Breaking News

GAT: Aviation workers disagree over planned strike

By Kenneth Ehigiator & By  Ise-Oluwa Ige

LAGOS—Plans by industrial unions to shut down the airspace today in protest against the Federal Government’s handover of the General Aviation Terminal (GAT) of the Murtala Muhammed Airport, Ikeja, Lagos, to Bi-Courtney Aviation Services Limited may come to nought, as some key unions offering essential services for flight operations have feigned ignorance of any strike.

Last weekend, the leaders of the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN), chapter of the National Union of Air Transport Employees (NUATE) and Air Transport Services Senior Staff Association of Nigeria (ATSSSAN), had declared  plans to embark on the strike without carrying along those who carry out essential service, such as air traffic controllers (ATCs).

The national presidents of the two unions were not present at the briefing addressed by the union leaders in FAAN, at the weekend, because they were said not to be favourably disposed to the strike yet, apparently still waiting for President Umaru Yar’Adua to invite them for the planned meeting to resolve issues concerning the handover.

The National President of the National Association of Air Traffic Controllers (NATCA), Mr. Jubril Haske, was said to have feigned ignorance of any strike, and that nobody had notified them that they were embarking on an industrial action.

Court reviews MM2 concession deal Oct 20

Also, the Abuja division of the Court of Appeal has fixed October 20, to review a verdict of a Federal High Court, Abuja, which okayed the purported grant of concession by the Federal Government to Bi Courtney Limited for the management of the Murtala Muhammed Airport 11 Terminal, Lagos, for 36 years.

The appellate court fixed the date for the review following an application by an aviation services firm, Ojemaie Investment Limited.

Although Ojemaie was not listed as a defendant in the suit before the court of first instance,  it has filed an application for joinder and another notice to seek the review of the said high court verdict.

In the processes filed by the aviation services firm, it is contending that the verdict of the court must be voided for two reasons including that the judgment was procured by fraud and deliberate suppression of material facts necessary to guide the court to enter a considered judgment in the case.


Comments expressed here do not reflect the opinions of vanguard newspapers or any employee thereof.