Comrade Fadipe Moses is a National Executive Council member of Amalgamated Union of Public Corporation, Civil Service Technical and Recreational Employees Services (AUPCTRE) He spoke with Shipping Position Daily correspondent, Dapo Olawuni on the face-off between the Nigeria Shippers’ Council, shipping companies and the terminal operators and the implication of the court case on Nigerian economy.
Comrade Fadipe Moses is a National Executive Council member of Amalgamated Union of Public Corporation, Civil Service Technical and Recreational Employees Services (AUPCTRE) He spoke with Shipping Position Daily correspondent, Dapo Olawuni on the face-off between the Nigeria Shippers’ Council, shipping companies and the terminal operators and the implication of the court case on Nigerian economy.
What do you think of the face-off between port concessionaires, shipping companies and the Nigeria Shippers’ Council?
It has come to the knowledge of Amalgamated Union of Public Corporations, Civil Service Technical and Recreational Services Employees (AUPCTRE), that some stakeholders in the maritime sector are threatening the management of Nigerian Shippers’ Council (NSC) to disrupt the nation’s maritime economy in respect of a subject bothering on port charges which is part of the functions, and objective for establishing Shippers’ Council as the economic regulator for the nation’s port system. The affected terminal operators and shipping companies took the matter to court and prayed for an interlocutory injunction to refrain the Council from such reversal, but the court did not grant the request. Rather, the court directed that the matter be listed for hearing and a date has been fixed.
It is inconceivable to comprehend why some maritime sector stakeholders would collaborate and deploy coercive powers to secure through the window what they could not get through the door.
The Nigerian Shippers’ Council (NSC) was established in 1978. Its enabling Act Cap 133 laws of the Federation 2004 provides for amongst others and I quite: “Forum for the protection of the interest of the Nigerian Shippers (Importers and Exporters) on matters affecting the shipment of imports and exports to and from Nigerian and advise the Federal Government on all matters relating to freight rates, availability and adequacy of shipping space, terms of shipment, port charges and facilities and generally on problems of the country’s shipping industry.’’
The NSC serves as an agent of economic development through interventions and providing solutions to the problems of the shipping industry. A “shipper” is at liberty to call on Nigerian Shippers’ Council for any exploitative or excess charges in his shipping business as it relates to its mandates at various times.
It will be necessary to mention that the Council have the right/power to direct terminal operators and shipping companies to reverse their charges because the NSC had over the years been intervening in Tariffs apart from Port Charges; such as freight rates stabilization, ensuring zero increase from 1986 to 1992, even new freight benchmarks were negotiated in 2013; negotiated Haulage rates with Road Hauliers (Joint Action Committee of Transport Owners (JACOTO) within Lagos and environs, which led to specific reduction in haulage rates.
Also NSC negotiated and fixed the cost of haulage for Bulk Cargoes from north to the east with Nigerian Railway Corporation (NRC) and was actively involved in working out the Benchmark Freight rate for calculating Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA)’s 3% gross freight rates earnings on import and export.
The NSC intervention in tariffs stems further to confirm the reasonableness of freight rates and charter party hire (fees) for the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) to regulate utilization of foreign exchange and stem capital flight. This has saved the nation over $2 Billion over a period of five years.
Of note for the purpose of this enlightenment is the fact that it was the same Shippers Council that promoted the need for Progressive Storage Charges by Terminal Operators to discourage the use of water front as storage to avert port congestion, achieved minimum delay in cargo clearance and created uniformity in penalising breach of set standards. But today the terminal operators and shipping companies have turned that laudable initiative of the Council to a money spinning syndrome.
Apart from tariffs regulation, the Shippers Council equally regulates the quality of transport services and all these interventions are to influence the market behaviour of individuals and organisations in the private and public sector to monitor and correct any disorder in the workings of free market.
Now that the case is in court, do you see any light at the end of the tunnel?
Yes, absolutely, let me quickly inform you that the Nigerian Shippers’ Council Act 13 of 1978 now Nigerian Shippers’ Council Cap. N133, laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 2004 was based on the 1965 United Nations Conference o Trade and Development (UNCTAD) recommendation. This urged developing countries to create National Shippers’ Council as public sector authorities to act as a countervailing force against the exploitative excesses of foreign ship owners and other providers of shipping and related services. Also the 1997 Cotonou II World Bank roundtable conference on Maritime Trade in West and Central Africa resolved that Shippers’ Councils should protect shippers throughout the transport chain which covers the entire transport chain from door to door and this led to the performance of regulatory functions by most Shippers Council in the sub- region, for example; Senegalese Shippers Council, Ghana Shippers Authority, Cameroonian Shippers Council and so on. Therefore, the function of Nigerian Shippers’ Council under section 3 of its enabling Act allows her to determine port charges and facilities including other related matters.
Apart from this main Act, there are other legal instruments upon which the Nigerian Shippers’ Council carries out its functions. There is Nigerian Shippers’ Council local shipping charges on imports and exports regulation of 1997, there is the Nigerian Shippers’ Council inland container depot regulation of 2007, and the Nigerian Shippers’ Council Container freight regulation of 2007.
It would interest you to note that the contents of the local shipping charges on Imports and Exports Regulation of 1997 gave the council power to negotiate Port tariffs and rates, power to negotiate local shipping charges, power to publish such charges to the exclusion of any person whether private or public on a periodical basis, or as often as it may deem fit.
So therefore what is all this hullabaloo or noise making by these so called terminal operators and shipping companies? They are making noise because there is a seeming light at the end of the tunnel which will expose and put a stop to all their exploitative tendencies over the poor hapless shippers. And don’t forget the nation’s economy is at stake as is evident in all the happening within the port industry today.
How will you react to the fact that MWUN had threatened a strike action in solidarity with terminal operators?
I think the time has come for labour to be proactive in whatever decision they are taking in the interest of their members and the entire country. No single individual is greater than the country and your personal interest must not be seen to override the national interest. First and foremost, is it a collective decision of branches, when and at what fora, where and who presided over such meeting. I am posing these questions because I know that the junior workers of Shippers’ Council who are part and parcel of Maritime Workers Union claimed no such meeting occurred and have even threatened to withdraw membership from the said body if they refused to withdraw that obnoxious and kangaroo decision by only one personality within that body. My take on this matter is that Unionism is a collective decision and when such are taken unilaterally, then one begins to ask questions. If the proponent of that decision knows that it runs contrary to the Trade Dispute and Essential Services Act sections 1 (a) (b) and 2 (1)(a) , probably they will rescind such decision with immediate effect. I think it is not too late for them to rescind such decision, meet with stakeholders within the industry to get up to date information and why they should not be involved in actions that can disrupt the economy. Can you tell me any country in the whole world where port charges and rates are conceived, determined and published by the operators themselves without recourse to a regulatory body? Can you tell me equally where services are rendered without anybody to determine whether it is commensurate to the amount being paid? Why is it that it is only in Nigeria that a shipper cannot determine the cost of clearance of a cargo prior to arrival of such cargo. I can go on and on and on. So, what we are saying is that it cannot be business as usual, so the MWUN members must have a rethink on their action, because Amalgamated Union of Public Corporations, Civil Service Technical and Recreational Services will not fold its arm and allow this obnoxious happening continue in our ports.
Do you think MWUN is being railroaded by the terminal operators?
Definitely yes, an adage that says, “He who pays the piper dictates the tune”. MWUN members are employees of the terminal operators and they are the one who determines their salary and other allowances, so one is not surprised by the action of their action.
Also it was rumoured that they negotiate their condition of service every year which equally places them at a disadvantaged position and makes them vulnerable to all sort of obnoxious rules.
What is your advice to concerned stakeholders, now that the matter has been taken to the court?
We wish to further advice stakeholders to allow the Court to determine the matter of port charges. In the words of John August, Executive Director of the Coalition of Kaiser Permanente Unions, USA, in his speech titled: “Why Unions Should Be Part of the Delivery System Changes,” in May 2010, “Unions need to initiate and take the lead to improve the quality of (services provided to the public) care of patients and find ways to cut costs. Unions can’t allow themselves to be bystanders but instead must be champions for these changes.” We totally subscribe to his view because when we consider the employment or industrial relations topography, it becomes clear that we are all on the same side for the purpose of serving the public; the masses’’. This, we strongly believe is the essence of effective governance. AUPCTRE will soon publish and enlighten Nigerians on the implication of the terminal operators and shipping companies’ obnoxious charges on the Nigerian economy and the citizenry.
Discussion about this post