Casual Employment in Nigeria: Legal Recognition vs. Ethical Practice – A Comprehensive Analysis

The legal recognition of casual employment in Nigeria does not equate to an endorsement of the widespread practice of casualisation. This practice, often tolerated due to pressing socio-economic realities, raises significant questions about worker rights, dignity, and the integrity of labour law. This article provides an in-depth exploration of the legal framework, judicial interpretations, regulatory interventions, and the ongoing legislative efforts to address the exploitation inherent in casual work arrangements.

Understanding Casual Employment and Casualisation

Casual employment, also referred to as Non-Standard Work Arrangement (NSWA), encompasses a range of employment relationships that lack permanence. These include fixed-term contracts, contract work, on-call work, part-time roles, and temporary assignments. The defining characteristic of such arrangements is the systematic deprivation of job security and social benefits—such as pensions, health insurance, and life insurance—that are typically afforded to permanent employees.

It is crucial to distinguish between ‘casual employment’ as a legitimate, short-term work arrangement and ‘casualisation’ as a deliberate strategy by employers to avoid long-term obligations. Casualisation often involves the repeated use of short-term contracts or the misclassification of workers to circumvent labour protections. This practice undermines the fundamental principles of fair labour and social justice.

The Legal Framework: A Patchwork of Definitions and Protections

The Labour Act: A Gap in Statutory Definition

Nigeria’s primary labour legislation, the Labour Act, does not provide a statutory definition of ‘casualisation’ or ‘casual work’. However, it mandates that a worker must not be employed for more than three months without a formal written statement outlining the terms and conditions of employment. This provision implicitly acknowledges the need for formalisation but falls short of addressing the systemic issues of casualisation.

Judicial Interpretation: The Court of Appeal’s Definition

In the landmark case of Owena Mass Transportation Co. Ltd v. Okonogbo, the Court of Appeal defined a casual employee as a worker engaged for a period of less than six months and paid at the end of each day. This definition, while providing some clarity, has been criticised for being narrow and potentially enabling employers to structure engagements to fall within this definition, thereby avoiding permanent status.

The Employees Compensation Act (ECA): An Expanded Definition for Limited Purposes

The Employees Compensation Act (ECA) offers a broader definition of ’employee’, encompassing persons employed under oral or written contracts on a continuous, part-time, temporary, apprenticeship, or casual basis. This includes domestic servants and workers in all sectors of the economy, including government agencies. The ECA’s definition is significant because it extends the right to compensation for workplace death, accidents, and injuries to casual workers. In Abel v. Trevi Foundation Nigeria Limited, the court relied on this definition to award compensation to a contract staff member injured on the job.

Practical Example: A casual labourer hired for a three-month construction project who suffers a workplace injury is entitled to compensation under the ECA, even though they are not a permanent employee. This protection is a critical, albeit limited, safeguard.

Judicial Activism: Protecting the Rights of Casual Workers

Right to Unionise

The National Industrial Court of Nigeria (NIC) has been a progressive force in upholding the rights of casual workers. In Patovilki Industrial Planners Limited v National Union of Hotels and Personal Services Workers, the court affirmed that the definition of ‘worker’ under Section 1(1) of the Trade Unions Act includes both permanent and temporary workers. Consequently, casual workers cannot be deprived of their constitutional and statutory right to join a trade union of their choice. This ruling is a powerful tool for collective bargaining and advocacy.

Condemning Exploitative Practices

In Fatai Oyekunle v Abel Sell Ltd, the NIC delivered a scathing judgment, branding the practice of denying a worker a contract of employment and treating them as a casual worker as ‘demeaning, otiose and no longer an acceptable terminology of description of any Nigerian worker no matter how lowly placed within the current Nigerian Labour and Employment legal regime’. This judicial pronouncement signals a clear shift away from tolerating exploitative casualisation.

Legislative and Regulatory Interventions

The Proposed Labour Act Amendment

The National Assembly is considering a bill to amend the Labour Act that would prohibit and criminalise the casualisation of workers after six months of engagement. If passed, this bill would mandate the regularisation of employees after six months, effectively ending indefinite casualisation. This represents a significant step towards aligning Nigerian law with international labour standards.

Sector-Specific Guidelines

Regulators have also taken action in specific industries to curb exploitation:

• Oil and Gas Sector: The Ministry of Labour and Productivity’s 2011 Guidelines restrict outsourcing to non-core business activities and grant contract staff a right of first refusal for permanent vacancies. They also explicitly protect the right to unionise.
• Banking, Insurance, and Financial Institutions: Similar Guidelines require employers to provide opportunities for self-development, career advancement (with promotions within three years), and regular employment where vacancies exist. They also mandate annual salary increments, unionisation rights, and fair disciplinary procedures.

Practical Example: A bank that outsources its security personnel must ensure they are given opportunities for career growth and are not indefinitely kept on temporary contracts. If a permanent security guard position opens, the outsourced staff must be considered first.

Conclusion: The Path Forward

While Nigerian law recognises casual employment, the practice of casualisation remains a deeply problematic issue. The legal framework is evolving, with courts and regulators increasingly pushing back against exploitative arrangements. The proposed Labour Act amendment, if enacted, would be a game-changer. However, true change requires a multi-faceted approach: robust enforcement of existing laws, continued judicial activism, proactive regulatory oversight, and a shift in employer mindset towards valuing worker dignity and security. The goal should not be to eliminate all forms of non-standard work, but to ensure that no worker is subjected to indefinite precarity and that all workers enjoy fundamental rights and protections.

Jamiu Akolade, MCIArb, is the Founder of The Employment and Labour Lawyers Association of Nigeria (ELLAN), Member Management Committee of the African Labour Law Society and the Author of The Employment Law Handbook.

All credit goes to the original article. For more information, read the: Source link