Question marks
The Petroleum and Natural Gas Senior Staff Association of Nigeria (PENGASSAN) has opposed the planned sale of Shell’s onshore assets…
The Petroleum and Natural Gas Senior Staff Association of Nigeria (PENGASSAN) has opposed the planned sale of Shell’s onshore assets, expressing concern over the lack of a proven track record among the potential buyers. PENGASSAN, issuing a national strike notice, alleged that one of the companies in the prospective group mistreats workers, citing its handling of OML 34. Another company in the group is accused of hindering workers’ unionisation. PENGASSAN’s General Secretary, Lumumba Okugbawa, warns of strong resistance if asset transfer proceeds without addressing issues affecting members, emphasising the potential for the most significant industry resistance.
Shell has had a troubled history in Nigeria since it discovered its first commercially viable oilfield in 1956 at Oloibiri, in modern-day Bayelsa State. The company, through its various ventures, produces about 500,000 barrels of oil per day (about a third of current production), making Shell the country’s largest private-sector oil and gas conglomerate in Nigeria. However, after decades of reported oil spills which went unpunished, Shell is now being held to account after some local and foreign court rulings. At the moment, more than 14,0000 residents of the Niger Delta have filed claims against Shell, asking that the company cleans up oil spills which they say have wrecked their livelihoods, poisoned their wells, and polluted their land and water, which means they can no longer farm or fish. However, while Shell maintains that over 95 percent of the spill incidents in its operations are caused by sabotage, the company has decided to minimise its contacts with host communities, hence the planned sales of all its onshore assets and liabilities. A labour union passing a vote of no confidence is not novel in the Nigerian context. While PENGASSAN’s concerns about selling Shell’s onshore assets are valid, addressing union-related issues through a transaction may not be the most effective approach. This practice of disparaging organisations when an investment is to be made does not paint the country positively. More often than not, it only complicates processes and extends the timeline of concluding deals. All this matters in the grand scheme of the ease of doing business. PENGASSAN should, instead, consider channelling their grievances related to worker subjugation and union prevention to the appropriate regulatory and labour authorities. By engaging in dialogue with these entities, PENGASSAN can ensure that labour-related issues are appropriately addressed without potentially jeopardising a private sector transaction. This approach would allow for a more targeted resolution, fostering a constructive environment for industrial relations and business transactions. It is crucial to navigate these concerns through established channels to balance safeguarding workers’ rights and facilitating business transactions within the private sector.