Port Harcourt refinery workers’ strike

THE protest by support staff of the Port Harcourt Refining Company (PHRC) over seven months of unpaid salaries and the delayed implementation of a new remuneration package has once again exposed the contradictions at the heart of Nigeria’s petroleum industry. While the workers’ grievances deserve attention, their ultimatum to shut down a refinery that has remained completely inactive raises a fundamental question: how long should Nigerians continue to finance a moribund public enterprise? On October 6, 2026, the workers operating under the aegis of the Support Staff Union of PHRC barricaded the refinery’s entrance in Eleme, Rivers State, demanding the payment of salary arrears, implementation of an approved salary structure with effect from October 1, a proposed N1 million housing allowance for eligible staff, and improved consultation with management. They alleged that the refinery coordinator had failed to implement the remuneration package approved by the Group Chief Executive Officer of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL), Bayo Ojulari. The union subsequently issued a 48-hour ultimatum.

There is no justification for withholding workers’ legitimately earned entitlements. Salaries are contractual obligations, not favours dispensed by employers at their convenience. If the workers have fulfilled their duties and their entitlements are established, management must pay them. Seven months without salaries is an intolerable burden in an economy already ravaged by inflation, rising rents and declining purchasing power. As William Shakespeare observes in The Merchant of Venice, “You take my life when you do take the means whereby I live” (Act IV, Scene I). This means that there are consequences from denying workers their means of survival. Yet, the other side of this controversy cannot be ignored. What exactly have Nigerians been paying for? How can a moribund refinery retain employees, conduct training programmes, approve promotions and incur substantial personnel costs while failing to sustain commercial production?

A 2024 report, drawing on refinery operating-expense data of the NNPC, put staff-related expenditure at approximately N272 billion across Nigeria’s government-owned refineries in Port Harcourt, Warri and Kaduna over four years when the facilities were shut down. Reported figures included about N60.5 billion in salaries and associated cost in 2020 and N66.8 billion in employee compensation in 2021. These figures, in light of public accountability, provoke serious scrutiny of the relationship between personnel expenditure and operational performance of an agency that has been moribund. Perhaps, this surprising expenditure profile should not automatically be interpreted as proof that every employee is unproductive or culpable. Refineries require engineers, technicians, safety personnel and maintenance teams even when production is suspended. Preserving equipment, preventing deterioration and preparing facilities for a restart all require skilled labour.

Nevertheless, the Federal Government and the NNPC management must explain what these employees have accomplished, what measurable targets they have met, and why the plants have failed to deliver sustained output, but humongous expenditure. The Port Harcourt refinery reportedly resumed operations in late 2024 but was shut down again in May 2025 for maintenance and sustainability reviews. Subsequent reports indicated that regular production had not resumed. The contradiction between substantial expenditure and disappointing results is too serious to ignore. Nigeria must end the culture in which public enterprises become permanent employers without corresponding obligations to perform. The experience of the defunct Nigerian Telecommunications Limited (NITEL) and the near-death years of the Nigerian Railway Corporation, a struggling state enterprise, illustrates the dangers of allowing institutional inertia to persist.

Public payrolls, promotions and administrative structures can survive in Nigeria long after the services they were established to provide have paralysed. The lesson is not that workers should be punished for failures of public service management. Rather, government must distinguish between productive staff who are critically needed and whose competence and skills are essential, and redundant positions sustained by obsolete operating models and prebendalism. As Peter Drucker, the management thinker, famously put it, “What gets measured gets managed.” Public enterprises must be judged by transparent, verifiable performance indicators.

Consequently, the Federal Government and NNPCL should undertake an independent workforce and operational audit of all three refineries. Every department should have clearly defined responsibilities, staffing requirements and measurable performance targets. Where genuine redundancy exists, affected employees should receive lawful severance packages, and opportunities for retraining or redeployment. Any restructuring must comply with labour laws and collective agreements. There is also a strong case for private sector participation in refinery operations. In May 2026, NNPCL announced a Memorandum of Understanding with two Chinese companies, Sanj)iang Chemical Company Limited and Xinganchen (Fuzhou) Industrial Park Operation and Management Co. Ltd, towards a potential technical equity partnership for the completion, operation and expansion of the Port Harcourt and Warri refineries. This initiative could provide an opportunity to introduce stronger operational discipline and technical expertise. However, the agreement is not itself proof that a successful transfer of operations has been completed. Any eventual partnership must clearly establish responsibility for existing workers, future recruitment, pension obligations, retrenchment and industrial relations. The government should neither force a private operator to inherit an unsustainable workforce nor use restructuring as an excuse to abandon employees arbitrarily. A credible transition plan negotiated with labour representatives is essential.

Moreover, the government must guard against sabotage, intimidation and the destruction of public assets during any restructuring. Security arrangements, transparent communication and lawful dispute resolution mechanisms should accompany the process. Workers must not be allowed to hold strategic infrastructure hostage, but management must equally refrain from treating legitimate industrial grievances with contempt. Above all, Nigeria’s refineries are too important to national energy security to remain monuments to administrative failure. A functioning domestic refining industry can strengthen supply resilience and reduce exposure to external disruptions. NNPCL, despite its corporate restructuring, must demonstrate that it operates as a commercially disciplined enterprise, not a patronage system sustained by public expectations and opaque expenditure.

The strike should therefore prompt two urgent actions: immediate resolution of legitimate salary arrears and a comprehensive review of the refinery’s workforce, finances and operational future. President Bola Tinubu’s government, having undertaken politically difficult petroleum reforms, must apply the same resolve to publicly owned enterprises. Nigeria cannot continue funding moribund refineries.