ABSTRACT

In Nigeria, in spite of the statutory mechanisms put in place to mitigate disputes, the phenomenon has been on the increase and on a consistent basis. The statutory dispute settlement procedure has not fostered industrial harmony to a large extent. Consequently, how to achieve effective settlement of trade disputes has, over the years, posed great challenges to industrial relations in Nigeria. The objective of this dissertation therefore is to appraise the effectiveness of trade disputes settlement mechanisms in Nigeria. The doctrinal method has been adopted for this research. Thus, the research analyzed materials derived from both primary and secondary sources. The primary sources include statutes and judicial decisions while the secondary sources include books, journals, articles, newspapers and internet materials. The dissertation found among others that, the framework of substantive law established by the state for the resolution of trade disputes in Nigeria lack some critical components of trade disputes resolution. For instance, section 25 (1) and (2) of the Trade Unions Act granted recognition to registered trade for purpose of collective bargaining, but N1, 000 fine section provided for non- compliance is inadequate to serve as deterrence. Additionally, the law has not set up an independent an agency that would monitor whether or not the employers have really accorded recognition to employees for bargaining purposes. It is also found that the process of mediation and conciliation at the ADR Centre established in the NIC is likely to be unattractive for workers because of the overbearing influence and discretion exercise by the President of the NIC. Against this background therefore, the dissertation recommends that section 25 (2) of the Trade Union Act should be amended to allow the sanction for the refusal by employers to recognize trade union for bargaining purposes to be determined based on the financial strength of each organization. Furthermore, there is need for the Government to set up an independent agency like the ACAS and NLRB to monitor whether or not the employers in the country grant trade union due recognition for bargaining. Additionally, the NIC Alternative Disputes Resolution (ADR) Centre Instrument need to be amended to make the appointment of the Director of the Centre to be done subject to the confirmation of the senate and to provide a fixed Panel for the ADR Centre with its membership drawn from the Nigerian Labour Congress and Trade Union Congress. This way, workers would feel adequately represented.

CHAPTER ONE GENERAL INTRODUCTION

Background to the study

Contract of employment is indispensable in economic growth and development of every modern society as it regulates and coordinates the efforts of labour and management (social partners) toward production of goods and services essential to the needs of individuals and the society. In Nigeria, these goods and services constitute an important source from where income is generated to sustain the economy and to enhance the citizen‟s well-being. Central to the existence of a productive employment relation however, is an atmosphere of harmonious co-existence characterized by mutual respect between the parties who appreciate that they need each other as management alone cannot create wealth. However, the emergence of free market economy has brought with it complexities in labour management relationship, which is being fraught with perennial conflicts of interests and mutual suspicion, with each party standing astute to wield its own weapon to protect its perceived interest in the relationship. This near hostile relationship usually results in trade disputes culminating in strikes, which have almost crippled the economy in the country.¹

Industrial actions involve the interruption of economic process in the workplace as a method of inducing pressure collectively by workers on their employers.² These actions have both costs and benefits to the three social partners (government, labour and management) and the society at large. For instance, most trade disputes aim at changing the bargaining position of the workers. Labour union mandate its members to embark on strike, in the hope that it will pressurize management to take a desired course of action in line with labour demands for improvement in conditions of services, better living standard of workers and their families.³However, it should be noted that the costs of industrial disputes have always outweighed the benefits. Trade disputes as exemplified by strikes, to a large extent, have a great bearing on the smooth and orderly development of the economy and the maintenance of law and order in the society. They sometimes arouse public resentment because they may hurt the public more than the parties involved in the dispute. For instance, strikes have a dramatic effect on the public, particularly in essential industries. The costs of strikes include loss of production or output; disruption in essential services (oil, electricity, education, and banking); capacity under-utilization; scarcity and high costs of essential items; unemployment and manpower contraction amongst others.⁴ A strike-prone country is not likely to attract foreign investors as this index has become one of the major considerations for foreign industrialists and multinational corporations. However, it may be instructive to state that, whether dispute staged is adjudged to be successful or not, it is obvious that some damage must have been done and parties and  the public have to bear the costs.⁵

It is well known that trade unionism all over the world emerged for improving the economic, living and working conditions of workers through collective bargaining. To achieve this, workers´ rights and interests are legally protected nationally and internationally not just as producer of national wealth but also as citizens. Such rights are conferred on workers and their organizations taking into consideration their special role and the need to protect them from extreme abuse and exploitation in the hands of profit- conscious employers often backed by a collaborative state.

For instance, Article 23 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights⁶ guarantees everybody the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment, as well as, the right to form, and join trade unions for the protection of rights. Similarly, Article 4 on the rights to organize and collective bargaining⁷ has granted workers the right to adequate protection against acts of entire union discrimination in respect of their employment. In Nigeria, section 40 (1) of the Constitution⁹¹ pluralized the word “interest” to emphasize that a trade union may bargain with the employer on behalf of the workers for variety of interest. For instance, it may be financial interests, political interests, economic interests, the physical conditions of work or national interests. Furthermore, the government realizes the effects of trade dispute and all its attendant consequences. Hence, it has provided legislations that provide for various legal mechanisms for effective settlement of trade disputes for the overall growth and development of economy. For instance, section 4 (1) of the Trade Dispute Act⁸ for instance required disputants to always resort to agreed means of settling their dispute whether such agreed means is by virtue of a collective agreement between the parties or any other agreement. Where the voluntary method fails, the parties are expected to refer the dispute to National Industrial Court (NIC) for adjudication. The statutory settlement mechanism is exemplified by collective bargaining (negotiation) Mediation, Conciliation, Industrial Arbitration Panel and the National Industrial Court. In labour relations, a pre-condition to the exercise of the right to collective bargaining is for the employer or his association to recognize the union as a bargaining agent. In Nigeria section 25 (1) and (2) of the Trade Unions Act⁹ has obliged employers recognize registered trade unions. Recognition connotes the willingness of an employer to bargain with a union.