The ongoing dispute between the Nigeria Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG) and Dangote Petroleum Refinery has drawn diverse legal opinions from lawyers across Nigeria regarding the legality and limits of company workers joining a union.
Some argue that employee contract terms forbidding unionism should be respected by employees and third-party organizations.
Others believe that the 1999 Constitutional provision on freedom of association is binding on all persons and companies.
In this exclusive interview with Nairametrics, prominent lawyers and experts shared their views on the legality of unionism while offering recommendations.
What Nigerian Lawyers Are Saying
In an interview with Nairametrics, Barrister Frank Tietie, an Abuja-based human rights activist and development advocate, stated that although there is freedom of association in the 1999 Constitution and Dangote Refinery cannot say its workers cannot form a union; if part of the conditions of employment is that the refinery would not recognize a union, anyone who accepts those conditions cannot later demand union recognition.
“The same freedom to associate gives the freedom not to associate. So, the bottom line is that unionism is not by force,” he said.
- He added that if the terms and conditions of employment at Dangote Refinery are unacceptable to anyone, such persons should resign rather than insist on staying and forming a union contrary to their employment agreement.
- He expressed the view that certain industries in Nigeria do not permit union members to carry out industrial action, for instance.
- He stressed that there have always been alleged violations of trade union law, especially by trade unions in Nigeria, allegedly to the detriment of industrial harmony and economic stability.
He highlighted that certain trade unions, such as NUPENG, cannot impose themselves on a private establishment like Dangote Refinery, which provides essential services to the public.
“Based on the provisions of the Trade Union Act as amended in 2005 and the Trade Dispute Act, together with all other acts that make provision for essential services, certain industries are excluded from the politics of trade unionism.
“By provisions of the Trade Union Act, particularly sections 6 and 31 (which deal with essential services), which outlaw certain illegalities under trade unionism; Dangote Refinery has every right not to recognize union activities that would hamper its provision of essential services to the Nigerian public,” he said.
On his part, Barrister Joseph Chinedu maintained that it would be “outrightly illegal” for NUPENG to block non-union workers like Dangote truckers from loading and distributing fuel.
- He added that if Dangote Refinery, as NUPENG alleges, is stopping truck drivers from joining the union, the development also violates Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution and the Trade Unions Act.
“The law is clear. Workers have a right to unionize or to remain non-union members. Employers cannot coerce employees regarding union membership, and Trade Unions or NUPENG cannot stop non-union members from working,” he told Nairametrics.
Senior Advocate of Nigeria George Ibrahim told Nairametrics that freedom of association is guaranteed by Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution.
“Every Nigerian has the right to freely join any association of their choice. You don’t force it on anybody,” he said.
- He highlighted that it would be problematic for NUPENG to try to force Dangote drivers to join its association, as Dangote is the employer of those drivers.
“The terms of employment the drivers entered with Dangote Refinery remain unchanged( as none has deviated) and they have not complained,” he stated.
- Citing NUPENG’s alleged modus operandi, the senior lawyer said once someone becomes a member, NUPENG will affix a seal on any truck loading petroleum products, contrary to constitutional provisions, as if the truck belongs to them.
“That in itself is illegal. You can’t force people to join you. NUPENG is not the owner of the Dangote trucks,” he said.
He added that if Dangote truck drivers do not want to be members of NUPENG, they have such constitutional rights.
- However, he noted that any clause in a company’s terms of employment barring employees from unionism would be contrary to best practices and international labor organization laws.
In an exclusive chat with Nairametrics, Chief Otunba Tunde Falola Esq, an Abuja-based legal practitioner, highlighted the applicable laws in the NUPENG and Dangote Refinery dispute:
“1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended). Section 40 guarantees the right to freedom of association, including trade union membership.
“ Section 17(3)(a) directs the State to ensure opportunities for all citizens to secure adequate livelihood, including fair labor practices.
“ Trade Unions Act, Cap T14, LFN 2004, recognizes registered trade unions such as NUPENG and protects their activities.
“By virtue of Section 9(6)(a) of the Labour Act, no contract shall make it a condition of employment that a worker shall or shall not join a trade union or relinquish membership of a trade union. Section 9(6)(b) protects employees from victimization for belonging to a union.
“Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA) 2019 prohibits restrictive trade practices and monopolistic behaviour, empowering the FCCPC to investigate and sanction violations.”
The lawyer added that the National Industrial Court of Nigeria (NICN) has consistently upheld workers’ rights to unionize and participate in trade union activities.
- He argued that if Dangote Refinery directed drivers to remove NUPENG stickers or attempted to enforce loading in defiance of agreed protocols, as alleged, such actions may amount to union-busting and contravene Section 40 of the Constitution and Section 9(6) of the Labour Act.
- He explained that while NUPENG’s decision to place members on red alert appears lawful within constitutional rights, it should not escalate into unlawful strike action without due notice as provided by relevant laws.
- The lawyer stated that the presence of federal ministers and DSS officials during the earlier resolution strengthens the union’s case that there was a binding industrial agreement which the employer must honour.
- He argued that unless NUPENG or other stakeholders can prove anti-competitive practices, the scale of Dangote’s operations does not amount to a monopoly under Nigerian law.
He added, however, that the FCCPC may need to monitor compliance to prevent market dominance abuses.
He warned that if allegations of anti-unionism are true, Dangote Refinery risks liability for infringing workers’ constitutional and statutory rights to freedom of association, unionism, and fair labor practices.
He added that monopoly claims against Dangote Refinery are presently unsupported by law, as the FCCPC recognizes multiple licenses and players in the downstream oil sector.
“Workers should be allowed to exercise union rights without harassment or intimidation, in line with constitutional guarantees,” he said.
On his part, Chris Ekemezie, a Nigerian lawyer based in Canada, said labor law is practiced everywhere in Nigeria, adding that the federal civil service and the states are all unionized.
- He stated that it is wrong, anti-democratic, and against the law for an individual or institution to restrict or refuse its staff from being members of a union.
- He explained that unionism is practiced worldwide and is entrenched in Nigerian laws.
“The industrial courts were created based on union agitations. It is a pressure group where workers unite for a common goal — to advocate for their interests so that employers do not cheat them,” he added.
Backstory
In a press statement on Saturday, Dangote Refinery emphasized that it is not opposed to unionism and recognizes workers’ rights to unionize.
The Group added that it respects the rights of all workers to either join or not join a union, in line with the principles of voluntarism.
“While we are obliged to protect the rights of workers who choose to join or not join any union, we are also obliged to protect the rights of those workers who, for any reason, decide not to join,” the statement partly reads.
- The Refinery highlighted that it respects the rights of all its employees to a safe, peaceful, and secure environment, free from threats to their personal well-being and source of income.
- The Refinery urged the unions to respect these principles for peaceful industrial relations in the oil and gas industry.
Nairametrics previously reported that NUPENG recently alleged that, days after agreeing to suspend its nationwide strike, Dangote Refinery drivers were instructed to remove union stickers from their trucks and were forced to load the facility, violating agreed protocols.
- The union said the incident came after a resolution on workers’ rights was signed in the presence of three federal ministers and the Deputy Director General of the Department of State Services (DSS).
- The union also claimed that Dangote Group official Alhaji Sayyu Aliu Dantata flew over the site by helicopter and summoned the Navy, allegedly to intimidate union officials.
In response, NUPENG placed members on red alert and called on the Federal Government, civil society, and international labor groups to safeguard workers’ rights.
Dangote Petroleum Refinery rejected claims of being monopolistic, saying over 30 refinery licenses have been issued to other private players, with active developments by BUA, Aradel, and Walter Smith.
