In the heat of the current strike action embarked upon by the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), the association has accused the federal government of insincerity at moving the education sector forward.
It also blamed the government for speaking from both sides of the mouth.
The non-implementation of the 2009 agreement that was reached between the federal government and the union was among the four fundamental issues that forced the university dons to down tools.
Also, the issue of university autonomy and academic freedom, coupled with staff welfare and condition of service also formed part of contending areas that triggered the industrial action.
In an exclusive interview with reporters, the President of ASUU, Dr. Nasir Isa Fagge, said that whenever their union met agreed on something with the federal government, within the twinkle of an eye the authorities would turn back, as if there had never been any meeting between the parties.
“We had a comprehensive agreement.
And I will like to remind people that we took three years, painstakingly, taking each item to make sure that whatever we touch on, both parties are in agreement.
So, after that we spent no less than two years waiting for government to implement the agreement.
The government decided, even after a strike, to just implement the salary component.
Salary is just one aspect of conditions of service.
That was the only item that government implemented,” Fagge said.
The ASUU President said the union had every cause to embark on a strike in the past. But instead it resorted to a warning action and then an indefinite strike.
That strike, according to him, commenced on December 4, 2011.
He added that with the intervention of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, the chairpersons of the National Assembly Committees on education, their union was able to reach some kind of Memorandum of Understanding, “which was also documented,” he said.
In what appeared to be a great shocker to the academics, Fagge further clarified: “In that MoU, government put down its plan to comprehensively implement the 2009 agreement.
That MoU was signed on January 24, 2012. With the signing, our members, nationwide, were convinced that there is a need for us to suspend the strike action.
And we were able to do that on the of February 2, 2012.”
He argued that it is one and a half years now and still there is nothing tangible from the government’s part.
He said: “Out of nine items, the federal government was only able to comprehensively implement two.
The first was the one that requires signing a law; the review of the retirement age of academics on the professorial cadre from 65 years to 70 years. That was done this year.”
He stressed another contending area: “There was also the issue of setting up of a Research and Development Council in the country, to encourage research.
Because our thinking is that our products do not have the appropriate training to fit into companies that produce in this country.
So, we think that if this council is set up, it will now harness the products in the university, so that they can be in tuned with what is required in the industry.”
When asked why he thought the government is adamant in meeting their demand, Fagge said: “I cannot talk for government.
But if I can just look at what I think is happening in the country… You see, our economy has been taken over by IMF (International Monetary Fund) and the World Bank. They dictate what we do in our economy.
The Bretton Woods Institutes are not interested in any developing country getting developed. We have seen it in many countries.
Most of the countries that have been able to achieve substantive development have been able to do away with the recommendations of Bretton Woods.”
He also commended members of the National Assembly for not posing any threat to the demands of the lecturers.
According to him, the parliamentarians were ever ready to critically look into the case of the academics at any given point in time.
He said: “We have been doing that. You see the National Assembly; they really don’t seem to have a problem, because whenever we go to them, they are willing.
I will give you an example.
When we confronted Comrade Uche Chukwumerije on the issue of the need to avert a crisis, he was willing to push the Senate to accommodate some of the requirements of implementing the 2009 agreement.”
