Dangote and labour rights

It’s a fragile truce holding between the Petroleum and Natural Gas Senior Staff Association of Nigeria (PENGASSAN) and Dangote Refinery and Petrochemicals over alleged anti-labour practices by the refinery, regarding which the labour body had called down industry Armageddon. PENGASSAN suspended its nationwide strike mid- last week, but warned the backdown was only temporary. It vowed speedy return to the trenches at the slightest indication of bad faith by Dangote.

The labour association had, on Sunday, called an industrial action that momentarily crippled Nigeria’s oil and gas sectors, all in avowed bid to bring Dangote into line. Government had to mediate and, on Wednesday, PENGASSAN announced it was pulling back on “moral high ground” by bowing to government persuasion despite strong doubts about the sincerity of Dangote Group. “We are only suspending, not calling off this strike. If any part of this agreement is broken, we will not give any warning. We will immediately resume our suspended industrial action,” said PENGASSAN President Festus Osifo, who is also the president of Nigeria’s alternate labour centre, the Trade Union Congress (TUC).

Dangote refinery is a $20billion private venture commissioned in 2023, and its rift with PENGASSAN centred on claims that the management sacked some 800 workers because they chose to join the labour association, allegedly against the policy of the organisation to not have its employees unionise. The association further alleged that the sacked workers were replaced with more than 2,000 Indians, which it described as an affront to Nigerian workers and a violation of the country’s Constitution, labour laws and International Labour Organisation (ILO) conventions. It thus directed its members to paralyse operations at the refinery by cutting off crude and gas supplies to it. 

In case you wonder how that works, PENGASSAN has members in organisations that supply Dangote with basic operational feedstocks like the Nigeria National Petroleum Company Ltd (NNPCL), and their compliance with the union’s directive meant the refinery got starved of those inputs. But PENGASSAN’s war was not restricted to Dangote, and it wasn’t like the association wanted it to be; it spilled over to national terrain as the association ordered its members nationwide to pull their services, thereby hobbling Nigeria’s entire energy sector and not just the 650,000 barrel-per-day output Dangote refinery. 

On Sunday, 28th September, that the association directed its members in various field locations to down tools from 6:00a.m., there were severe gas shortages that resulted in a reduction of national power generation by more than 1,100megawatts. The Nigerian Independent System Operator (NISO) made known that available generation on the national grid dipped from over 4,300mw in the early hours of the day in reference to about 3,200mw at the lowest point – a development that heightened pressure on the grid and necessitated emergency measures to stabilise supply and avert nationwide blackout. Measures applied include “demand-side management” that involved selective load shedding, which in practical terms for the average electricity consumer meant there was no public power supply for much of that day. There were as well snaps in supply lines of petrol and cooking gas to the market for much of last week. Up till the weekend, there were few petrol stations selling fuel in Lagos, and so at exploitative rates, while there were cooking gas shortages that inflated cost where available. The public bore the brunt.

It was not that Dangote Group took the labour challenge laying back. The refinery management denied that it victimised workers for unionising, but rather that it undertook a restructuring from security and efficiency concerns within the organisation. It argued there were of recent incidents of sabotage by some employees at its plant that brought up issues of grave health concern and safety of human lives. Besides, it further argued, only a small portion of its 3,000 Nigerian workforce was affected, and that PENGASSAN’s recourse to disrupting its operations was brigandage writ large. “No law grants PENGASSAN the right to cut off our supplies,” the refinery said in a statement, as it accused the labour body of criminal conduct. It warned that disruption of its operations could significantly harm national fuel supply and revenues, urging government to stop the “reckless conduct.” Well, the public’s experience proved much of its statement true.

“What will PENGASSAN do if Dangote replaces human workforce at its refinery with Artificial Intelligence?”

Dangote Group also approached the National Industrial Court, from which it secured an interim order restraining PENGASSAN from disrupting the refinery’s operations. Justice Emmanuel Subilim granted the ex parte injunction after Dangote refinery argued that the disruption would cause irreparable economic harm. The judge ruled that preserving industrial peace outweighed the union’s actions, and scheduled further hearing in the suit for 13th October, 2025. 

Dangote management and PENGASSAN locked horns even over that court ruling. The association spurned the injunction, arguing that it had not been formally served and could not go by mere media reports. The company, for its part, accused the labour body of evading being served and at some point published the verdict in national newspapers. While the gridlock lasted, the country’s alternate labour centre, the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), directed all its affiliate unions to immediately begin mobilisation for industrial action against Dangote Group – a threat that, if carried through, would have had further devastating consequences on the public. 

Reprieve came only by way of government mediation – first  at closed-door talks moderated by Labour and Employment Minister Mohammed Dingyadi, and Minister of State Nkiruka Onyejeocha at the ministry’s headquarters in Abuja that were deadlocked, and later moved to the Office of National Security Adviser (NSA) Nuhu Ribadu. Reports said the parties eventually agreed that unionisation is a right of workers in accordance with Nigerian laws, and that the right should be respected. The meeting also agreed that the management of Dangote Group shall immediately begin the process of reabsorbing the disengaged workers and move them to other companies within the group, with no loss of pay and with no worker victimised for their role in the labour crisis. PENGASSAN, for its part, agreed to begin the process of calling off the strike. The communique at the end of the meeting added that both parties “agreed to this understanding in good faith.”

The labour association had accused Dangote management of peddling misinformation with the claim that the sacked workers were suspected of sabotage, whereas the real issue was about their right to unionise. Indications were that it was right, otherwise Dangote would not have agreed to reabsorb those workers and redeploy them within the group. The conglomerate, obviously, has issues with unionisation and the effects on its investment interests. Reports at the weekend said the refinery management lately wrote the Nigeria Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG), with which it also had recently squared off, to notify the union of its tanker drivers’ voluntary withdrawal from the body’s membership. It reportedly provided evidence of that voluntary decision and made a pledge to defray attendant financial commitments. So, there’s no question that the conglomerate has union phobia and would rather not have its employees partake.

But can you blame Dangote? The labour wars with which the business venture has had contend by themselves make unionisation unattractive for a private investor who staked his capital to create job opportunities and hopes for reasonable returns on that investment. Besides, it stands to reason that there is no employer who would be comfortable outsourcing control over employees – including the power to hire, fire or retain – to a supra authority called unions. Perhaps what the refinery management did wrong was the stock disengagement of workers on suspicion of unionisation, since the power for individual staff appraisal rests invariably with the management and decisions based on those appraisals inalienably that of the management.

There is indeed a sense in which PENGASSAN’s bid to cripple Dangote’s operations was impetuously short-sighted. Refinery operation is of a kind where the pipes must stay wet or they could rust and develop blockages that could ruin the entire business. The labour association could have pressed its grouse through procedural channels like the industrial court or arbitration panel, or proactively invite government mediation; because if the refinery gets grounded, PENGASSAN’s members would be among those sent out of job.

Two final posers should drive home the point. Labour unions naturally must desire more employment opportunities for their prospective members; but do they consider that the bring-down disposition of labour conversations could scare off investors who would create those jobs? Besides, what will PENGASSAN do if Dangote replaces human workforce at its refinery with Artificial Intelligence?