Aviation Strike Threat: A Test of Leadership

Institutions rarely fail dramatically. More often, they fail quietly

A responsibility goes unattended. An office hesitates to act. Another institution, frustrated by the vacuum, steps into a role that was never meant to be its own. Before long, role confusion becomes a governance failure, which in turn becomes a general inconvenience to the public.

The recent threat by aviation unions to take industrial action over the alleged non-remittance of statutory ticket sales charges by airlines is one such moment. The issue deserves serious attention. The method warrants serious reconsideration.

Let there be no misunderstanding. If airlines have collected statutory charges on behalf of aviation agencies but have failed to remit them in accordance with the law, they should do so immediately.

These revenues are not voluntary contributions. They fund safety oversight, economic regulation, air navigation services, security, infrastructure development, personnel training, and many of the functions that keep Nigerian aviation safe, efficient and internationally credible.

An underfunded aviation regulator is not merely an administrative problem. It is a national risk. The unions’ concern is therefore legitimate. The question is not whether the money should be recovered. It should. The question is who should recover it and how. That distinction matters more than it may seem.

One of the recurring lessons in leadership is that organisations function best when every institution understands both its responsibilities and its limits. Problems rarely arise because nobody cares.

They arise because the wrong people start solving the right problems while those entrusted with responsibility retreat into silence. That appears to be unfolding before us. The unions are fighting the right battle, but they are the wrong institution to lead it.

Trade unions perform an indispensable function in every healthy industry. They defend workers, negotiate terms of service, promote welfare and provide an organised voice for employees.

Every mature democracy requires strong unions. However, strong unions should not become substitutes for management. Nor should they become substitutes for revenue collectors.

Recovering statutory revenues is not an industrial function. It is an executive responsibility. It belongs to the leadership of the aviation agencies, their finance and revenue departments, the supervising ministry, and the regulatory institutions established for that purpose. When unions begin to perform executive functions, institutions have already begun to lose their place.

What we are dealing with is not merely an administrative matter. It is a governance matter. Professional institutions derive their strength not only from competent individuals but also from clear boundaries of responsibility. Boards govern. Management administers.

Finance departments collect revenue. Regulators enforce compliance. Unions protect workers. Each role reinforces the others. Each depends on the other, remaining within its proper constitutional and administrative space.

Once those boundaries blur, accountability blurs as well. One cannot help asking a few uncomfortable questions. Where are the chief executives of the agencies? Where are their finance directors? Where are the revenue collection units? Where is the supervising ministry?

If airlines genuinely owe statutory revenues, why has the matter reached the point where labour unions feel compelled to threaten industrial action before decisive executive action is visible? Leadership should never outsource authority.

The aviation industry has every reason to be proud of the professionalism it has painstakingly built over the years. Despite many challenges, Nigerian aviation has consistently demonstrated technical competence, regulatory progress and operational resilience.

That reputation should not be undermined by approaches that cast financial disagreements as political mobilisation. Industrial action has its place. Revenue collection has its place. The two should not be confused. Revenue collection is an administrative function, not an industrial weapon.

There is another reason for caution. Whenever aviation workers threaten industrial action, airlines undoubtedly experience disruption. But airlines are rarely the principal victims. Passengers are. Businesses are. Families are. Patients travelling for medical care are. Students are. Investors are. Citizens are. Public institutions exist primarily to serve citizens. Every avoidable disruption imposed upon them is a cost that should never be treated lightly.

The objective should therefore be to recover revenue without imposing unnecessary hardship on those who bear no responsibility for the dispute.

This requires more than confrontation. It requires leadership. Leadership begins with certainty. Airlines should know precisely what they are required to remit. They should know how those figures are calculated and when payments fall due.

The agencies, in turn, must ensure that every demand is transparent, legally sound, consistently applied and proportionate. Authority commands respect when it is supported by clarity. Clarity makes compliance easier. Ambiguity invites conflict. But clarity alone is insufficient.

Nigeria’s aviation sector needs a strategy. I would propose one built upon four simple principles. The Four Es

The first is enlightenment. Every stakeholder should fully understand the industry’s financial architecture. Airlines, agencies, auditors and the travelling public should know which statutory charges exist, why they exist, how they are calculated and where the money goes. Transparency is often the cheapest form of dispute resolution.

The second is Engagement. Dialogue should be routine rather than exceptional. Agency leadership and airline executives should meet regularly to resolve concerns before they escalate into crises. Mature industries do not wait until relationships collapse before starting conversations.

The third is engineering. This is where real reform begins. The best debt is the one that never arises. Technology now enables payment systems to distribute funds automatically at the point of transaction. Passengers already pay statutory charges when purchasing tickets.

Why should those funds be held by airlines before eventually reaching government agencies? A better-designed system would automatically split payments electronically. The statutory portion would go directly into the accounts of the relevant aviation agencies, while airlines would receive only the revenue that properly belongs to them.

Such a system would eliminate prolonged disputes over remittances, improve cash flow for agencies, strengthen accountability, reduce opportunities for abuse and minimise the need for enforcement. Good institutions depend upon good people. Great institutions depend upon good systems.

The fourth is Enforcement. Only after enlightenment, engagement and engineering have been exhausted should enforcement be necessary. When it is, it should be swift, impartial and predictable. No selective application. No political considerations. No public theatrics.

Simply the consistent application of the law. Enforcement succeeds best when it is rarely needed because the system itself encourages compliance.

Ultimately, this episode presents Nigeria’s aviation sector with a choice. It can continue to treat revenue disputes as periodic crises, requiring threats, counter-threats and public confrontation. Or it can redesign the system so that such disputes become increasingly rare. The latter is a mark of institutional maturity.

Airlines must honour their obligations. Agencies must recover what is due. The Ministry must exercise effective oversight. Regulators must regulate with confidence.

Unions must continue to defend workers with the same professionalism that has long distinguished the aviation sector. Citizens should not be collateral damage whenever institutions fail to fulfil their proper roles.

The measure of a mature aviation industry is not that disagreements never arise. It is that every institution knows precisely which disagreements are its own.

Professionalism begins with competence. It is sustained by discipline, and discipline begins when institutions know their place and have the courage to stay there.

*Anthony Kila, the author of “Strategy Systems and Power in Flight: Lessons in Strategy, Leadership and Institution Building from Aviation”, is a Jean Monnet Professor of Strategy and Development at the Commonwealth Institute of Advanced and Professional Studies (CIAPS). He also serves as Pro-Chancellor and Chairman of the Governing Council of the Michael and Cecilia Ibru University (MCIU). He is the founding Chairman of Sabre Africa Travel Network.

Wole Shadare