Dangote Accuses Labour Unions of Prioritizing Check-Off Dues Over Workers’ Welfare

A fresh round of tensions has erupted between Dangote Industries Limited and labour unions in Nigeria, as the company accused union leaders of being more concerned about collecting check-off dues than addressing the genuine welfare of workers. The development marks the latest twist in the ongoing industrial disputes between the conglomerate and various labour groups, particularly in its refinery and cement operations.

In a statement released over the weekend, Dangote Industries faulted the approach of some union leaders, arguing that their agitation was not rooted in improving staff conditions but rather in securing steady streams of dues from employees’ salaries. The company described recent criticisms by the unions as “misguided and self-serving,” stressing that it has consistently upheld its obligations to employees through fair remuneration, healthcare support, training opportunities, and safe working environments.

The accusations come amid heightened disputes involving the Petroleum and Natural Gas Senior Staff Association of Nigeria (PENGASSAN) and the National Union of Chemical, Footwear, Rubber, Leather and Non-Metallic Products Employees (NUCFRLANMPE), both of which have raised concerns about working conditions, welfare packages, and collective bargaining rights at Dangote operations. Union leaders argue that the company has resisted full engagement with organized labour, undermining employees’ right to representation and negotiation.

Dangote, however, insists that its record speaks for itself, citing ongoing investments in employee welfare. The company pointed to its comprehensive staff health schemes, housing support initiatives, and competitive pay structures as evidence that workers’ needs are being prioritized. It accused union leaders of distorting facts to serve their own financial interests, warning that allowing such agendas to dominate the conversation could derail efforts to build harmonious industrial relations.

At the centre of the dispute is the issue of check-off dues—mandatory deductions from workers’ salaries that are remitted to unions as membership contributions. Dangote claims that certain union executives have shown more urgency in pushing for the enforcement of these deductions than in engaging constructively on broader staff welfare matters. According to the company, this focus raises questions about the sincerity of the unions’ advocacy.

Union leaders have rejected the allegations, calling them an attempt to divert attention from unresolved issues. PENGASSAN, in a swift response, argued that the check-off system is a globally recognized practice that sustains union operations and enables effective representation of workers. They accused Dangote of trying to discredit organized labour as part of a broader strategy to avoid accountability and resist institutionalized negotiation frameworks.

Labour experts note that the clash highlights long-standing tensions between large corporations and unions in Nigeria, where industrial relations often struggle to balance employer interests with workers’ rights. For Dangote, whose refinery recently commenced operations with high public expectations, the dispute comes at a sensitive time when the company is under scrutiny to demonstrate not just economic impact but also adherence to labour standards.

The Federal Government has begun to step in, with the Ministry of Labour and Employment urging restraint on both sides. Officials emphasized the importance of dialogue, warning that escalating disputes could disrupt operations in critical sectors and undermine confidence in ongoing economic reforms. With fuel queues already re-emerging in parts of the country, stakeholders fear that prolonged disputes at the Dangote Refinery could exacerbate supply challenges and erode public trust.

Workers on the ground remain caught in the middle of the battle of narratives. Some employees have expressed concern that the dispute may overshadow genuine welfare issues such as career growth, pension plans, and working hours. Others worry about possible victimization or job insecurity should the rift between management and unions escalate further.

Analysts argue that the outcome of the standoff could set an important precedent for industrial relations in Nigeria’s private sector. If Dangote succeeds in framing unions as self-interested actors, it could weaken organized labour’s influence in other industries. Conversely, if unions prevail in pressing for deeper engagement, it may reinforce collective bargaining as a cornerstone of Nigeria’s industrial relations system.

Beyond the immediate clash, the situation also raises questions about the broader future of labour relations in Nigeria. With the government pursuing economic liberalization and companies like Dangote playing a central role in strategic industries, the relationship between capital and labour is under renewed focus. Observers stress that sustainable industrial peace will depend on transparent negotiations, mutual respect, and recognition of both workers’ rights and employers’ obligations.

For now, Dangote’s blunt accusation that unions are after check-off dues rather than workers’ welfare has added a new layer of controversy to the debate. With both sides trading words and standing their ground, the coming weeks will be critical in determining whether dialogue prevails or whether the rift deepens into industrial action that could ripple across Nigeria’s economy.