A “contentious document” called the “Scheme of Service for Polytechnics by the National Board for Technical Education (NBTE)” has been criticised by polytechnic lecturers in Nigeria.
They claim that it lacks comprehensive stakeholder input, especially from their union and stakeholders in the polytechnic sector.
On July 8, 2024, the Federal Government was given a 15-day ultimatum by the irate lecturers to halt the implementation of “the rough work termed “Scheme of Service for the Polytechnics,” failing which our union would take various forms of industrial action.
Dr Abdulazeez Ibrahim Badaru, Zonal Coordinator, Zone A of the Academic Staff Union of Polytechnics (ASUP), stated during a press conference in Kaduna that it is now vital to address significant concerns about the newly issued Scheme of Service (SOS) for Polytechnics.
These observations and reservations were carefully discussed during the 110th National Executive Council (NEC) meeting of ASUP on July 4, 2024, as well as the Zonal Executive Officers of our Zone of the Union on the 10th July 2024.
Polytechnic lecturers noticed and resolved that “the National Board for Technical Education (NBTE) released a document titled “Scheme of Service for Polytechnics” that lacks inclusive stakeholder input, particularly from our union and polytechnic sector stakeholders
It differs greatly from a previously published paper resulting from extensive consultations and engagements that began in 2012, and is interpreted as a purposeful move by the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation and the NBTE to foment strife within the polytechnic sector.” They stated that the existing draft is opposed until all issues of disagreement are resolved.
“The importation of sub-tertiary level qualifications, such as the National Skills Qualifications (NSQ), as mandatory precondition for academic staff career advancement within the polytechnic is considered ludicrous.
The NSQ has little practical relevance in improving the delivery of curricula at the postsecondary level in polytechnics, acting as an unnecessary burden without corresponding professional growth. As a result, we categorically reject its inclusion as a necessary criterion for academic staff career development.
There is a concerning contradiction in the admission points for Graduate Assistants, with the NBTE document reducing the threshold for Bachelor degree holders while disadvantageously affecting HND holders.
Equivalent grades (e.g., Second Class Lower: Lower Credit) should be required at the Graduate Assistant level to ensure equity.
Dividing the Senior Lecturer level into Senior Lecturer II and Senior Lecturer 1 will increase complexity and extend the lecturer cadre structure.”We demand a return to the status quo and a reduction in the lecturer cadre from nine to seven steps, with a maximum three-year waiting period for progression between steps.”
“The current document’s structure would require a minimum of 26 years for a Graduate Assistant to reach the pinnacle of their career, which is impractical and demotivating when compared to the progression of lecturers in universities and colleges of education, which require a minimum of 18 and 20 years, respectively, to reach the pinnacle.”
“The addition of non-academic titles such as Assistant Director (Library) and Deputy Director (Library) undermines the academic nature of the Librarian cadre and is undesirable. A reversal of academic nomenclature is required.
The decrease of terminal levels for several cadres, including Library Officer, Executive Officer, and Confidential Secretary, from CONTEDISS 14 to CONTEDISS 12, is unjustified, demotivating, and harmful to the polytechnic sector.
This will encourage and intensify students’ apathy about applying to polytechnics. The Union demands that the discriminatory discrimination against items produced by the same system be reversed.
“Technologists play an important role in students’ technological growth and should be considered academic personnel. The designation of technologists as non-academic staff undervalues their efforts and is inappropriate.
“The preference for Bachelor degrees over HND qualifications in appointing Registrars and Bursars is discriminatory. The document’s bias against Higher National Diploma graduates weakens efforts to combat this reprehensible practice. Polytechnics should not discriminate against their graduates.
“The omission to incorporate the HND Pharmaceutical Technology programme in the SoS, despite a court judgement, raises questions regarding legal compliance.
The Union demands that the NBTE cancel the bogus MoU with the Pharmacists Council of Nigeria about the HND program’s legitimacy and reinstate the Pharmaceutical Technology Cadre.
“While our Union is not opposed to career advancement in the Lecturer cadre, the question of a relevant PhD is now a mandatory condition for demanding for answers is: to what effect?What are the benefits of PhD degrees?The lack of stages towards a degree programme in polytechnics reduces the value of PhD holders in the sector.
“As a result, our Union requests that prompt actions be taken to implement reholdites degrees in polytechnics in order to take advantage of the additional qualifications that are required.We want to emphasise that we thoroughly reviewed the material and are dedicated to following these problems to their logical conclusion.
It is important to note that we have issued a 15-day ultimatum to the Federal Government, effective July 8, 2024, to halt the implementation of this rough work known as the “Scheme of Service for the Polytechnics” or face various types of industrial action by our Union,” the lecturers stated.
In Essence
The Academic Staff Union of Polytechnics (ASUP) has issued a 15-day ultimatum to the Nigerian Federal Government to halt the implementation of the new “Scheme of Service for Polytechnics” by the National Board for Technical Education (NBTE).
The lecturers argue the document lacks comprehensive input from stakeholders, particularly from their union, and includes several contentious points such as the inclusion of the National Skills Qualifications (NSQ) as a precondition for career advancement, which they deem irrelevant and burdensome.
Additionally, they criticize the document for introducing inequities and complexities in the career progression structure, discriminatory practices against Higher National Diploma (HND) holders, and other detrimental changes.
ASUP demands a reversion to previous standards and threatens industrial action if their concerns are not addressed.
