CASUALIZATION OF LABOUR IN NIGERIA: LEGAL GAPS, JUDICIAL RESPONSES, AND THE CASE FOR LEGISLATIVE REFORM

Abstract

This article examines the legal challenges arising from the casualization of labour in Nigeria, with particular focus on the legislative gaps, judicial responses, and the imperative for reform. It traces the development of casualization from the Structural Adjustment Programme of the mid-1980s through contemporary triangular employment arrangements, arguing that Nigeria’s principal labour legislation, conceived within a bilateral and permanent employment framework, has proven structurally incapable of regulating the complex outsourcing arrangements that now dominate many sectors. The article identifies a critical definitional vacuum in the Labour Act, which fails to expressly define “casual worker” or “outsourced worker,” thereby enabling employers to perpetually classify workers as casual through rolling short-term contracts and deny them statutory entitlements such as pensions, severance pay, and trade union representation. While the Employees’ Compensation Act 2010 adopts a broader and more inclusive definition of “employee,” its protective reach remains undermined by weak institutional enforcement and inadequate funding of the relevant regulatory authorities. The article further interrogates the divergent jurisprudential approaches adopted by the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, which favours an economic reality test, and the appellate courts, which continue to emphasise contractual privity, resulting in legal uncertainty for both workers and employers. It also examines the suppression of trade unionism among casual and outsourced workers, contrasting this with Nigeria’s obligations under core International Labour Organization (ILO) Conventions, and highlights the significance of Nigeria’s recent ratification of ILO Convention No. 181 on Private Employment Agencies as a positive, though insufficient, development. The article concludes that judicial activism, while commendable, cannot substitute for deliberate legislative reform. It therefore recommends amending the Labour Act to introduce express definitions and statutory conversion rules, strengthening labour enforcement institutions, and codifying the primacy-of-facts doctrine in line with international best practices.