former.
TUC President, Mr. Festus Osifo, speaking on a television programme, said the union never agreed to embark on a protest with the NLC, adding: ‘I’ll just explain exactly what happened to you.
“When you say somebody opt out from a process, it means that the person was in before, it means that there was an agreement to do something. When there is an agreement to do something at the last minute, you will not say I am not doing again. That is opting out, then you can use the word sold out.
“But in this scenario, there wasn’t any agreement to do anything. We did not have any conversation; nobody even mentioned it to us that this is the direction to go. That conversation never took place.
“So, as long as that also never took place, we never opt out of anything. If there was an initial agreement that let’s go for a protest, and later say we are not going for that protest, you could call that opt out; you could call that sold out, you could call that anything.
“But in this scenario, there was no understanding at all. In fact, there was no discussion that could have even led to any understanding.”
