President of the Trade Union Congress (TUC), Festus Osifo, has sharply criticised Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) President Joe Ajaero over his claim that the NLC can independently negotiate workers’ salaries and allowances with the Federal Government, exposing a widening disagreement between Nigeria’s two major labour centres.
Osifo challenged Ajaero during an appearance on Channels Television’s The Morning Brief on Monday, November 2, 2026, insisting that the NLC cannot negotiate on behalf of workers represented by the TUC without involving their organisation.
The disagreement follows the Federal Government’s announcement of a ₦70,000 transport intervention for public sector workers, intended to operate for six months beginning in November. While the NLC defended the arrangement, the TUC rejected the temporary intervention and demanded a more sustainable salary increase.
Osifo described the agreement reached without TUC participation as an aberration and accused Ajaero of misunderstanding the relationship between independent labour organisations.
“You cannot negotiate for them on their behalf!” Osifo declared, arguing that each recognised labour centre retains the right to represent its members in discussions concerning employment conditions and welfare.
The TUC president also criticised Ajaero’s leadership, contrasting his position with the legacies of former NLC presidents, including Adams Oshiomhole, Hassan Sunmonu and Ayuba Wabba.
He challenged Ajaero to identify the specific International Labour Organization (ILO) regulation granting one labour centre exclusive authority to negotiate for another organisation’s members.
According to Osifo, international labour arrangements recognise the participation of workers’ representatives, employers and governments, but do not automatically eliminate the negotiating rights of independently organised trade unions.
He acknowledged that the NLC has more affiliated unions than the TUC, estimating their respective numbers at approximately 60 and 40. However, he maintained that numerical superiority does not confer unrestricted authority over another organisation.
Osifo argued that where negotiations affect both labour centres, their representatives should participate and reach an agreement through consultation rather than unilateral decisions.
Ajaero, however, defended the NLC’s position during a separate appearance on the same television programme, maintaining that his organisation could negotiate independently under the ILO principle concerning the most representative workers’ organisation.
He argued that the TUC could participate alongside the NLC but could not independently exercise the same negotiating authority in certain labour arrangements.
Ajaero also cited the composition of the Joint National Public Service Negotiating Council, saying seven of its eight constituent unions were affiliated with the NLC, while one belonged to the TUC.
He maintained that the council’s structure strengthened the NLC’s position in public service negotiations, although Osifo disputed the suggestion that such arrangements extinguished the TUC’s independent representation rights.
The competing interpretations have not been conclusively resolved through the public exchanges. Neither leader’s statements alone establish the definitive legal position governing every category of negotiation.
The dispute intensified after the Federal Ministry of Labour and Employment announced the transport intervention following a conciliation meeting with NLC representatives in Abuja on October 27.
The government presented the arrangement as temporary assistance for workers facing increasing transportation expenses and other financial pressures.
However, the announcement did not establish that payments had already reached beneficiaries, and questions remained about implementation and participation by authorities outside the federal government.
The TUC rejected the proposed arrangement, arguing that a temporary allowance would provide limited relief without addressing the underlying erosion of workers’ purchasing power.
Osifo insisted that the Federal Government should increase salaries directly, rather than offering a short-term payment that would expire after six months.
He also distinguished a general salary adjustment from negotiations over the national minimum wage, arguing that the government could improve workers’ earnings without waiting for a new minimum wage committee.
The TUC had publicly advanced that position following its National Administrative Council meeting on October 8.
Osifo subsequently disputed Ajaero’s account of how the transport intervention emerged, claiming that government representatives had discussed a possible wage award with TUC officials before the NLC’s conciliation meeting.
He said discussions involving Secretary to the Government of the Federation George Akume and TUC representatives preceded the announcement.
According to Osifo, the TUC had already rejected the proposed temporary intervention before Ajaero’s meeting with labour ministry officials.
Ajaero presented a different account, explaining that the NLC had issued an ultimatum over workers’ welfare concerns and subsequently entered discussions with the government.
He said the transport intervention emerged during those engagements, rejecting the suggestion that the NLC had no meaningful role in securing the arrangement.
The disagreement therefore concerns both the authority to negotiate and the circumstances under which the allowance was introduced.
Ajaero previously argued that the TUC should not reject an agreement it had not negotiated, maintaining that the organisation remained free to pursue its own demands.
Osifo countered that an agreement affecting workers represented by different labour centres should not be presented as a collective labour settlement without their participation.
Both organisations have advocated improved remuneration, although they differ over the appropriate negotiating process and the adequacy of the government’s latest proposal.
The dispute comes as Nigerian workers continue facing financial pressure from transportation costs, food prices and other essential household expenses.
For employees, the immediate concern extends beyond institutional disagreements to whether government interventions will produce meaningful improvements in disposable income.
The controversy also raises broader questions about representation, collective bargaining and coordination within Nigeria’s organised labour movement.
The NLC and TUC have previously cooperated on major labour campaigns, including negotiations concerning minimum wages and economic policies affecting workers.
Their present disagreement illustrates the challenges that arise when organisations representing overlapping interests adopt different negotiating strategies.
While both leaders have defended their respective mandates, the government’s responsibility to engage relevant representatives fairly remains central to maintaining confidence in labour negotiations.
A prolonged dispute could complicate attempts to establish a unified position on future wage discussions, although no formal breakdown in cooperation has been announced.
The next developments will depend on whether the two labour centres reconcile their interpretations of negotiating authority and whether the Federal Government provides further clarity on the allowance.
For workers awaiting financial relief, the central issue remains whether temporary assistance or permanent salary adjustments will adequately address rising living costs.
Osifo’s challenge has placed that question alongside a fundamental dispute over who speaks for organised labour, leaving Nigeria’s leading union representatives publicly divided over both process and policy.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters News | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments