In 1993, workers of Union Bank of Nigeria Ltd were embroiled in a bitter dispute with their employer over terms of collective engagement. When management ignored the grievances of employees, the workers through their recognised union, considered industrial action as a last resort. The Court of Appeal in Union Bank of Nigeria Plc v. Edet recognised that when collective bargaining fails, recourse to strike action may be justified to compel employers to honour agreed terms.[1] Yet, Nigeria’s legal framework places many pre-conditions on industrial action, making lawful strikes highly regulated rather than an unfettered right. Workers and trade unions continue to grapple with statutory restrictions that limit the exercise of industrial action in pursuit of economic and social justice.
This article examines the legal and constitutional basis for trade union rights and the right to strike in Nigeria, analyses the statutory framework governing industrial action, discusses relevant judicial authorities, and assesses the extent to which the right to strike operates in practice. This article seeks to clarify the legal parameters of trade unionism and strike action under Nigerian law, demonstrate how the law circumscribes that right through statutory conditions, and evaluate the tension between constitutional freedoms and regulatory restraints.
Legal Framework Governing Trade Unions
1. Constitutional Foundation
Nigeria’s Constitution guarantees certain fundamental rights relevant to trade union activity, including the freedom of association and assembly. Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution(as amended) provides that every person shall be entitled to assemble freely and associate with others, and in particular may form or belong to any trade union or other association for the protection of his interests.[2] This provision has been interpreted broadly as encompassing collective bargaining and union formation, which form the foundation for workers’ ability to organise and pursue industrial action.
However, the Constitution does not expressly guarantee a right to strike, unlike jurisdictions where the right is specifically entrenched. Instead, strike rights in Nigeria derive from labour statutes supported by constitutional freedoms.[3]
2. Statutory Basis: Trade Unions Act & Amendments
The Trade Unions Act as amended by the Trade Unions (Amendment) Act 2005, regulates the formation, registration and operations of trade unions in Nigeria. It also places conditions on lawful strike action.[4]
Under Section 31(6) of the amended Act, no person, trade union, or employer shall take part in a strike unless a number of conditions are met, including that:
- the union is not engaged in essential services;
- the dispute is a dispute of right (as opposed to mere disputes of interest);
- the dispute arises from a fundamental breach of contract or collective agreement;
- the provisions for arbitration in the Trade Disputes Act are complied with;
- and a secret ballot of members is conducted, with a simple majority voting in favour of the strike.
These conditions reflect the legislature’s intention to control industrial action by imposing a procedural and substantive framework before workers can legitimately embark on a strike.
3. Trade Disputes Act 2004
The Trade Disputes Act (Cap T8, LFN 2004) defines a strike and outlines the compulsory settlement mechanisms that must be exhausted before industrial action becomes lawful. Section 48(1) defines a strike as the cessation of work by a body of persons in combination, or refusal to continue to work as a means of compelling acceptance or rejection of terms of employment or conditions of work.[5]
More critically, Section 18 prohibits workers from striking (and employers from lockouts) where prescribed procedures under the Act, such as referral to conciliation, mediation, or arbitration, have not been complied with.[6] Failure to comply renders a strike illegal, carrying potential fines or criminal penalties.[7]
Judicial Recognition of the Right to Strike
1. Union Bank of Nigeria Plc v. Edet (1993) 4 NWLR (Pt. 287) 288
In Union Bank of Nigeria Plc v. Edet, the Court of Appeal acknowledged that a strike may be a legitimate part of collective bargaining where fundamental employment breaches occur.[8] Although Nigerian law imposes conditions on strike actions, the court recognised that strike action is functional to collective bargaining and may be resorted to when all other avenues fail.[9]
This judgment remains one of the key authorities supporting the notion that trade unions can legitimately employ collective action, including strikes, in the defence of worker interests subject to legal constraints.
2. Academic Staff Union of Universities Case
In labour disputes such as Federal Government of Nigeria & Ors v. Academic Staff Union of Universities, the National Industrial Court has held that strike action is a last resort for protecting trade union rights, and that unions must demonstrate compliance with statutory preconditions before a strike can be judicially justified.[10] Courts consistently treat strike actions within a statutory and judicial framework that requires prior processes such as arbitration and conciliation to be followed.
Limitations on the Trade Unions Right to Strike
1. Procedural Pre-conditions
As noted under Section 31(6) of the Trade Unions Act, a lawful strike must meet conditions including:
- Arbitration processes under the Trade Disputes Act;
- Secret ballot approval by a majority of union members; and
- Exclusion of strike actions in essential services.[11]
These preconditions make lawful strike action highly regulated. Several commentators argue that these outcomes may undermine the practical ability of unions to strike, particularly as the balloting requirement (simple majority of all registered members) can be difficult to achieve swiftly.
2. Essential Services
Workers engaged in essential services are further restricted. While not absolutely prohibited from striking, they may be required to give additional notice and follow stricter legal processes before any industrial action.
3. National Industrial Court Oversight
The National Industrial Court of Nigeria has primary jurisdiction over labour and trade disputes including challenges to the legality of strikes. The Court has affirmed that strike rights are not absolute and must be reconciled with legal requirements to ensure public order and economic stability.
Tension Between Law and Practice
Although Nigerian law recognises unions and allows industrial action, the statutory preconditions and potential penalties for unlawful strikes have led to debates about whether the right to strike remains meaningful or effectively circumscribed. For example, strict conditions under Section 31(6) and the Trade Disputes Act have often been interpreted as limiting the ability of unions to respond promptly to employer conduct, forcing heavy reliance on arbitration mechanisms that delay resolution.
Some commentators contend that these procedural hurdles, combined with the absence of a specific constitutional guarantee for the right to strike, mean that trade unions’ ability to effectively exercise industrial action is constrained, despite constitutional freedoms of association.
Nevertheless, Nigerian workers continue to rely on strikes as a bargaining tool, as seen in recent actions by trade unions (e.g., national oil workers’ strike actions in 2025) which exert significant economic and political pressure, albeit often leading to negotiated settlements before prolonged disruption.
Conclusion
Nigeria’s legal regime recognises trade unions and allows for strike action, but not as an unfettered right. The framework comprising the Constitution, the Trade Unions Act (and its 2005 amendment), and the Trade Disputes Act creates a conditional, procedural right to strike that requires compliance with strict statutory requirements. Judicial authorities like Union Bank of Nigeria Plc v. Edet affirm that strike action is a legitimate albeit regulated component of collective bargaining. However, commentators argue that statutory restrictions have effectively limited the practical exercise of the right to strike.
Ultimately, the right to strike in Nigeria exists within a delicate balance protecting workers’ capacity to negotiate while ensuring that industrial action does not threaten public order or essential services. Whether this balance sufficiently respects workers’ rights remains a matter for legislative refinement and judicial clarification.
[1] Union Bank of Nigeria Plc v. Edet (1993) 4 NWLR (Pt. 287) 288 (CA).
[2] Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, as amended. Section 40 (freedom of association).
[3] The right to strike is not expressly provided in the Constitution but derived partly from Section 40 and labour statutes.
[4] Trade Unions Act (Cap T14, LFN 2004).
[5] Trade Disputes Act (Cap T8), Section 48(1) (definition of “strike”).
[6] Trade Disputes Act, Section 18 (conditions that prohibit strike where settlement mechanisms are in progress).
[7] Violation of the Trade Disputes Act provisions on strikes may attract criminal liability.
[8] Supa note 1.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Federal Government of Nigeria v. Academic Staff Union of Universities (NICN).
[11] Supra note 5.
CONTRIBUTORS
Lead Partner, EKO SOLICITORS & ADVOCATES
Graduate Trainee, EKO SOLICITORS & ADVOCATES
Bessie Obort Ofuka
Graduate Trainee, EKO SOLICITORS & ADVOCATES