In a dramatic turn during the protracted standoff with PENGASSAN, sources say Dangote Petroleum Refinery presented an extraordinary offer to settle the dispute. The company allegedly proposed paying employees who were terminated over alleged sabotage a full salary for five years, without requiring them to return to work. The offer, according to insiders familiar with the talks, was intended as compensation and to forestall risks of sabotage or disruption at the facility.
The proposal reportedly came amid tense negotiations in which the union had threatened to cut gas and crude supply to the refinery nationwide in protest of the dismissals. According to the sources, Dangote argued that the financial cost of paying idle staff would be less damaging than permitting potentially untrustworthy individuals to remain near critical operational areas. The company offered the five-year salary package on condition that the affected workers stay away from the refinery, and ideally pursue other opportunities elsewhere, while still receiving payments monthly over the period. But PENGASSAN rejected the option. The sources said the union felt the offer undermined workers’ dignity and preferred redeployment within other parts of Dangote’s operations.
PENGASSAN’s General Secretary, Lumumba Okugbawa, when reached for comment, acknowledged being aware of the offer but refused to dwell on proposals that never gained consensus. He said negotiations often involve many options considered and discarded, and that what matters is the final agreement. “The option to pay salary for five years is not the one we endorsed,” he said. “Our priority is ensuring workers are treated fairly and that any resolutions preserve their dignity.”
The backdrop to this dramatic offer is the earlier dismissal by Dangote of some staff members, which management justified as necessary to protect the refinery. The company cited repeated acts of sabotage, safety lapses, and operational inefficiencies as the rationale for the decision. The sacked employees were said to be members of the union, intensifying the conflict between labor rights and security concerns at a facility deemed strategic for Nigeria’s energy future.
Following the dismissals, PENGASSAN responded by ordering its branches to shut off crude and gas supplies to the Dangote facility to boycott its operations. That measure threatened to choke the refinery’s feedstock supply lines and bring operations to a halt. The union also issued directives for nationwide industrial action in protest of what it deemed anti-worker practices. The political and economic stakes escalated swiftly.
However, the five-year salary option was never implemented. Instead, negotiations yielded a different settlement: the parties agreed that the sacked staff would be redeployed to other units within the Dangote Group, with no loss of pay, and no retaliation against them for involvement in the dispute. PENGASSAN announced a suspension of the threatened strike and gas cut in light of the agreement. The union warned, though, that any breach of terms would provoke renewed warnings and action.
Observers say Dangote’s offer was extreme, but revealing. It underscores how high the stakes are in this conflict: safeguarding operations, avoiding sabotage, maintaining capital investments, and protecting energy revenues are as important to the company as its labor relationships. Dangote’s readiness to consider paying salaries for years without work suggests a calculation that security and stability at the facility outweigh short term labour confrontation.
Critics, however, warned that even proposing such a plan could violate labour norms or set troubling precedents. Paying staff without requiring work, they argue, risks eroding accountability and blurred boundaries between discipline and reward. Some labour experts say such offers should be approached with caution, especially in sectors tied to national security and infrastructure.
At the moment, the agreement to redeploy staff and protect their pay is the outcome bearing legal and operational weight. But the memory of the five-year salary proposal will likely remain as both bargaining card and public reference in any future disputes. It reveals how close the conflict came to radical solutions beyond standard industrial practice.
Samuel Aina