• Warns current labour focus ignores post-service welfare gap

By Victor Ahiuma-Young

The organised private sector has called for urgent reforms in Nigeria’s social protection system, insisting that both active workers and retirees deserve structured welfare support beyond their years of service.

The Director-General of the Nigeria Employers’ Consultative Association, NECA, Mr. Adewale-Smatt Oyerinde, in an interview with Vanguard said it was unfair for labour and policy discussions to focus only on serving employees while ignoring those who have exited the workforce.

He argued that existing social insurance mechanisms, such as the Nigeria Social Insurance Trust Fund, NSITF, should be strengthened to cover long-term risks, including injuries or illnesses that may manifest after retirement.

Oyerinde also proposed practical welfare interventions for retirees, including subsidised transport access and discounted essential goods, saying such measures would enhance social protection and dignity in retirement.

“For example, the NSITF is meant to provide compensation for workers injured in the course of employment. A worker may serve for 30 years without injury, during which employers have made contributions on his behalf. If that person leaves service and suffers an injury two years later, is it fair to say he is no longer our concern simply because he is no longer in active service? He has already contributed significantly to the system.

“The same logic should apply to retirees. There is nothing preventing government from introducing structured support systems—for example, transport cards that allow retirees to access public transport, or programmes that provide discounted access to essential goods and services. These are social protection mechanisms.

“Yes, there may be concerns about abuse, but we already see such issues in other public programmes. We cannot avoid designing necessary systems because of potential misuse. That is the responsibility of proper social insurance design.

“Unfortunately, this is not yet a central focus of organised labour, even though it is a very important conversation. If someone works for 25 or 30 years and then leaves service, and later develops a work-related illness, there should be a safety net. The current arrangement does not adequately reflect that reality.

“We should also recognise that some occupational illnesses or injuries only manifest years after retirement, especially for workers in hazardous environments. That is why this conversation is important.

“The question is: what happens after service? This is a fundamental issue that will determine commitment within the workforce. People need to know that even after leaving service, there is some level of protection and support.”

On the debate around reinstating gratuity, he said the private sector had long moved away from the system, opting instead to strengthen pension contributions linked to salary structures.

He explained that pension systems in the private sector automatically adjust with wage increases, unlike gratuity schemes, which he suggested are no longer sustainable for employers.

Oyerinde added that government operates a fundamentally different revenue structure from the private sector, making direct comparisons between both systems inappropriate, even as he affirmed that private employers remain committed to improving workers’ welfare through existing pension frameworks.