Download PDF
1. SENIOR STAFF ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY TEACHING HOSPITALS, RESEARCH INSTITUTIONS AND ASSOCIATED INSTITUTIONS (SSAUTHRIAI) AND ANORS 2. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF NIGERIAN NURSES AND MIDWIVES (NANNM) 3. NATIONAL UNION OF PHARMACISTS, MEDICAL TECHNOLOGISTS AND PROFESSIONS ALLIED TO MEDICINE (NUPMTPAM) 4. MEDICAL AND HEALTH WORKERS UNION (MHWUN) AND 1. FEDERAL MINISTRY OF HEALTH 2. OFFICE OFESTABLISHMENTSAND MANAGEMENT SERVICES (NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT) HON. JUSTICE B.A.ADEJUMO - PRESIDENT PROF. B.B. KANYIP - MEMBER MRS. V.N. OKOBI - MEMBER SUIT NO: NIC/12/2000 DATE OF JUDGMENT - MARCH 30, 2006. LABOUR LAW Allowances - Teaching allowance – Primary health care tutors - Entitlement of thereto. LABOUR LAW National Industrial Court - Disputes arising from mere interests of parties - Whether National Industrial Court ideal forum to resolve same. LABOUR LAW Trade dispute - Negotiations – Unconcluded negotiations - Effect - Whether can yield entitlements for the court to enforce. LABOUR LAW Trade union - Workers within a union - Parity of treatment of- Demand therefor - Propriety of. LABOUR LAW Workers within a sector - Parity of treatment of-Where instrument therefor absent - Whether court can decree. NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT Disputes arising from mere interests of parties -Whether National Industrial Court ideal forum to resolve same. TRADE UNION LAW Trade union - Workers within a union - Parity of treatment of- Demand therefor - Propriety of. ISSUE Whether the Appellants have an entitlement as to parity for which the court should intervene and enforce. FACTS The office of Establishment and Management Services issued a circular dated 3lst January, 1996 with Ref. No. CND. 25/S.4T/135 (Circular 1 of 1996). In the course of implementation of the circular, a trade dispute arose which was then referred to the Industrial Arbitration Panel by the Honourable Minister of Labour. The award of the IAP was objected to by the Appellants, hence the present referral to the National Industrial Court. The circular made detailed provisions as to the rates of allowances in respect of call duty allowance, hazard allowance, inducement allowance, journal and learned societies allowances, and teaching allowances. In all of these allowances, what was payable to medical/dental practitioners (doctors) was higher than what was payable to other categories of health employees. The Appellants disagreed with the disparity in treatment and hence their action at the IAP. The Appellants demanded withdrawal of Circular 1 or for harmonization of Circular 1 by removing all the discriminatory components and applying same uniformly across the board. At the trial, the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Appellants filed a joint memorandum. The 4th Appellant submitted its own separate memorandum. The Respondents presented a joint memorandum. Additionally, the 1st to 3rd Appellants submitted a written brief of argument, which brief was adopted by the 4th Appellant. The brief of argument was supplemented by oral arguments by the two counsel representing the Appellants. Counsel to the Respondents only orally argued his case. HELD (Directing the parties to go back for negotiation): 1 On Whether court ideal forum to resolve disputes arising from mere interests of parties - Labour/industrial relations is a function of conflicting interests which may remain mere interests or crystallize into rights, depending on what can be agreed on through the process of collective bargaining. So long as an interest has not crystallized into a right, an adjudicative process of the court is hardly useful in the resolution of disputes that may arise in that regard. Adjudication deals with rights. And until an interest crystallizes into a right, the court is not the ideal forum to go 2. On Whether court can decree parity of treatment for workers within a particular sector in the absence of instrument - The demand for parity within a particular union is ‘perfectly’ understandable and accords with the principle of equal work, equal pay enunciated by even the International Labour Organization (ILO). However, unless there is an instrument (a law, circular or collective agreement) that entrenches parity of treatment within particular sector as an entitlement, it is not for the court to decree it. In the instant case, the parity sought by the Applicants for present purposes is not within the same union, but among different unions. 3. On Whether unconcluded negotiations can yield entitlements for the court to enforce - Where negotiations between parties were not concluded, no enforceable agreement is reached. Such negotiations do not yield any entitlements for the cowl to enforce. In the instant case, the negotiations between the parties were never concluded. The court therefore enjoined all the parties to go back to the negotiation table. 4. On Entitlement of primary health care tutors to teaching allowance - Primary health care tutors are entitled to benefit from teaching allowance meant for all medical practitioners and health professionals as enjoined under Circular 1 of 1996 of the office of Establishment and Management Services.