Truckers’ strike as metaphor for impunity of shipping companies

For about two weeks early this month, July, 2018, the port operations stood still as truck drivers and their owners went on strike, holding the whole industry to ransome.

They were protesting what they described as mindless and bared-faced extortion by government and security agents, especially the Naval officers and officials of the Nigerian Ports Authority(NPA) that were driving the traffic management system put in place to tame the monstrous traffic gridlock that has become a permanent feature on the port access roads.

During the period of the strike which was effective and total, the ports were literally locked down, resulting to humongous congestion as the terminals were bursting with mounting stranded cargoes due to the refusal of truckers to evacuate them.

Even though the strike has since been called off, its multiplier effects are still reverberating in the industry as almost all the operators are counting their losses.

The terminal operators , shipping companies, importers, customs brokers and the federal government through its revenue-generating agencies all lost in one way or the other due to the disruptive action.

In as much as we condemn the strike action by the truckers, it however helps to expose the underlying ing rot in the cargo delivery system.

The strike action exposes the impunity of the shipping companies, the contempt and scorn with which they treat constituted authorities in the country.

It also underlines the shocking helplessness or perhaps weakness of our regulatory authorities such as the Nigerian Ports Authority(NPA) and Nigerian Shippers’ Council in enforcing statutory laws and guidelines.

Let us put our argument into proper perspective for ease of comprehension.

The strike action embarked upon by the truckers was a reaction to the resultant consequence of the festering disdain with which the shipping companies had over the years treated the directive by the NPA on the provision of holding bays.

To our knowledge, one of the conditions for the registration as a shipping company is the ownership of holding bays where all the empties of the company would be warehoused after their return by the importers.

Curiously, this condition has been observed more in the breach by the shipping companies who cashed in on the laxity of weak regulatory authorities.

The resultant effect of this flagrant disobedience to a statutory guideline was gradual but fast build up of empty containers which litter the roads all over the country.

The situation is exacerbated by the fact that Nigeria is an import-dependant country.

Almost all the containers used for imports finally get stranded in the country as there is little exports for which they could be used that will take them back to their countries of origin.

Due to the unproductive nature of constructing and maintaining holding bays, the shipping companies out-rightly refused to venture into it.

Kikelomo Abiola Cudjoe, the marine operations manager of Maersk Nigeria Limited, one of the recalcitrant shipping companies, hinted as much when she said constructing holding bays will put additional cost to their operations which she vowed would be passed onto the customers.

“Talking about cost, for the shipping lines, we were asked to return the containers to the holding bays, nobody is thinking of who will cover the cost of shunting and transferring of the containers back to the terminals, we have made it known to the authorities and the Shippers Council that this is a cost that would eventually be passed on to the customer.

“It is also not in our best interest because everybody understands the condition in Nigeria and the economy, what I am saying is that this policy eventually would hit the customers really badly.

“If you look at it prior to now before this policy was implemented, it was simply go inside the terminal and come out with a container, but now, there is going to be many stops, you go from the terminal to the customers yard, from there back to the holding bays and from holding bays back to the terminals, there are so many different movements and that in itself creates congestion on the road, this policy will very likely compound the problem we are trying to avoid”.

This is the mindset of the shipping companies over the issue of holding bays which clearly shows their disdain for the directive.

What some of them do, we gathered, was to arrange with friendly terminals, which would collect the empties on their behalf at agreed terms.

This arrangement was what caused the perennial traffic logjam on the access roads to the ports as trucks laden with empties queued to enter the port, thus blocking the road.

The NPA directive that containers which do not originate from holding bays will not be allowed access into the port further compounded the traffic logjam as empties -laden truck stayed put on the road.

This arrangement, sadly though,ensures that importers lose their containers deposits to the shipping companies as they find it difficult to return the empties as at when due.

This was the chaotic level to which the situation has degenerated before the present management of the NPA led by Ms Hadiza Bala-Usman, which appears to have the will power and muster enough courage to deal with the monster which has now grown wild, tackled the problem headlong.

To free the access road from the heavy traffic caused by trucks carrying empties that have become orphans, the NPA came up with call-up system of traffic management which was eventually abused by the facilitators.

It was in reaction to the fall out of the abuse which was alleged extortion, exploitation, humiliation and harassment of truck drivers by the security agencies on the traffic management team that resulted to the strike.

We decided to go into what appeared to be the historical background of the strike action, at the risk of boring our readers, in a bid to expose the excesses of the shipping companies and the damage their intransigence has caused the country.

Even though the NPA seemed to have woken from its regulatory slumber when it slammed a 10-day suspension on four of the recalcitrant shipping companies, we dare say the action took longer time in coming.

A stitch in time, they say, saves nine.

We believe that the strike action with its attendant economic losses and debilitating traffic logjam could have been avoided, in the first place, if the NPA had done what it recently did several years ago, before the problem became homogeneous.

The aftermath effect still stings several days after the strike had ended which necessitated the direct intervention of the presidency.

In another breath, however, we believe in the axiom which says that it is better late than never.

The sanction of the NPA, even though belated, would serve as a warning signal to these recalcitrant operators that the sleeping regulatory agency has finally woken up.

We want to however advise that the regulatory authority should not dither in its resolve to whip these operators into line as they are likely to resist any measure to make them comply.

Maersk Nigeria Limited, one of the sanctioned shipping companies and by far the biggest and most influential, has already served a notice to the NPA that the fight is not going to be easy.

The foreign operator contested the decision of the NPA to sanction it and described the action as misguided.

What we find disturbing was an attempt by the Maerskline to distort fact by its claims that it has four holding bays instead of the mutually verified two facilities.

This hard stance of the shipping companies, especially Maerskline, in the face of gross disobedience, is a sufficient warning signal to the NPA that it has gotten tough customers in these foreign operators.

We want to therefore appeal to the agency to go all out in ensuring total compliance with its order.

Any faltering step or indecision at this stage will have catastrophic effects on the cargo delivery system in the country.

The NPA cannot afford to be faint-hearted or allow itself to be intimidated in its present efforts to infuse sanity into cargo delivery system and port operations in the country.

Another unfortunate backlash effect of the strike is the resultant demurrages which accrued on the cargoes that were stranded at the terminals.

Different figures ranging from N4 billion to N10 billion are being bandied about as the accrued demurrage on the stranded cargoes.

Whatever the true figure is speaks volumes of the consequence of the impunity of the shipping companies and the negligence of the regulatory government agencies in their statutory role of enforcing regulations.

However, we want to lend our voice to the pleading cries of importers and their agents that the terminal operators should grant them adequate waiver on the payment of the accrued demurrage.

We recognize the fact that the terminal operators are business people who are also obligated under the port concession agreement to pay different charges to the NPA.

So outright waiver is out of the question.

However, we believe the terminal operators will be magnanimous enough to grant an appreciable degree of concession to the importers and their agents in the payment of the accrued demurrage.

Our position is informed by the fact that the strike action, which they did not initiate, was beyond their control.

In addition, some of these importers may have incurred additional costs within the period of the strike action.

We must not fail to commend the action of SIfax Group, the operator of Ports and Cargo terminal which has granted six-day waivers for the importers and their agents.

We can only hope other terminal operators will take a cue from the gesture of the indigenous operator to bring succour to the embattled customs brokers and their importers.