The Academic Staff Union of Universities(ASUU) has suspended its three-month old strike.
ASUU President, Prof. Biodun Ogunyemi announced the suspension after meeting with the Federal Government.
He said the strike would be suspended from midnight today.
ASUP calls off 2-month strike
The Academic Staff Union of Polytechnics (ASUP) has suspended its strike after two months.
Usman Dutse, ASUP National President, announced this at a media briefing held at the end of its National Executive Council (NEC) meeting in Abuja on Tuesday.
He noted that the decision was taken in view of the progress made in its discussions with Nigerian government.
He said: “We have hereby decided to suspend our two-month strike. This decision was taken at the end of our National Executive Council meeting. This is in view of the progress made in the course of the union’s negotiations with government.
“The NEC of the union, after exhaustive deliberations and in due consultations with the respective congresses across the nation, resolved to suspend the current industrial action.”
Dutse stated that the government had shown willingness to make funds available for disbursement by April 2019. He also added that N16.7billion has been released for the payment of salaries and allowances.
“A circular had also been released to all rectors conveying increased personnel funding for 2019 and directing the payment of full salaries and allowances in Polytechnics. It is expected that the funds shall be made available for disbursement to deserving institutions by April 2019.
Equally, the approval of the NEEDS assessment report shall be pursued with all diligence to ensure a sustained and effective intervention in the infrastructure and other needs of our institutions,” he said.
Dutse noted that the union would not hesitate to resume the strike if the government fails to review the Memorandum of Action and ensure full implementation before end of May 2019.
MOTIVES, ACTIONS & CONSEQUENCES: Do we judge the motivations of the actions or the consequences of the actions?
There are two methods of viewing actions. We can judge the motivations of the actions or the consequences of the actions. Consequences produce empirical evidence which can be independently analyzed and judged. We can only speculate about another person’s motivation.
Attacking someone’s motivations is a classic political attack, but it is usually an ad hominem fallacy. Why is it that we place more value on a person’s motivations rather than the consequences?
If we strive to be perfect rationalists, we could sit down and debate the costs and benefits of every policy alternative. Usually, politics devolves into monkeys throwing poo at each other. So why?
So, take a hypothetical policy-wonk. He thinks X policy would be good for business development in our city.
There are two ways we make political counter-arguments.
#1: I disagree, I think you underestimate the damages this policy would cause to these neighborhoods. Policy Y should outperform X.
#2: You’re in the pocket of Corporations that rob the poor
Of course, the logic of the first argument is better.
First, it is empirically based. The effects can be quantified and studied. Others can review the studies independently and more objectively. This is a much better way of learning the truth about the consequences of any policy.
Second, motives have little to do with consequences. Speculating about a person’s motives usually tells us more about the speculator. The idea that motivations of an individual matter is based on the myth that the “personal is political.” The message and the empirical consequences are separate from the individual – which is why the ad-hominem attack is a logical fallacy.
We can empirically prove many things – intent, consequences, actions. Legal courts evaluate evidence to determine intent and consequences (ie, was the death an accident or intentional?) These can be proven.
Motivation is unprovable. Even a man’s signed testimony discussing his motivation cannot be trusted – does he have a motive to lie about his motivation? You cannot know for certain.
We are biased by our perceptions. One bias is correspondent inference. If we see Person A punch Person B, we assume Person A was motivated to harm Person B. Yet what we saw was the consequences of the action, not the motivation. They could have been actors pretending to fight. It could have been an accident. We do not know for certain what motivated the action. We infer what the motive after seeing the result.
But notice we reverse the order of events. In reality, motive came first, then the action, then the consequences. Here, we see the consequences and infer what the motives must have been. This type of inferrence might work in simplistic cases some of the time, but it breaks down in complicated cases where there are many alternatives.
In more complicated systems, individuals may not even see the triggering action. Thousands of small inputs interact and produce consequences that may not be easily predictable. We cannot assume that one person’s input means that they desired the consequences.
What about men who try to solve Wicked Problems and face many unintended consequences? The problem is messy, poorly defined, and resists attempts to solve.
The greatest flaws of motivation inference is that it assumes rational decision-making mattered. There is the classical “trinity” of forces – rational, irrational and non-rational elements in life. Consequences of policies are shaped by all three elements, but inferring motivation from consequences presumes that the consequences may only be shaped by a rational motive. The consequences may have been circumstantial and random for all we know.
Our biases assign a higher weight to uncertain motivations than concrete consequences. People engage in ad-hominem attacks by assigning a negative value to an individual rather than debate the merits of the ideas. On the other hand, if someone claims the purity of well-intentioned motives, then they are absolved of their failed and harmful policies.
There was a recent Penn and Teller Bullshit episode which attacked three sacred cows: Mother Teresa, Gandhi, Dalai Lama. In this case, all three were “holy” persons so we assume they did good things. Their message makes us feel good and engenders respect.
Now imagine they were not holy persons. They were just ordinary people from the street who did what they did. How would we judge the results of their actions?
Christopher Hitchens described the results of Mother Teresa’s policies. They did not help the poor of Calcutta. For instance, the medical care she provided was so awful it caused harm.
HITCHENS: The care facilities are grotesquely simple: rudimentary, unscientific, miles behind any modern conception of what medical science is supposed to do. There have been a number of articles … about the failure and primitivism of her treatment of lepers and the dying, of her attitude towards medication and prophylaxis.
As to why those who would normally consider themselves rationalists or skeptics have fallen for the Mother Teresa myth, I think there is an element of post-colonial condescension involved, in that most people have a slightly bad conscience about “the wretched of the Earth” and they are glad to feel that there are those who will take action. Then also there is the general problem of credulity, of people being willing – once a reputation has been established – to judge people’s actions by that reputation instead of the reputation by that action.
She will be elevated to sainthood because she denied proper scientific medical care to sick people.
There were many in India who genuinely help the poor. This includes the proverbial bakers, butchers, and merchants who feed the cities to make a profit. But their motivations are not seen as “pure” as the holy ones.
Indeed, when you hear of a micro-credit loaner who wants to make a profit off the poor, you might recoil in disgust. Why is that? Micro-finance alleviates poverty by giving the poor access to money to start businesses. Both the poor and the banker profit and this does far more to reduce poverty than anything the holy men have done in history. I know this and I recoiled in disgust writing the sentence. Why do the words “I want to profit off the poor” make us feel badeven when the effect is good? Why does Mother Teresa trapping poor lepers into a charnel house to die make us feel good?
I try to be a consequentialist. I cannot say that I am strictly ethically consequentialist or a Utilitarian, in part because we do not know the full consequences of our behavior.
The Importance Of Business Strategy For Your Business – Zoe Talent Solutions
Business strategy is the basic requirement for an organization regardless of segments. However, as new companies emerge every year, many would not survive market competition even with innovative products or services.
Therefore, conducting a business strategy review creates a huge shift in results, and leaders need to know how to do it in practice. Here I will present some tips and good practices so that your company’s strategy can be improved. At Zoe Talent Solutions we can help you to know more about business management and business strategies, this a huge ‘must do’ for companies of all sizes.
Make Sure People Are In The Right Positions
The main assets of a company should be a priority to make sure business management. And the most strategic positions of the organization are being filled by the greatest talent.
The first step is to identify what the positions are, according to the activities that give the most results. Check what the needs and skills are essential to achieve the organization’s goals. Then allocate the talents in the appropriate positions, or, if necessary, open an external selection process.
It is not difficult to find examples of business management companies with problems for succession of leaders.
Carefully Follow The Goals
The business strategy must have constant monitoring in order to evaluate the results and the need for changes in the action plan. Through the business goals, it is possible to verify the objectives of the company will be reached. And it is easy to measure the performance of the teams and helps to make effective decisions according to the indicators.
Through the targets, it is still possible to detect the need to conduct business strategy reviews. This can be done in several situations, such as when the customer does not perceive the differential of his brand. When there are operating margin falls even with investments or reduction of revenue even with increased efforts of marketing and sales teams.
To make it easier to see results, many companies use an integrated, standardized system to manage their goals and action plans. This can also be an incentive for employees to use the tool and follow corporate goals more closely.
Do Not Be Afraid Of Restructurings
When one hears talk about business management restructuring, many people believe that it refers to reducing staff numbers and cutting costs. However, corporate restructuring means much more than that.
This process can occur at any time, in order to improve results and increase profitability. The organization should reflect on the goals it wants to achieve, how to mitigate risks and assess pros and cons of the new strategy. This review of strategic planning can generate cost reduction, process modernization, and increase the efficiency of the areas.
A review of business strategy should occur, on average, every two or five years in all companies that seek to grow in the market and watch over their competitiveness. Having a business strategy is essential for achieving short- and long-term goals, as we have seen throughout this article.
Fayemi sacks VC, other top officers of EKSU
Gov. Kayode Fayemi of Ekiti on Tuesday approved the removal of the Vice-Chancellor of the Ekiti State University, (EKSU), Prof. Sam Oye-Bandele.
Fayemi performed the function in his capacity as the visitor to the state owned-institution.
The Chief Press Secretary (CPS) to the governor, Mr Yinka Oyebode, stated this in a statement to journalists in Ado-Ekiti.
Oyebode said the sack was sequel to the consideration and the adoption of the White Papers on the reports of the Visitation and Fact-Finding Panels by the State Executive Council.
Oyebode said the Chief Medical Director (CMD) of Ekiti State University Teaching Hospital (EKSUTH), Dr Kolawole Ogundipe, and the Provost of the College of Education, Ikere-Ekiti, Prof. Mojisola Oyarekua were also sacked.
According to the statement, the most senior officials are to take over the running of the institutions pending the appointment of substantive heads.
He said that in the case of EKSU, the Deputy Vice- Chancellor (Academics), Prof (Mrs.) Olubunmi Ajayi, should take charge in an acting capacity.
He said this would be pending the appointment of a substantive Vice-Chancellor by the institution’s Governing Council.
The CPS said the governor had also approved the appointment of Mrs. Folakemi Falore as the Sole Administrator for the College of Health Sciences and Technology, Ijero-Ekiti.
“As approved by the State Executive Council, the Governing Councils’ immediate task is the implementation of the approved recommendations of the White Paper.
“In the case of the College of Health Sciences and Technology, Ijero, the Sole Administrator is responsible for implementing the White Paper.
Oyebode added the governor had also approved the immediate constitution of new governing councils for the affected state institutions.
He said that they would be sworn-in on Monday. (NAN)