Why always Nigeria?
“The policy of ExxonMobil Corporation is to comply with all governmental laws, rules and regulations applicable to its business,” the Ethics Policy of the company says.
The sources of employment law in Nigeria are: a) The constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended); b) The Labour Act, Chapter L1, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004; c) Federal laws enacted by the National Assembly and the State laws enacted by the House of Assembly of each state that relate to labour and employment, pension and workplace compensation including the following: Guidelines for the release of staff in the Nigerian oil industry 2019, Nigerian Oil and Gas Industry Content Development Act 2010, Employees’ Compensation Act 2010, Factories Act, Chapter F1 LFN 2004, Industrial Training Fund, Chapter 19 LFN 2004, National Health Insurance Scheme Act, Chapter N42 LFN 2004, National Housing Fund Act, Chapter 45 LFN 2004, Pension Reform Act 2014, Personal Income Tax Act, Chapter P8 LFN 2004, Trade Disputes Act, Chapter T8 LFN 2004, Trade Union Act, Chapter T14 LFN 2004, Nigeria Data Protection Regulation 2019; d) Decisions of the Nigerian courts; e) International conventions, treaties and protocols relating to labour, employment, workplace, industrial relations or matters connected therewith that have been ratified by Nigeria. Which means that no organisation, not even a multi-national, should flagrantly disregard such laws.
But then, Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited (a subsidiary of ExxonMobil), is not new to this act.
On July 17, 2018, the Lagos headquarters of ExxonMobil was shut down by the company’s workers’ unions over the alleged dismissal of 860 security personnel without entitlement.
The protesters accused MPNU of sacking the workers most of whom had worked with the company for over 22 years without regards for the rule of law.
Rasak Obe, the Chairman of ExxonMobil branch of the Petroleum and Natural Gas Senior Staff Association of Nigeria (PENGASSAN), told News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) that the protest was to express the disaffection of the workers with the management.
According to him, this was an unfortunate situation which the Supreme Court of Nigeria had corrected with its April 20, 2018 judgment of 508 workers.
“This underscored the scale of error in company’s assessment of the reality after the Supreme Court judgment,” he said.
“There are tens more who by the judgment are active employees of Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited. To say the least, this wholesale sack unambiguously conveys management’s disdain for the highest court of the country and mocks its ruling on the subject.
Obe said the company was quick to indiscriminately sack Nigerians and replace them with expatriates, “taking jobs Nigerians have successfully performed over the decades.”
“The cost of keeping one of the over 20 expatriate security personnel in Nigeria would pay one hundred of the Nigerian security personnel currently being repressed,” he said.
“This impunity has been raised with HR and Law since February 2018, but the company continues to ignore our advice.”
On May 11, 2017, workers in the oil industry embarked on protest action against “anti-labour practices in Mobil” following the sacking of 83 employees.
The workers, under the aegis of the PENGASSAN, started a gradual withdrawal from oil and gas installations belonging to Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited, Nigeria’s ExxonMobil arm.
“The company has no respect for the constituted authority of the land, as represented by the Honourable Minister of Labour and Productivity,” the PENGASSAN Lagos Zonal Chairman, Comrade Abel Agarin, said.
“The management disobeys the law and authority of Nigeria and we find this unacceptable to us.”
On February 25, 2020, over 70 members of PENGASSAN bemoaned the non-payment of their severance package 10 years after they were sacked by Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited.
The workers were disengaged in 2009 before the expiration of their employment contracts at the Qua Iboe Oil Export Terminal operated by the company. They were denied their entitlement of N600 million.
According to the oil workers, it took the management of the company nine years to authorise payment of their terminal benefits in 2018 but said that the amount fell short of the computed benefits by over N600 million.
“We were locked out while our employment contract was still running and under our labour laws, when there is such a breach of an existing contract, the terminal benefits reflect and compensate for the breach,” Peter Akpenka, a former Chairman of Contract Workers branch of PENGASSAN in MPNU, said.
“It took them nine years to pay part of the benefits in 2018 and they are still holding on to the balance, and we are at a loss as to why our union is working against us. Rather than use the subsisting Collecting Bargaining Agreement as at the time of our disengagement in August 2009 to compute our benefits they connived and used an old, discarded template and hence the shortfall.
“We have communicated them several times in writing, written reminders while this matter lingered over the years and they have taken no action.”
The way forward
A 2010 study sponsored by the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES) (an independent German non-profit organisation committed to promoting social democracy worldwide) titled, The State of Workers’ Rights in Nigeria: An Examination of the Banking, Oil and Gas, and Telecommunication Sectors by Funmi Adewumi and Adebimpe Adenugba found that:
• There is an appreciable level of rights awareness on the part of workers in the three sectors covered
• The level of compliance on the part of employers is low. Employers are deliberately avoiding compliance
• Official enforcement is low, and this is encouraged by weak institutional capacity
• There is a strong belief on the part of workers that the union is in a good position to ensure the protection and enforcement of workers' rights.
The International Labour Organisation (ILO) expects member countries to strengthen machinery for labour disputes settlement, in line with international labour standards and consultation with the social partners, by Establishing legal and regulatory frameworks; Building effective dispute resolution systems and services within the labour administration and by independent statutory institutions and specialised labour courts; Capacity building through specialised training focused on negotiation skills and conciliation/mediation skills, as well as on international labour standards; Sharing knowledge and raising awareness in respect of the advantages of voluntary conciliation, mediation and arbitration mechanisms; and Sharing experiences of labour court judges on issues of common interest and concern.
However, the study by Adewumi and Adenugba came to the conclusion that “the provisions of labour laws and international labour standards of the ILO in, and by, themselves are not enough guarantees for the protection of workers' rights and as such there is the need to look beyond these instruments in protecting the rights of workers. Workers, their organisations and allies within the labour movement should develop and adopt extra-judicial means such as political and social actions to secure their rights at work.”
Omo-Ojo took his case to the highest political office in Nigeria – the Presidency.
In a letter dated July 20, 2020, titled Wilful and Flagrant Abuse of DPR Regulations by ExxonMobil, and sent through the office of the Chief of Staff, Amb. (Prof.) Agboola Ibrahim Gambari, Omo-Ojo requested for the intervention of His Excellency. Below is an excerpt.
This letter also seeks your Excellency’s intervention, not only as the President and Commander-In-Chief but also as the extant Minister of Petroleum.
3. Specifically, your Excellency, on 5th December 2019, DPR issued a Violation Sanction and Directive to ExxonMobil after months of investigation on my matter bordering on an alleged conflict of interest owing to my publication of a book (The Potent Force of Sponsorship) which is a faith-based mentorship manual and my quest in seeking an elective position as Vice-President of ExxonMobil Employees Multipurpose Cooperative Society.
In the said letter, DPR affirmed that my release/disengagement from service fell short of due process and, accordingly, ExxonMobil was given seven (7) days to restore my rights and privileges and proceed with my retirement effective December 31, 2019. But, rather, ExxonMobil has continued to defy the DPR directives deploying all manner of underhand tactics and taking advantage of the leadership changes in DPR to shirk in its responsibility. The 5th December 2019 letter is annexed herein and marked “C.”
4. The continuous flouting of the directives of DPR by ExxonMobil is, by extension, a defiance of the powers of your office both as President and as Honourable Minister of Petroleum; the supervisory body for DPR. It is beyond peradventure that ExxonMobil is in breach of the following DPR guidelines:
* Resolution 4.0 of the amended guidelines and procedures on the release of staff in the Nigerian Oil and Gas Industry dated November 13, 2019, and signed on November 17, 2019, as can be seen in the within annexure “D”; and
* Resolution 4.1 requiring that any employer who wishes to release
a worker shall apply in writing to the DPR Director for the Minister’s
approval stating manner of staff release, reasons for the proposed
release, the compensation due to the worker and proposed
replacement of the worker.
5. Ludicrously, it is now over 200 days that ExxonMobil has been in disobedience of DPR’s directive and DPR seems frustrated as manifest in the tenure of two letters it has sent to me advising that my case is considered closed. The two letters are annexed and marked “E1” and “E2”.
6. Painfully, your Excellency, I have gone through this avoidable pain for the past fifteen (15) months. The unethical stoppage of my salary and allowances is taking a serious toll on the welfare and well-being of my family; the children’s university education cannot be paid for as planned. This has a severe psychological impact on me and my family.
7. It is worthy of note your Excellency, that you determine based on the prevailing circumstances and available facts if DPR has shirked in its responsibility as stated in its guidelines as a regulator viz-a-viz my case.
8. Your Excellency is kindly requested to intervene on this absurdity not necessarily for my sake alone, but in the overall interests of Nigerians in the employment of international oil companies operating in Nigeria. I have been pressured by many to let go because they fear bureaucratic bottlenecks will not let me have justice. I am, however, persuaded to fight on with the belief that your intervention would right this and similar wrongs in the Nigerian oil industry.
Conclusion
Grievances and conflicts are an inevitable part of the employment relationship. But few controversies are more damaging to a business than a dispute with an employee. It is high time Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited came to terms with this. An amicable resolution of the matter with Ernest Omo-Ojo is the first step to this realisation.