MANAGING INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN THE NIGERIAN UNIVERSITY SYSTEM. A FOCUS ON ENUGU STATE UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (ESUT) AND UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA (UNN).
ATTENTION:
BEFORE YOU READ THE
PROJECT WORK, PLEASE READ THE INFORMATION BELOW. THANK YOU!
TO GET THE FULL
PROJECT FOR THE TOPIC BELOW PLEASE CALL:
08068231953,
08168759420
TO GET MORE PROJECT
TOPICS IN YOUR DEPARTMENT, PLEASE VISIT:
MANAGING INDUSTRIAL
DISPUTES IN THE NIGERIAN UNIVERSITY SYSTEM.
A FOCUS ON ENUGU
STATE UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (ESUT) AND UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA,
NSUKKA (UNN).
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1
BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
University
worldwide is regarded as the citadel of knowledge, the fountain of
intellectualism the most appropriate ground for the incubation of leaders of
tomorrow. According to Ike (1999:1) a university fulfills, o e major function
it is a knowledge and value provider it stand or fails in its ability or
inability to deliver on this criteria. According to magna carta universitatum,
“the university is an autonomous institution at the heart of societies
differently organized because of geographically and historical heritage; it
produces, examines, appraises and hands down culture by research and is an
enterprise that serves multi disciplinary purposes. This according to Nwankwo
(2000:25) explains why merit has been the watchword in the university system –
a system a student must first be certified worthy in character and learning
before being admitted into the Honours Degree Hall. Universities are key author
in national development, more so in Africa than in other regions. Their roles
in research and this explains why the Federal Government of Nigeria is
acknowledging the university as a fulcrum for national development, set up a
commission headed by Chief Gray Longe 1992 to review higher education in
Nigeria with particular reference to universities in Nigeria. The commission
was given terms of reference amongst which were;
i.
To re-examine the developmental roles of universities in developing countries
such as Nigeria.
ii.
Determine the middle and higher level manpower supply and demand of the country,
and advice in the area of under / over population and under/ over utilization
of the same.
iii.
Examine the availability and adequacy of academic staff in universities.
iv.
Investigate the nature, sources and criteria of funding in higher educational
institutions. (Especially universities) with a view to improving the situation
and guaranteeing steady source of funds for optimal functional of these
institutions.
v.
Review the general condition of staff in higher educational institutions such
as salaries, pensions and retirement benefit, housing of the public service and
private sector and particularly to stemming the brain drain phenomenon.
vi.
Review the criteria for appointment of administration, including the
vice-chancellor, provosts, rector, registrars and other principal officers,
their terms of office and the process of renewal of their appointment.
The commission held
special sessions with a number of eminent personalities and educationist from
whose knowledge and experience of the educational system in Nigeria it
benefited immensely.
Finally, the commission defined higher education as the type of education in
higher educational institution especially in universities (conventional and
specialized), which produce high level and middle level manpower, but not
specialized set up by professional bodies.
The commission also noted that the goals and objectives among others include;
teaching, research and public service. The commission observed that Nigeria universities
had established standard comparable to the best in other parts of the world.
The commission, however, frowned at the discovery that the following physical
conditions are still the trade - marks of the Nigerian universities;
(i)
Dilapidated workshops equipment in most of the higher institutions.
(ii)
Inadequate facilities such as libraries, lecture rooms, laboratories and work
farms.
The commission was
also appalled by the fact that universities have not achieved much in terms of
the goals and objectives for which they were set up, owing to incessant
disruption in the academic flow chart caused by strike actions, industrial
unrest, students hooliganism, political instability etc.
Based on these discoveries, the commission recommended among others, that;
(i)
The university education as the apex of the system of higher education should
play a leadership role in the nation providing people of special qualification
and motivation.
(ii)
Universities education is not a means to earn a living. It should also equip
the individual to the highest level of his ability with the intellectual and
physical skill which he requires to be an innovative, creative and self-reliant
member of the society.
(iii)
The university, because of its key role in the overall economy should always
encourage and facilitate industrial harmony and provide a conducive atmosphere
for learning and attainment of other goals and objectives.
The government on its
part accepted these recommendations and thus, commented as
follows:
(i)
That university should undertake periodic reviews of programmes and activities
to meet national priority goals as defined from time to time.
(ii)
In order to develop closer academic / industrial relationship and
also ensure that the programmes of tertiary institutions are
relevant to the needs of the industry and the national economy, there should be
regular interaction between the institutions, the employers of their products,
and the National Manpower Board.
(iii)
The government on its own pat should render its lawful obligations to the
universities by providing funds, research grants, the required infrastructure
(roads, laboratories , electricity, telephone), a conducive learning
environment and allowing universities to operate autonomously by ensuring that
government does not interfere with the university administration.
(iv)
To encourage industrial harmony in the higher educational institutions by
passing laws that will preserve the rights of various interest groups within
the university system, especially organized trade unions and employers
associated.
This
is however, the general picture of the events that surrounds the university system
in Nigeria. We shall examine at the appropriate chapters of this work how far
these major actors in industrial disputes have discharge their respective
obligations in order to reduce the rate of industrial disputes in the Nigeria
universities.
1.2
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Over the last thirty
years in Nigeria, the educational system has witnessed an unprecedented
industrial unrest and so many official assaults than other social institution.
According to Onuoha (2001:8), this is so perhaps, because of its strategic
place both in the nation’s hierarchy of priorities and its considered role as a
veritable machine for development. In his own contribution, Nwankwo (2000:37)
opined that Nigeria educational institutions, characterized by military
intervention in governance have witnessed untold negative political
interference and a seeming calculated moves to submerge it in the river of
irrelevances. He further argued that those in authorities see universities as a
burden and as institutions to be exploited and left desolate. Consequent upon
this ures, non-payment development, our universities he posited, have become
aberrations of themselves. The manifestation are in form of cultism,
brain drain, under funding by government, erosion of academic freedom, general
insecurity, dilapidated he structures, non-payment of university staff
salaries. These are indications that all is not well with the Nigeria
university system.
ASUU
went on strike on 27th June, 2009 in protest against non
implementation of agreement against signed with the federal government of
Nigeria.
In a press briefing
on 30th August in Calabar, ASUU president, Prof. Ukachukwu Awuzie
accused the Minister of Education of not presenting the true facts concerning
government’s handling of the issues that led to the strike. He expressed regret
that the minister claimed in his reaction to the strike, that there was no
agreement between the federal government and the union (ASUU) and that the
government needed to review the agreement because of the global economic
meltdown. He said the minister also claimed that government was not
properly briefed during the negotiations and that the strike action by ASUU
would further reduce the quality of education, which the union claimed
that it was fighting to improve.
Awuzie described the minister’s remarks as “particularly vexatious and
unfortunate” as the federal government was responsible for the strike action,
which has thrown the university system into another turmoil. He
said contrary to the minister’s assertion, there was an agreement reached
between the federal government and the union (ASUU). On May 12, 20009 and
government invitation, they assembled at the NUC to sign the agreement between
the federal government of Nigeria (FGN) and ASUU. He said the union is on
strike “to persuade government to be serious for once and take the interest of
its citizens seriously by signing the agreement already reached.” According to
him, the much touted sum of N78 billion is actually the shortfall in the amount
needed to fund personnel emoluments arising from the various agreements which
government has reached with hall federal tertiary institution in the country.
He said it was therefore not true that N78 billion was needed to fund the
FGN/ASUU agreement as claimed by the minister. “It was an assertion meant to
politicize the issues, deceive and hoodwink the Nigerian people. By the way, is
it not a crying shame that our government finds the same N78 billion too much
to spend over a period of time to revamp t the educational system? Yet, the
same government wastes millions of Naira on frivolities”, he said.
He added that even though the present government touts education as one of the
issues in the seen-point agenda, the allocation to education in the 2009 budget
betrayed its lack commitment to the education of Nigerians. The ASUU president
further argued, “ASUU believes that with an average of N120 billion earned from
oil each day, government should be able to fund education effectively. If it
considers this impossible, the money should be enough to increase access to
education by a greater majority of our people. We cannot aspire to being one of
the developed economies by 2020, if the bulk of our citizenry remain uneducated
as is the case today.” He however, assured that the union will call off the
strike as soon as the federal government signs the agreement reached with the
lecturers.
ASUU strike ended on October 22nd, 2009 by 8:10pm.
The incessant strikes closures and boycotts of lectures on work by academic and
non- academic staff in our universities are also evidences that there is
strained industrial relations in the Nigerian university system.
In the light of the above facts, the management of these universities has been
confronted with the following problems.
(i)
To find ways of improving such deteriorated relationship in order to move the
education industry forward.
(ii)
To find the causes of the deterioration in relationship between the labour and
management.
The
sources of discontent in our university system are in exhaustive.
According to Akpala (1982:56) it has bearing with present economic situation in
the country, our political history and inheritances authoritarian attitudes of
both the government and university. Management towards labour issues, the
presence of obsolete labour laws, corruption in all segments of the society,
mal administration, class conflict and struggle, struggle for survival etc.
Also in the list of the problems is the inability of the Nigerian universities
to actualize the objectives for which they were established, such as a training
of high caliber manpower etc. it was on the basis of the above problems that
the researcher was motivated to conduct this research work to find out the true
position of things in the Nigerian University system and to state the facts as
they are without any bias and to proffer some solutions.
1.3
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
This study had the following
objectives:
(i)
The determination of the causes of industrial disputes.
(ii)
The determination of ways of ensuring industrial harmony in the future.
(iii)
To find out the consequences/implications of industrial unrest in the Nigerian
university system
(iv)
The determination of factors stalling workers participation in decision making.
(v)
To know the strategies used by:
(a)
The university management
(b)
The trade union
(c)
The government in solving industrial disputes in the Nigerian university
system.
(vi)
To determine the frequency of industrial disputes in the Nigerian university
system.
(vii)
To know how industrial disputes could be managed.
(viii)
1.4
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
This research work will enable the researcher to come up with answers to the
following research questions namely:
(i)
What are the likely causes of industrial disputes in the Nigerian university
system?
(ii)
What are the ways of ensuring industrial harmony in the future?
(iii)
What are the consequences / implications of industrial unrest in the Nigerian
university system?
(iv)
What are the factors that militate against worker’s participation
in decision making?
(v)
What are the strategies used by:
(a)
The university management
(b)
The worker’s union (trade union)
(c)
The government in settling industrial disputes in the Nigerian university system?
(vi)
How often does a trade dispute arise in the Nigerian university system?
(vii)
How can industrial disputes be managed?
1.5
FORMULATION OF HYPOTHESES
The following hypothesis related to the
study:
(i)
H0: There is no difference I the proportion of staff of ESUT and UNN who
are of the opinion that industrial crisis is independent of university
management.
H1: There is difference in the
proportion of staff of ESUT and UNN who are of the opinion that industrial
crisis is independence of university management.
(2)
H0: There is no difference in the proportion of the staff of both
ESUT and UNN who are of the
opinion that industrial disputes in the Nigerian university system are dependent
on management indifference to union needs.
H1: There is difference in the proportion of the staff of both ESUT and UNN
who is of the opinion that industrial disputes in the
Nigerian university system are not dependent on management indifference to
union needs.
(3)
H0: There is no difference in the proportion of staff of ESUT and UNN who are
of the opinion that trade unions contribute to industrial disputes.
H1: There is difference in the
proportion of staff of ESUT and UNN who are of the opinion that trade unions
contribute to industrial disputes.
1.6
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY.
A study on industrial relations would
not only be beneficial to the state, employers of labour and employees but to
the society as a whole. Labour issues have bearing with integrated national
planning. It contributes to manpower development and harmonized industrial
relations, which promotes rapid economic development. Besides, a peaceful
industrial atmosphere is required to actualize the noble objectives for which
universities were set or established to achieve.
The research work is significant in a
number of ways, which include:
(1)
With the introduction of the concept of management in industrial disputes, the
research has contributed to the pod of knowledge already available and
therefore adding to the existing literature.
(2)
Following the discovery of a fault in the process of collective bargaining, it
will spur and support other researchers in the area of collective bargaining.
(3)
The study is significant to the state and federal governments who will
appreciate that the inability to implement the joint decisions reached has been
a source of dispute in the university system
(4)
The study is significant to university management who are now in vantage
position to apply management by consultation in all issues involving labour.
(5)
The study would also benefit labour union that in the course of this research
would understand that even though their demands are imperative in line with the
economic realities, must consider the lean resources of the state and the
position of management before embarking on strike. Under a democratic setting,
industrial relations is a different issue.
Democracy promoter’s freedom and guarantees conducive atmosphere for expression
of feelings. But such rights should not be abused or suppressed into witch
hunting for selfish interests. We must demand for what is right so long as it
is within the labour laws and what is right so long as it is within the labour
laws and what is right must be done so long as it within the labour laws and
what is right must be done so long as it is within the state resources. This
research work will also be beneficial to the researcher as it is a requirement
for award at a higher degree to the researcher.
1.7
SCOPE OF THE STUDY
The scope of the study is the research boundary. This research focuses on
industrial disputes in the Nigerian university system. Emphasis is laid on the
management of industrial disputes with a view to identifying the causes, the
dimension and socio-economic implications of industrial disputes in our
society.
The scope also revolves on the machinery of reaching collective bargain and
identification of parties and their objectives as it relates to tripartism in
labour relations.
The scope of the study will be limited to universities in Enugu state.
The research work will pay attention to Enugu state university of Science and
Technology (ESUT) and university of Nigeria Nsukka (UNN).
1.8
DEFINITION OF TERMS
Bouycott
- This means
refusal of wage earners to have dealing with or to Patronize, a business
organization when there is an organized labour grievance.
Collective Bargaining
- This simply means all methods
by which groups of workers and relevant employers come together to attempt
to
Employee/worker -
This is any person who is not a manager and who works for another in any
organization for fixed wages.
Employer
- This
means the owner(s) of work. This can be business owners, organization,
partnership, sole proprietorship, private or public limited company, government
etc.
Industrial Relations:
A tripartite
relationship involving three parties namely, the owners of work, the employees
or their representatives and government agency for the purpose of setting job
rules and regulations.
Industrial Disputes:
-
When there is inability among the participating parties in industrial relations
to reach peaceful agreements as it affects job rules and conditions of work
generally.
Lock-out:
- This is the employer’s action of closing a business enterprise
for the purpose of enforcing a demand on the employees by causing them to be
thrown out of work.
Picketing:-
This means the action of striking workers to prevent other persons from taking
their places in the plant or establishment and induce their colleagues who have
not joined the strike action to do so.
AFFILIATE LINKS:
Comments
Post a Comment