PAGE 12
Opinion
PEOPLES DAILY, FRIDAY, March 22, 2019
The uneasiness of Uber female drivers in Lagos By Rafiq Raji
T
he odds that you would happen on a female Uber driver in Lagos are slim. Still, Nigeria is not Saudi Arabia; women are free to do whatever they like here. Well, mostly. And if you make the error of thinking they could not drive any better than their male counterparts, kindly try fighting for the right of way with a woman in Lagos traffic. Needless to say, you may hesitate to do so next time. There are probably as many women as there are men on Lagos roads. Women at the wheel of public transport vehicles are not as many though. It is not the norm. So even as there are many of them driving all sorts of vehicles in their private capacities, from those with little engines to the ubiquitous sports utility vehicles (SUVs), it is still a novelty to find female chauffeurs. If there are, they would certainly be reluctant to work for men. And their fellow women are not likely to hire them. Wives would certainly shudder at the thought in these parts. And even Uber itself found out all too quickly how difficult it was to secure cars from “partners” (car owners) for their few female drivers. That is, when the firm used to facilitate the connection. Now, it does not. At least, that is what Blessing Onuh, one of the ridesharing firm’s first female drivers in Lagos says. “I was actually the first female Uber (driver) that went for the exams…there were more than hundred guys and I was the only lady…they actually thought I was one of the officials.” A few years ago, having just arrived from Abuja, after being let go at a government job over there, Blessing took an interest in being an Uber driver after taking a ride with one. She applied, did the training and eventually got a car. As alluded to earlier, that last bit did not come about easily. Many of
the car owners she approached turned her down for no other reason than she was a woman. “Women have issues”, was the typical refrain. As Blessing herself admits, many potential riders would cancel their trips the moment they see her picture. When asked how she knew this, she says since she is able to tell from the app if she is the only driver in an area, and if a potential rider cancels a trip persistently, there could be only one reason why. It turns out that a couple of those who did choose to take a ride with her sometimes did so for mischievous reasons. One was “laughing and touching my lap” during a trip, she vouchsafes. Even as she stood firm against his advances, he persisted. Eventually, she stopped the car and confronted him. He got the message. Even then, the male rider was furious. He wondered how she could be indifferent to the “dollars” he was flashing, and so on. “If you don’t want it, you say you don’t want it”, was his final remonstration. It also turns out that male drivers also get sexually harrassed. Some female riders, upon reaching their destinations, would instead of paying the fare, offer to pay in kind, Blessing reveals, confirming views from an earlier interview with one of her male colleagues, who says he never took anyone of them up on the offer. But surely she must have liked some of the riders who made advances at her, and perhaps dated one? After a while, she admits to having dated one. He was not like the others who would say “come to my house!” at the slightest chance, she says with a chuckle. “That ‘come to my house’ is so annoying”, she adds. Let us just say she thought this one was a gentleman and was vindicated afterwards by how he treated her; going on interesting dates and so on. It did not last, though. What happened? “I did not have time for that
relationship.” On a date one time, while watching a movie at the cinema, Blessing glanced at her phone and understandably, perused an ongoing chat in the Uber group (there are many) on WhatsApp she was a member of. Something caught her attention: A driver announced he had just made a huge sum from a trip. She stood up and left for the door. “I just told him I’m coming I want to use the restroom”. She did not go to the bathroom. Blessing went back to work. Of course, she lost the gentleman. Like her male colleagues, she has mouths to feed, school fees to pay for siblings and so on. And like everybody else, her fixation on her economic goals have come at a personal cost. But how safe is it for a female Uber driver in Lagos? Has she been attacked before? “I have been harrassed, they blocked me. But they didn’t take anything because I fought back. I lost a fingernail…We got to Yaba, an isolated area, so I told him the price – N2000 and something, and he was like ‘give me your phone’; I laughed, I thought maybe now, maybe he is trying to crack me up or scare me”. No, he was not. Her friends told her she should give up her phone the next time. Blessing insists, “anything that has to do with my money, I have to fight for it.” Apart from driving for Uber, Blessing also drives clients to locations outside Lagos. Asked if she is ever worried about the risks. She takes precautions, working only with people she has known for a while or referred to by trusted acquaintances. And at the destination, she lodges at a different hotel from the client. As many females would admit, most men in Lagos would make advances at women they find attractive; especially one whose details they already have via the Uber app. Harassment is rare, however. But with their phone numbers in hand, Blessing and
the other few female drivers get a barrage of calls. Solution? She keeps two phones. And for the business line, she blocks the errant male callers. Ironically, it is the female riders that tend to be more problematic. “I don’t talk to drivers”, goes one. And when making requests, some do so at the top of their voice, barely hiding their disdain. “Transferred aggression” is what Blessing calls it. Cash in hand afterwards, Blessing could care less. It is a hustle. It must be a lucrative venture, then. Not as much as before, she admits. Uber used to take a lower cut of their earnings before. But yes, it still pays the bills. In a good week, she could earn as much as N100,000. A bad week is when she earns half as much. Out of that amount, she makes a weekly payment of N30,000 to fulfil her hire purchase agreement obligations. The car would be hers after she completes the payments. Any future plans? Wouldn’t she rather do something else? Does she not want to settle down? And clearly there are not many Nigerian men, if any, that would allow her continue as an Uber driver after taking their vows. Most female Uber drivers are single or divorced with kids. She would not mind being a housewife if she finds a good husband, Blessing admits. As the retail business interests her, a supermarket might be something she would try her hands on. She could also buy cars for drivers to make payments to her; become a “partner”, that is. Does Uber provide any support for its female drivers? There is a “Woman Week”, Blessing says. But she believes they could do much more. Rafiq Raji, a writer and researcher, is based in Lagos, Nigeria
Workers are not benefiting from Privatized Pension System
By Eugene Uduigwome
W
hen the Contributory Pension Scheme commenced in 2004, many Nigerian believed that the Person Reform Act of 2004 was introduced for the benefit of workers and ultimately pensioners. More than a decade after, is this privatized model of contributory pension, really benefitting workers and pensioners in Nigeria? My intuition tells me that, few persons who were and are still major players in our banking sector, may have convinced Government in power in 2004, to impose Chile’s Model of contributing pension system on Nigeria Workers. These persons had an ulterior motive, for desiring the privatized system because they knew that Chile’s Model would provide for them a veritable source of virtually, free public funds to ply their trade and with the adoption of this privatized system, these few individuals have indeed achieved their aim. Pension Fund Custodians and several Pension Fund Administrators are subsidiaries of commercial banks and major insurance companies in Nigeria. These Pension Fund Companies have been licensed by Government to keep, invest and generally administer pension funds on behalf of Nigeria Workers. Today, these Pension Fund Companies are literally feasting on the contributions of Nigeria Workers, albeit legally. Every year, Pension Fund Companies in Nigeria declare huge profits without a corresponding growth on the retirement savings account of Nigeria Workers who are contributors to the Scheme, a large chunk of the profit these Pension Fund Companies make end up in “Warehouse Pockets” (Deep Pockets) of owners of Pension Fund Companies and yet workers were told that the Pension Reform Act is for their benefit – what a lie. Those who are substantially benefitting from this Pension Act are owners of Pension Fund Companies and, it is objectionable. In Chile Workers have embarked on strikes and street protest since 2013 and ever since they have continued to protest sometimes up to four times yearly in subsequent years, against the Privatized Pension System, which they claim has not provided them with decent retirement benefit since it was introduced in 1981, and that only Pension Fund Companies and big companies are benefitting from the Privatized Pension System. The leader of Central Labour Unions that organized the strike in Chile in 2013, said “The AFP System has failed, provide Poverty Level Pension and must be brought to an end” (Source Equal Times of 11th July, 2013). On the 24th October, 2018, Chilean Workers again embarked on street protest against the Pension System being managed by Pension Fund Companies and they have resolved to continue their protest until the Privatized Pension System is changed. Here in Nigeria, many of the objectives of the Pension Reform Act have not been fulfilled.
One of the key objectives of the Act is that Nigeria Workers will receive their retirements benefit “As and when due and not later than three months after retirement”, but today, retirees have to wait for up to fifteen (15) Months or more before they get their retirement benefits. The Pension Reform Act also indicates that retirees would not get less than Fifty (50%) Percent of their terminal salaries as Monthly Pension when they retire, but many Federal Retirees under this Pension Reform Act, receive far less than Fifty (50%) Percent of their terminal salary as Monthly Pension. Where is the justice in a Pension Reform Act where employees who retire on higher terminal salaries receive lower Monthly Pension than their colleagues who retired on lower terminal salaries, under the Defined Benefit Scheme? The Pension Reform Act of 2004 exempted employees who had Three (3) Years to retire form 25th of June, 2004 from the Contributory Pension Scheme, the disparity between the monthly pension of retirees under the PRA and those who retired under the defined benefit scheme would have been substantially resolved if the number of years for employees who have Three (3) Years to retire from 25th of June, 2004 had been extended to Six (6) Years in the Pension Reform Act of 2014. Apparently, those who drafted the Pension Reform Act of 2014 did not want to “Upset the apple cart”. A shift from Three (3) to Six (6) Years for employees to be exempted from the scheme would have resulted to sending officers who retired from 25th June, 2007 up till 30th June, 2010 back to the Defined Benefit System, where they would have retired gracefully. However, sending this group of retirees back to the Old System (DBS) would have reduced the earnings of Pension Fund Companies, as a result, this group of retirees have been used as “guinea pigs” in a Privatized Pension System that was Ab initio set up in Nigeria for the benefit of Pension Fund Companies and to provide capital for banks and big companies. Consequently, the Monthly Pension of some early retirees under the Pension Reform Act was stopped for some months recently by Pension Fund Administrators, due to insufficient funds in their retirement savings accounts, whereas retirees who retired decades ago under the defunct benefit scheme have been receiving their Monthly Pension without any brake. Obviously, the Pension Reform Act does not guarantee pension for life. Since 2004, PENCOM is yet to approve a minimum pension guarantee, under this act. The Pension Reform Act allows contributors to move from one PFA to another once a year if they so desire, but up till date contributors have remained stuck to one PFA, because PENCOM is yet to approve change of PFA’s. In compliance with the provisions of 173(3) of the Nigeria Constitution (as amended) Pension
Transitional Arrangement Department (PTAD) based on Federal Government Circulars have increased the Monthly Pension of Retirees under its purview by Twelve and Thirty Three Percent (12 & 33%) and have almost finished the payment for the arrears of the Thirty Three (33%) Percent Pension increase. Till date, PENCOM is yet to pay a dime to some Federal Retirees under the Pension Reform Act who are also entitled to Twelve and Thirty Three (12 & 33%) Percent Pension Increase. Where did PTAD get money to pay the pension increments, and why has PENCOM failed to do same. When the Privatized System commenced in Chile, state officials, the army, police and some security agencies were exempted from the scheme in Chile. Workers in Chile who were already in service were giving the option to remain in the defined benefit scheme or switch over to the new scheme managed by pension fund companies. Only workers who were employed after the commencement of the privatized system were made to compulsorily enroll into the new system in Chile. The Nigeria Army after observing that retired junior officers who retired under the old scheme were receiving higher monthly pension than senior officers who retired under the privatized scheme, rightly requested to opt out of the privatized system which led to their exit from the privatized scheme vide pension reform (amendment) act 2011. Most of the problems in the privatized scheme would not have arisen if workers in Nigeria who were in service before the commencement of the Pension Reform Act were also given the option to remain in the old system (DBS) or switch to the new system like their counterparts in Chile. Why are our labour leaders in Nigeria not on the same page with their colleagues in Chile? Why have they not engaged government to address the obvious problems inherent in this Pension Reform Act. Are our labour leaders benefitting from this privatized system? The answer to this question in the words of Bob Dylan (A Famous American Artist) “is blowing in the wind”. However, the Nigeria Labour Congress and the Trade Union Congress are major share holders in a Pension Fund Company and their company and all other Pension Fund Companies in Nigeria are blossoming while Nigeria Workers are groaning under this Act and retirees under the Act are suffocating. Since the commencement of the Pension Reform Act, the retirement benefits of workers have been considerably slashed, but the retirement and severance benefits of political office holders in Nigeria have been increasing since 1999. PENCOM is yet to deny media reports that it recently requested for and got Federal Government Approval for about Three Hundred (300%) Percent increase in the severance benefit for PENCOM Management Staff. The increase in the retirement benefit for PENCOM Management Staff is really absurd and insensitive, since it came at a
time when PENCOM, reduced the lump sum benefit of retirees from Twenty Five (25%) Percent to Twenty (20%) Percent of the balance in their retirement savings account. Why can’t we create our own unique pension system in Nigeria? Would a defined contributory cum defined benefit Pension System not be better than the system in operation now? Why do we need appendages of commercial banks in Nigeria to Warehouse Pension Fund? Why should excessive profit making middle men in whatever guise be allowed to administer pension funds? Why can’t the Central Bank of Nigeria, be allowed to warehouse pension funds in Nigeria? For me, the Central Bank of Nigeria ought to be the Sole Custodian of Pension Funds, and the Central Bank of Nigeria could also invest pension fund on behalf of Nigeria Workers, by channeling pension funds through existing development finance institutions, so that Eligible Nigerians, Fund Managers, (not Pension Fund Managers) Big Companies, Owners of Micro, Small and Medium Size Enterprises, including serving and retired workers who are the real owners of pension funds, could easily obtain loans for various purposes. Today, Pension Transitional Arrangement Department (PTAD) is performing very well in the payment of retirees under the Defined Pension Scheme. Why can’t we have another properly supervised office for the payment of retirees in the Federal Public Sector under a defined contributory cum defined benefit scheme, and a third office for those in the private sector. Why is the living condition of retirees under the privatized not at par with their colleagues in the old scheme? The poor living conditions of retirees under the Pension Reform Act in Nigeria may predispose workers to engage in corrupt practices. If Government really intends to dissuade workers in Nigeria from unwholesome acts, them there is need to revisit the Pension Reform Act 2014, with a view to providing workers in Nigeria with a retirement system that would genuinely cater for the welfare of retired workers. For me, the notion that Pension Fund Companies invest pension funds for the benefit of workers is the greatest deceit of the twentieth and I dare say twenty first centuries. Pension Fund Companies invest pension funds for their selfish gains; they do not care if workers on retirement end up with meager retirement benefits. The iniquitous pension system in Nigeria managed by Pension Fund Companies, which only benefits banks, big companies and owners of Pension Fund Companies, should be scrapped. Eugene Uduigwome is a Public Policy Analyst.
PAGE 13
PEOPLES DAILY, FRIDAY, March 22, 2019
Comment
The truth about the Boko Haram insurgency By Jibrin Ibrahim
M
y column of November 30 was on winning the war against Boko Haram and I was responding to President Muhammadu Buhari’s declaration that the war against the insurgent group is a “must win”; so that Nigeria can forge ahead in its quest for even development and national stability. I return to the same theme today because securing peace has become the most urgent issue in Nigeria. Just three days ago, the former chief of defence staff, Alex Badeh was gunned down on his way back home from his farm. Absolutely no one is safe in Nigeria today. Last Friday, the Professor Ibrahim Gambari-led Savannah Centre organised a workshop on the theme of finding pathways out of Nigeria’s counterinsurgency quagmire that complemented a lot of the points I raised three weeks ago. Also, this week, Nextier, the research and dialogue think-tank organised a symposium on exactly the same theme. Participants in both events emphasised the high level of obfuscation about the insurgency and agreed that we should start by telling ourselves the truth. The first truth is that we should stop deceiving ourselves that we have fully recovered the 17 local governments seized by the insurgency and earlier declared as the Islamic State of West Africa. Yes, the insurgents have been chased out of the local government headquarters and their ability to fight degraded but they are still there and engaged in deadly operations against not only soft targets but also the military. If we do not admit their strength, we would
be unable to contain it. The second truth we should tell ourselves is that we have a real insurgency on our hands and it will remain active in the medium term. The insurgents are able to sustain their war against the Nigerian State and, unfortunately, we are having increased levels of rogue action from our own military, some of who have developed a stake in the war economy and are in no hurry to see the end to the war. In addition to rogue action, corruption has made it difficult for our military to respond to the war with adequate logistics and supplies. Our troops are often exposed to enemy fire with inadequate supplies. The third truth is that we do not have an effective strategy against the insurgency. The National Security Council has not met in the past three years to engage in strategic considerations. The war strategy for the past decade appears to be to militarily defeat and annihilate the enemy. In other words, we are acting out a conventional war strategy against an enemy that is engaged in an asymmetrical warfare, in which the insurgents can hide, operate in small cells and strike later, almost at will. Precisely because of our conventional strategy, we have not invested sufficiently in developing the intelligence that could enable us win the war. We therefore need an urgent rethink of our political strategy and how the military operationalises it. The fourth truth is that it’s a governance, rather than a security, crisis that we are facing. The North-East is vast, poor, lacking in infrastructure and completely marginalised. For these reasons, it has a lot of ungoverned spaces, which create
safe havens for the insurgents. To win the war, we have to lift the standard of life and build livelihoods for the people, so that it becomes clear that governments – federal, state and local – have a better offer for the people than the insurgents. In other words, good governance is the key to victory. The fifth truth is that our war commanders have ran out of ideas on what to do next and rather than intensify the war against the insurgents, they are currently seeking excuses by blaming human rights and humanitarian organisations for the lack of progress. We must address the issue of the leadership of the war effort to seek new pathways out of the insurgency. The sixth truth is that we do not appear to fully understand the regional and international dimensions of the war, with our neighbours – Cameroon, Chad and Niger – severally engaged with the Americans and the French. We do not appear to know who is on our side and who is on the other side and we therefore lack a clear strategy. We also stuck, for too long, to the narrative that we are confronting arms flowing in from the Libyan crisis, without sufficient evidence. In other words, our knowledge of the drivers of the war and its dynamics has been defective. Most of our troops are committed to winning the war and we must all commend the selfless sacrifices of most members of our Armed Forces engaged in numerous operations in thirty-two out of the thirtysix states in the country today. We are all distraught at the loss of lives of so many officers and men of our security agencies. In this context, the seventh truth that we should tell ourselves is that the approach of
the armed forces is to minimise the losses suffered and boost their public relations units to refute what is being revealed about the negative aspects of the war. The fact of the matter is that, both for the communities concerned and the armed forces involved, there is knowledge about the high casualty rates and that information has been filtering out. As I argued three weeks ago, the greatest concern for all of us should be the concordant reports about the degraded arms, equipment and supplies of our troops. If the insurgents are scoring points, it must be because they are developing relative advantage vis-à-vis our troops and that’s what needs to be addressed. Refusing to admit loses, denying them or minimising the numbers do not help the situation. The real threat to success in defeating the insurgency is the developing war economy in which resources for fighting the war are diverted by some unscrupulous officers. We need a national conversation about the true conditions surrounding the insurgency as a precondition for developing a workable strategy and tactics to restore peace in our dear country. This requires simultaneous and effective actions by government and the military. Society has an even bigger role to play in ensuring that the conditions that breed the insurgency are addressed at the level of the family and community. A professor of Political Science and development consultant/expert, Jibrin Ibrahim is a Senior Fellow of the Centre for Democracy and Development.
Sustainable partnership and national development By Jerome-Mario Utomi
W
e recognize that the engine of growth and development for any developing nation today lies in the ability to strategically cultivate and harness private as well as public sector efforts’ - Babatunde Raji Fashola – September 15, 2008 I remember reading soberly sometimes in 2008 a report of how Babatunde Raji Fashola (SAN) then Executive Governor of Lagos state while commissioning the reconstructed Ajose Adeogun street in Victoria island made the above remark. I have also at different meetings and conferences listened with real curiosity to some public office holders defend governments insufficiency in scope to develop the nation both economically and infrastructurally without support from the private sector and civil society groups. But each time such plea is made, for practical and moral reasons it elicits two sets of reactions within me- First is the jigsaw: If it has been said that the government has no business in business, what business does the private sector has helping government to do its business of providing quality governance to the populace? The second point is that the hope of building a productive partnership in the country will continue to be at infancy until our leaders set the structure and context furnished with conditions that will ensure that investors operate both successful and profitably in the country. There are possible explanations for these reactions. Fundamentally, apart from the fact that factors that impeded collaboration in history are still alive and active on our
political geography, I hold an opinion that; government decision in most to be a ‘captain instead of a couch’ in the drive for public-private partnership sets the stage for transparency challenge. As it promotes personal interests among public officers who already have the view of their positions not as an opportunity for the public good but as an avenue for private gains. While this should, however, be of concern to all is that the same partnership undermined here on our shores is what accelerates socioeconomic development of other nations. This indicates a challenge. As an illustration, when one questions some of the theories associated the traditional Corporate Social Responsibility and analyzes the history of successful public-private partnerships in the world; it leaves a shocking impression about the quality of successes recorded. It is, however, no overstatement that this scope and results have been limited on our shores. In the light of this reality, I must clarify why Nigeria as a nation must openly admit, support, and adopt the initiative which has become a ‘lingua franca’ of the sort for all nations desirous of development. Increasingly by choice or by accident, government at all strata can no longer single-handedly shoulder the crushing weight of infrastructural and economic development in the country. It was this fact and other related concerns that conjoined to bring about the 2030 sustainable agenda- a United Nation initiative and successor programme to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)- with a collection of 17 global goals formulated among other aims promote and carter for people, peace, planet, and poverty. And, currently preaches partnership
and collaboration at its centre and clearly specifies that the scale and ambition of this agenda calls for smart partnerships, collaborations, ecosystem thinking, co-creation and alignment of various intervention efforts by the public and private sectors and civil society. Very instructive also, this needed partnership between the government and private sector will require finding an ‘urgent need for creative and innovative thinking by all strata of the society-public and private sector and civil societyto promoting sustained and inclusive economic growth, social development, and environmental protection’. Though some organizations have appreciably demonstrated commitment in this programme, but not without challenges and for the nation to succeed on this job, the source of the problem must be understood before any meaningful solution can be found, and the crucial issues brought to light without the risk of overlooking anything important. Given the above demand, I need not pause to know that the crisis has its origin rooted in transparency challenge and instability of policy made by the government-a factor that instill doubts in the minds of corporate organizations. Notably, transparency will remain a challenge in the country as no corporate organization or civil society group feels comfortable in an environment devoid of transparency and accountability. To succeed in this job, both the government and private organizations must first recognize that any growth or development without a focus on building the capacity of the people is a mere waste of time. Also, the FG must be ready to learn from those who have met with the problem
we currently face, how they tackled it, and how successful they had been that’s on one part. In addition to the above, the government must help this country to earn new respect by developing a framework that will promote transparency, and encourage the private sector to partner with government. In the same breadth, corporate organizations apart from supporting the government in the race for infrastructural development must recognize that profit should not be pursued without due consideration of the societal norms. The civil society groups as changeagents should develop the people’s capacity to welcome new ideas and build a hyper-modern society while as the voice of the people help identify and fill the information gap in the society. Finally,“ as a condition for victory in battle”, the sovereign and the generals must be synchronized, the sovereign manifests the vision, while the generals appraise conditions, determining how the conditions can be carried out”.Joined together, this makes the victory’. The same principle is required to enable us to win the war against our current socioeconomic and environmental woes. The government of Nigeria as the sovereign, should summon the political will, seize the initiative, develop the vision and approach our corporate organizations. Then, appraising the condition and determining how to achieve the vision will be the responsibility of the corporate organizations. That for now remains the best way out. Jerome-Mario yahoo.com) is Journalist.
(jeromeutomi@ a Lagos-Based