Kayode Komolafe
The significance of the recent agreement that the federal government reached with the university teachers should not be lost on the public.
With effect from January 1 this year, the important agreement has put an end to a 17- year dispute between the federal government and the formidable Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU).
It is indeed good news about the tertiary level of the educational system.
The new pact, which is subject to review after three years, has effectively replaced the 2009 document which ASUU painstakingly negotiated with government.
The repudiation of agreements by government has been a recurrent theme in the many ASUU strikes of the last few years.
While the content of the current document may not fully meet the expectations of ASUU in the light of economic realities, it is certainly a welcome departure from the era of dealock. As a result of the deadlock strikes by university teachers episodically paralysed academic activities on campuses for decades. After all, time was when one minister of education serving a military regime infamously declared an agreement which government signed with ASUU “an imperfect obligation” that was not binding on the regime. Hence, ASUU was on strike virtually for the whole of the tenure of that minister.
It is in the light of such a sordid past that this new agreement should be appreciated as a bit of relief for the students, university teachers, administrators, parents and indeed the public at large.
Perhaps, not many observers of the long-drawn dispute between ASUU and government would note the import of the recognitions made by a federal legislator at the formal presentation of the agreement. The lawmaker, Hon, Abubakar Hassan Fulata, is the chairman of the House of Representatives’ Committee on University Education. In addition to the optimistic statements made by education minister Dr. Tunji Alausa and ASUU President Professor Chris Piwuna, Hon. Fulata was decidedly retrospective. He recalled the gallant roles played by former ASUU leaders, living and dead. Names on the roll call included those of Festus Iyayi (deceased), Eskor Toyo (deceased), Asisi Asobie, Nasir Isa Fage, Dipo Fasina, Emmanuel Osodeke, Toye Olorode and Biodun Ogunyemi. These eminent scholars and several of their comrades and colleagues had devoted a lot of time, energy and intellect negotiating with successive governments on what to do to improve the standards of university education. They had made enormous sacrifices bearing the cross of tertiary education in Nigeria.
So how does this agreement address the extant issues of university education?
Notably, embodied in the agreement is the provision for a salary increase of 40% among other elements of improvement in conditions of service. Besides, there is a novel provision for an annual allowance of N1.74 million for professors and 840,000 for readers. University teachers are also entitled to a new Earned Academic Allowances (EAA) for supervision, field trips, external assessment honoraria etc. Lecturers are to retire at age of 70 with the 100% of their annual salary paid during retirement as life pensions. Added to the foregoing is the new Consolidated Academic Tools Allowance (CATA) for academic journals, books, internet access, attendance of conference etc.
Besides, while female university teachers are entitled to maternity leave their male colleagues would also go on paternity leave.
A Stabilisation and Restoration Fund of N30 billion has also been created for universities. The Fund will be disbursed in three equal instalments between this year and 2028. The Fund is targeted at improving the infrastructure on campuses.
The agreement is also in synchrony with the proposed National Research Council to promote innovation, research and development. The proposal is to have 1% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) allocated for this purpose.
Remarkably, the agreement also strengthens university autonomy. Only professors would be appointed as deans and provosts. The appointment of vice chancellors and members of the governing council would also be strictly done according to regulations.
Another dimension of the agreement is the proposed comprehensive review of existing laws that are considered to be restricting university autonomy. These include the laws establishing the Joint Admission and Matriculation Board (JAMB); National University Commission (NUC), Tertiary Education Trust Fund Act And the criteria for establishing new institutions would be more rigorous henceforth.
Furthermore, in the agreement government is committed to funding university staff primary and secondary schools.
Above are some of the takeaways from the agreement. The challenge now is that of meticulous implementation and sustainability of trust between government and ASUU.
To achieve the purpose of industrial peace on campuses the synergy of purpose between government and the university teachers should be scrupulously maintained. And with mutual good faith on both sides this is quite possible. The trend of disruptions of academic programmes could be reversed in the next three years that this agreement is meant last before a review.
Meanwhile, at least two lessons could be learnt from the positive development which the agreement represents.
First, the authorities in all tiers of government in the health sector should borrow a leaf from the playbook of the federal education ministry. Honest engagement with trade unions at different levels could bring about positive outcomes. Disruptive strikes could be avoided. Officialdom should stop revelling in the illusion that the weapon of strike could be taken away from workers by force. Intimidation and manipulation of unions will on the long run prove ineffectual. Instead of the blind declaration of “no-wok-no pay” ultimatum when workers go on strike, management in the health sector should perfect the art of collective bargaining based on facts and figures. That is the principled thing to do.
The second point is that the FG-ASUU agreement is relatively a cheery reminder that development efforts cannot be complete without taking the social sector especially education and health aspects more seriously. To solve the problem in the social sector the welfare and dignity of those who labour to keep the system running should be central to any strategy of development. Those who work in the health and education sectors deserve greater respect than they are currently getting from the government and society at large. Teachers, doctors, nurses, non-academic staff of schools etc. go on prolonged strikes and it is often as if nothing is amiss on the part of the public. Government officers talk down on the strikers accusing them of sundry crimes and misdemeanours.
In the specific case of university teachers, they are responsible for the production of knowledge. That’s their primary duty. It is indubitable that for the purpose of development and progress university teachers should be treated with respect and their welfare should be central to policymaking. It is, therefore, a good thing that this age-long proposition is now a prominent element of the new FG-ASUU agreement.
