“Air Peace… is the champion of the bad airlines we have in this country…”

That statement was made during an interview by Frances Akinjole, General Secretary of the Air Transport Senior Staff Association of Nigeria (ATSSAN), in the course of the ongoing industrial dispute involving Air Peace and aviation unions.

Mr. Akinjole did not stop there. He reportedly claimed that, of all the airlines operating in Nigeria, only two allow unionisation, and proceeded to invoke Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution to justify his position.

To my mind, this goes beyond an ordinary labour dispute. The language and intensity of the attack raise legitimate questions about whether the objective is genuinely to protect workers’ interests or to deliberately damage the reputation of Air Peace.

Calling Air Peace “the champion of bad airlines in Nigeria” is not a labour argument. It is a sweeping reputational attack on Nigeria’s largest airline. If an aviation union official has evidence of regulatory, operational, or labour violations by the airline, he should present that evidence and allow the appropriate authorities to act. Personalised attacks and inflammatory language do not strengthen a labour case.

More importantly, Mr. Akinjole’s invocation of Section 40 of the Constitution requires a proper examination.

Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution guarantees the right of every person to assemble freely and associate with others and, in particular, to “form or belong to” a political party, trade union or other association for the protection of his interests. That is a fundamental constitutional right. Workers have the right to organise, join unions and pursue their legitimate interests.

But there is an equally important part of that provision that cannot simply be wished away: the Constitution says “form or belong to.” It does not say that every worker must belong to a particular union.

Indeed, Nigerian labour jurisprudence recognises freedom of association as a constitutional right. The National Industrial Court has emphasised that the right of association cannot simply be abridged and that no association should arrogate to itself the authority to determine what association another person must belong to. (nicnadr.gov.ng⁠)

That distinction is crucial to the controversy surrounding the picketing of Air Peace.

According to reports, aviation unions picketed Air Peace operations in Lagos, Abuja, and other locations, causing substantial disruption to flight operations and affecting passengers. The unions cited grievances including alleged anti-union practices and financial obligations.

Air Peace, on the other hand, has maintained that its workers do not wish to participate in the unions’ action and that some of its employees protested against being drawn into the dispute.

If that position is correct, then a fundamental question arises: Can a union use industrial action to compel workers who are not its members to participate in its dispute?

The answer is particularly significant because Section 43 of the Trade Unions Act expressly deals with peaceful picketing. It permits people acting in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute to attend at or near a workplace for peacefully obtaining or communicating information or peacefully persuading people to work or abstain from working.

But the same provision contains important safeguards. Section 43(1A) provides that no person shall subject another person to any kind of constraint or restriction of personal freedom in the course of persuasion. More significantly, Section 43(1B) provides that no trade union, federation or member thereof shall, during a strike, compel a person who is not a member of the union to join the strike or obstruct highways, institutions or premises for that purpose. The National Industrial Court has specifically reproduced and applied these provisions. (nicnadr.gov.ng⁠)

This is where the unions must answer some difficult questions.

The right to unionise is not a licence to coerce.

The right to peaceful picketing is not a licence to intimidate.

The right to strike is not a licence to compel non-members to join a strike.

And a legitimate labour dispute is not a licence to hold an entire travelling public hostage.

I therefore disagree completely with the attempt to reduce this matter to a simplistic battle between “labour” and “management.”

There are at least three interests involved.

First, there is the legitimate right of trade unions to organise workers and pursue genuine labour interests.

Second, there is the right of individual workers to exercise their own freedom of association and determine whether, and with whom, they wish to associate, subject to applicable labour laws.

Third, there is the right of innocent passengers and members of the travelling public not to have their legitimate journeys disrupted by an industrial dispute in which they have no direct interest.

That third interest cannot be ignored.

Nigeria has seen what happens when workers in strategically important sectors wield industrial action without sufficient regard for the consequences to the wider public. We have experienced situations in which petroleum tanker drivers, because of their critical position in the fuel-distribution chain, could bring economic activity to a standstill at the slightest disagreement.

We must not allow the same mentality to take root in aviation.

Aviation is too critical to the Nigerian economy to become hostage to industrial confrontation.

And this is why Mr. Akinjole’s statement is troubling. When the General Secretary of a major aviation workers’ union describes one of the country’s most prominent airlines as “the champion of bad airlines,” while his organisation is simultaneously engaged in industrial action against that airline, Nigerians are entitled to ask whether the language is intended to resolve a dispute or to destroy the reputation of a particular company.

If the unions believe Air Peace has violated labour laws, frustrated legitimate unionisation or breached any statutory obligation, there are established institutions for addressing those grievances. They can approach the appropriate labour authorities and, where necessary, the National Industrial Court.

What they should not do is use industrial action to punish innocent passengers or attempt to force workers into an association against their wishes.

There is also an important distinction between an allegation and a proven offence. It would therefore be premature to declare the picketing itself criminal without a judicial or regulatory determination. But if the reported conduct involved coercion, obstruction or compelling non-members to participate, those are precisely the issues that the relevant authorities should investigate under the Trade Unions Act and other applicable laws.

The government also has a responsibility here.
The Ministry of Aviation and Aerospace Development, the Ministry of Labour and Employment, the NCAA and other relevant authorities must ensure that this dispute is resolved within the framework of the law. The reported intervention of Aviation Minister Festus Keyamo, after which the unions suspended the picketing pending further discussions, is therefore a welcome development.

But this matter should not end with a temporary suspension.
Nigeria needs a serious national conversation about industrial action in critical sectors; the rights of workers who choose not to belong to particular unions; the limits of picketing; and, most importantly, the rights of the travelling public.

Let me be very clear: I support the right of Nigerian workers to unionise. I support lawful collective bargaining. I support legitimate labour struggles. But I do not support coercion, intimidation or the use of industrial action as a weapon to destroy a company or punish innocent citizens.

Section 40 of the Constitution protects freedom of association. It does not confer a monopoly of association on any particular union.

The right to belong to a union cannot logically become the right to force another person to belong to that union.

And if Mr. Akinjole and his colleagues believe otherwise, they should take their argument to the courts and let the law decide.

As for the claim that Air Peace is “the champion of bad airlines in Nigeria,” that is a political and reputational judgment, not a legal argument. If there is evidence to support such a sweeping indictment, let it be presented before the appropriate regulatory authorities and the Nigerian public.

Otherwise, Nigerians are entitled to regard such rhetoric for what it appears to be: an unnecessarily aggressive attempt to discredit a Nigerian airline in the middle of a labour dispute.

This opinion piece is authored by Fred Chukwuelobe,fnipr, journalist and public affairs commentator, who writes from Lagos.