By Concerned Staff
You cannot continue to demand the best from workers while giving them so little to live on. Behind the cameras, microphones and transmitters are men and women whose own struggles rarely make the news.
There is something deeply troubling about working for an organisation whose responsibility is to tell the stories of Nigerians, yet whose own workers have stories of hardship that nobody seems willing to tell.
The Nigerian Television Authority (NTA) has spent decades informing, educating and entertaining the nation. Generations of Nigerians grew up watching NTA. Its reporters covered historic events, its newscasters became familiar faces in living rooms, and its production crews worked behind the scenes to keep the nation informed.
But behind the familiar logo and the bright studio lights is a workforce struggling with a painful question: How long can an organisation continue to demand sacrifice from its workers without adequately rewarding that sacrifice?
This is not a question of ingratitude. It is a question of fairness, dignity and survival.
When work no longer guarantees a decent living
Imagine waking up every morning, dressing for work, spending money on transportation, putting in hours of professional service and returning home at the end of the day, only to realise that your salary has barely made a difference to your family’s needs.
Imagine being a professional journalist with years of experience, responsible for gathering information, verifying facts, writing stories, editing reports, presenting news and ensuring that millions of people receive accurate information, yet struggling to meet basic household expenses.
For many NTA workers, this is not an imaginary situation. It is the reality they confront every month.
The cost of food, transportation, housing, children’s education and healthcare continues to rise. Yet the earnings of many workers remain inadequate to meet these demands. The gap between what people earn and what it costs to live has become a source of constant anxiety.
A worker should not have to spend an entire career worrying about how to survive on the salary earned from a legitimate, full-time job.
And it becomes even more painful when the worker has devoted the most productive years of their life to public service, only to approach retirement with anxiety rather than confidence.
If a worker gives an organisation the best years of their life, should that organisation leave them struggling to live with dignity?
In broadcasting, public holidays and weekends are often just another working day
There are professions where public holidays offer a welcome break from work. Broadcasting is not one of them.
When Nigerians are celebrating Christmas, Eid-el-Fitr, Eid-el-Kabir, Easter, Independence Day or other public holidays, the news does not go on holiday. Government activities continue. Accidents happen. Emergencies occur. Elections are conducted. Communities experience events that demand immediate coverage.
And somebody must be at work to tell those stories.
That somebody could be an NTA reporter who leaves home before sunrise to cover an assignment. It could be a camera operator standing for hours under the sun, a driver transporting a crew, an editor working against a transmission deadline, a producer coordinating a programme or a newscaster preparing to go on air while others enjoy their holidays.
Then comes the weekend. For many NTA workers, Saturday and Sunday are not necessarily days of rest. Depending on their assignments, they may be in the newsroom, on location, in the editing suite or behind the microphone.
The work must go on, and the workers understand that. Nobody needs to explain the demands of broadcasting to people who have spent years practising the profession.
But understanding the demands of a job should not mean accepting a system that fails to recognise the sacrifices it requires.
Where staff work on public holidays, there should be proper holiday duty allowances or appropriate compensatory time off. Where weekend work is required, that commitment should be recognised. Where employees work late into the night or beyond their normal schedules, there should be a fair and transparent system for compensating them.
Passion for journalism cannot permanently replace fair remuneration.
The fact that a worker loves the job does not mean the worker has no bills to pay.
And when a worker returns home after a long assignment, the electricity bill, school fees, rent and food expenses are waiting. They do not recognise the public importance of the story that worker has just delivered.
The special risks of keeping the transmitters running
There is another issue that deserves urgent attention: the potential occupational risks associated with broadcasting transmission facilities.
NTA depends on transmitters to deliver its signals to viewers. Personnel work to operate, maintain and support the infrastructure that keeps these facilities running. Some work in environments where radiofrequency electromagnetic fields may be present.
This raises an important question: what has been done to assess and manage the exposure of workers who serve around these facilities?
Are appropriate exposure assessments carried out? Are safety procedures, warning signs, access restrictions and equipment maintenance measures in place? Are workers adequately informed about the risks associated with their duties? Are the necessary occupational health and safety measures being implemented consistently across stations?
These are not questions to be dismissed. They concern the health, safety and welfare of the people who keep the network operational.
The level of radiofrequency exposure depends on several factors, including transmitter power, distance, frequency and duration of exposure. The risks therefore need to be properly assessed rather than assumed. But uncertainty about individual exposure levels is not an excuse for neglecting workers’ safety.
Every NTA staff member deserves proper occupational health protection, and every member of staff should be covered by a fair and transparent policy on special allowances for the demands and risks of broadcasting work.
The demand for a special allowance should not be restricted to a handful of employees selected by job title. NTA is a connected operation. Reporters, camera operators, engineers, technicians, producers, editors, presenters, drivers and other personnel all contribute to keeping the institution running. They all work under the demands of a profession that does not operate like an ordinary nine-to-five office.
The case for a special broadcasting allowance should therefore cover the entire workforce, with the appropriate framework developed through engagement with staff representatives and the relevant authorities.
Where specific duties attract additional exposure or other demonstrable risks, those risks must also be assessed and addressed through appropriate safety measures and any additional compensation required.
An allowance is not a substitute for safety. And safety measures should not be used as an excuse to deny workers fair compensation.
The point is simple: NTA cannot continue to rely on the dedication of its workforce while leaving the welfare of that workforce to chance.
A transmitter cannot be more important than the person responsible for keeping it operational.
Thirty-five years of service, and only ₦5 million to show for it?
Perhaps nothing illustrates the anxiety surrounding retirement more painfully than the reported experience of an NTA director who retired after 35 years of active service and received just ₦5 million as the 25 per cent lump-sum pension payment from their retirement savings.
Thirty-five years.
Think about that for a moment.
Thirty-five years of waking up for work. Thirty-five years of reporting for duty, meeting deadlines, handling responsibilities and contributing to an institution. Thirty-five years during which a worker may have raised children, paid rent, supported family members and put personal ambitions aside in the hope that retirement would eventually bring some measure of peace.
Then retirement comes, and the person reportedly receives ₦5 million as a lump sum.
What exactly is the retiree expected to do with that money?
Buy a house? Pay years of accumulated bills? Establish a business? Settle medical expenses? Support children who may still depend on their parents? Rebuild a life after the regular salary stops coming?
In today’s economic climate, ₦5 million can disappear quickly when faced with housing costs, healthcare, family responsibilities and the basic expenses of starting a new chapter in life.
Even if carefully managed, how far can that money reasonably go for someone who has spent 35 years in active service and is expected to live on after retirement?
And that is before considering the question of a sustainable monthly income.
The reported payment deserves scrutiny, and the retiree’s full pension statement would be needed to establish the complete retirement position. The ₦5 million should not automatically be mistaken for the person’s entire pension entitlement. Under Nigeria’s contributory pension system, the lump sum is only one component of retirement benefits, while the remaining balance may be used to provide periodic income, depending on the applicable arrangements. .
But that clarification does not remove the central concern. It makes the question even more important: what level of retirement security does the system actually provide for a worker after 35 years of service?
A retiree should not have to leave the workplace wondering whether the savings accumulated over a lifetime will be enough to meet the demands of the years ahead.
If ₦5 million is the reported lump sum received by a director after 35 years of service, NTA management and the relevant pension authorities should be prepared to explain the circumstances and examine whether the retirement arrangements provide adequate security.
This is not about ridiculing a pension system or questioning the person who retired. It is about asking whether the outcome meets any reasonable expectation of dignity after a lifetime of work.
Thirty-five years of service should count for more than a farewell ceremony, a handshake and the anxiety of wondering how to survive.
Workers need to see retirement as a reward for years of service, not as the beginning of another struggle.
The sacrifices nobody sees
The public sees the reporter standing before the camera, but rarely sees the hours spent travelling to an assignment, waiting for interviews, chasing information and returning to the newsroom to meet a deadline.
Viewers see a newscaster looking composed on screen, but do not see the preparation, the pressure of live transmission or the responsibility of delivering information accurately.
They hear the finished report, but not the producer’s frustration when equipment fails, the editor’s struggle to meet a deadline or the technical officer’s efforts to restore a signal.
Broadcasting is teamwork. When one part of that chain fails, the entire operation can suffer.
Yet too often, the sacrifices that sustain the system are treated as ordinary expectations rather than contributions deserving proper recognition.
There are staff members who use personal resources to facilitate assignments, travel long distances to cover events or find ways to get work done when the resources available to them are inadequate.
Such arrangements should never become a substitute for a properly funded operational system.
A national broadcaster should not depend on the personal finances of its employees to fulfil its institutional responsibilities.
Operational transport, functional equipment, reliable power, safe facilities and adequate field allowances are not luxuries. They are necessities for a broadcasting organisation that expects its workers to deliver quality service.
When these provisions are missing, the burden falls on the workforce. And when the workforce is already poorly paid, that burden becomes even heavier.
What exactly are we asking NTA workers to sacrifice for?
Loyalty is important. Public service is important. Institutional history is important.
But loyalty cannot be measured only by how much hardship a worker is willing to endure.
A staff member who has spent ten, fifteen or twenty years in an organisation should be able to look back on that service with a reasonable sense of security. Years of experience should count for something. Professional growth should lead to better opportunities. Promotion should bring meaningful financial improvement. Retirement should be a period of rest, not a new battle against poverty.
Unfortunately, the fear of what lies ahead can become overwhelming when workers see the gap between their years of service and the income available to sustain them.
What happens when an experienced journalist can no longer comfortably pay rent? What happens when a technical officer struggles to provide for the family despite years of specialised service? What happens when a worker approaches retirement without sufficient confidence that the benefits awaiting them will provide a decent standard of living?
These questions deserve more than assurances that the organisation is doing its best.
They deserve a serious review of salaries, allowances, career progression and retirement security.
Management must recognise that the welfare of staff is not separate from the performance of the institution. It is central to it.
NTA cannot build a modern broadcaster on the backs of struggling workers
The broadcasting industry has changed dramatically. Digital technology has transformed news gathering, editing, transmission, audience engagement and content distribution. Competition has increased, and viewers have more choices than ever before.
For NTA to remain relevant, it must invest in modern equipment, functional infrastructure, staff development and better working conditions.
But technology alone will not solve the problem.
A modern newsroom still needs trained journalists. A digital transmission system still needs competent engineers and technicians. A well-equipped studio still needs producers, camera operators, editors, presenters and other professionals who understand their responsibilities.
Machines can improve efficiency, but they cannot eliminate the need to motivate and retain skilled personnel.
What is the point of investing in equipment if experienced workers are leaving because their earnings cannot sustain them? What is the point of expecting innovation when staff are preoccupied with the daily struggle to survive?
NTA must recognise that its human capital is one of its most valuable assets. It cannot continue to expect outstanding performance while treating staff welfare as an issue to be considered only when circumstances permit.
A better salary structure is no longer optional
The demand for improved remuneration should not be reduced to a complaint about money. It is a demand for a sustainable working relationship between an institution and the people who keep it running.
NTA management should urgently engage the relevant government authorities, labour representatives and other stakeholders on a comprehensive remuneration review that reflects the realities of the broadcasting profession.
The review should address:
* A substantial salary increase that reflects inflation, professional responsibilities, years of experience and the need to retain skilled personnel.
* A special broadcasting allowance for all NTA staff, recognising the peculiar demands of the profession and the collective effort required to keep the network operational.
* Radiation-related occupational risk assessments and appropriate special compensation, alongside proper safety measures for staff working in and around transmitting facilities. Every staff member should be covered by the overall welfare framework, with additional protections based on assessed risks where necessary.
* Weekend and public holiday allowances, or appropriate compensatory time off, under a clear policy that recognises the reality that broadcasting does not stop for holidays.
* Adequate field, transport and assignment allowances, so employees are not forced to subsidise official duties from their personal salaries.
* Night duty and overtime compensation for staff required to work beyond normal schedules.
* Improved workplace facilities and equipment, including safe buildings, reliable power, functional studios, operational vehicles and modern digital systems.
* Better retirement security, including transparent pension information, timely remittances and an honest review of whether retirement benefits are adequate for a dignified life.
* Regular training and career development, enabling staff to acquire the skills needed in an increasingly digital broadcasting environment.
These are practical steps towards building a workforce that is properly equipped, adequately compensated and able to concentrate on its responsibilities.
Management must also communicate openly with staff about what is possible, what requires government approval and the steps being taken to achieve improvements.
Silence only deepens frustration.
The government must pay attention
NTA is not just another workplace. It is a national institution with a responsibility to serve the public.
That responsibility makes the welfare of its workforce a matter of legitimate public concern, especially where funding, remuneration and employment conditions require decisions beyond the authority of station management.
The Federal Government, through the relevant ministry and other appropriate agencies, should examine the conditions under which NTA personnel work and determine what reforms are necessary.
If existing civil service arrangements are inadequate for the peculiar demands of national broadcasting, the government should review the available options within the law, including a more suitable remuneration framework that recognises the profession’s demands while protecting public accountability and financial sustainability.
A special broadcasting salary structure should not be dismissed before it is seriously examined. It should be properly costed, transparently negotiated and supported by a sustainable funding plan.
The government must also ensure that funds intended for broadcasting operations translate into functioning equipment, safer workplaces, adequate transport and better conditions for the people delivering the service.
A national broadcaster cannot be expected to compete effectively in a modern media environment if the welfare of its workforce remains an afterthought.
Before the next worker gives up
Perhaps the most painful part of this conversation is that many workers continue to report for duty despite their frustrations.
They show up because they have responsibilities. They do their jobs because the news must go out. They endure because families depend on them and because years of service have created a sense of obligation to the institution.
But endurance should not be mistaken for satisfaction.
A quiet workforce is not necessarily a happy workforce. People may continue to work while becoming increasingly discouraged, searching for opportunities elsewhere or losing the motivation that once made them proud of their profession.
When experienced staff leave, an organisation loses more than employees. It loses institutional memory, professional judgement, mentoring capacity and years of practical knowledge that cannot be replaced overnight.
It is therefore in NTA’s own interest to address these concerns before the consequences become more difficult to reverse.
The question is not whether NTA workers should be grateful to have jobs. They are professionals who provide a service to the nation, and their work deserves respect.
The question is whether a national institution can continue to depend on their commitment while failing to give adequate attention to the conditions under which that commitment is sustained.
How many public holidays must an NTA employee spend away from family without adequate recognition? How many weekends must be sacrificed? How many years should an experienced professional spend struggling to meet basic needs? How long should workers wait for a fair special allowance and proper occupational health protection? And what kind of retirement should a worker expect after 35 years of service?
These are not questions that should make management uncomfortable simply because they are being asked. They should make management uncomfortable if they have remained unanswered for so long.
The men and women of NTA are not asking for charity. They are asking for fairness. They are asking for salaries that reflect the realities of life, allowances that recognise the demands of their duties, workplaces that protect their dignity and a retirement that does not fill them with dread.
They are asking for an institution that values the people behind the broadcast.
NTA has served Nigeria for decades. Its workers have helped keep the nation informed through elections, national emergencies, political transitions, sporting triumphs and countless moments in the country’s history.
They deserve more than applause for their service. They deserve practical action.
Because behind every bulletin is a human being. Behind every outside broadcast is a worker who has travelled, waited, endured and delivered. Behind every signal reaching a Nigerian home is someone whose labour has made that service possible.
The nation cannot continue to rely on the sacrifice of NTA workers while ignoring the conditions of their survival.
It is time for better salaries. It is time for fair allowances. It is time for safer workplaces. It is time for proper recognition of weekend and public holiday duties. It is time for a special broadcasting remuneration package that respects the realities of the profession. And it is time to take retirement security seriously.
Above all, it is time for NTA workers to feel that the institution they serve also cares about them.
A national broadcaster should not only give Nigerians a voice. It should also ensure that the people who make that voice possible are heard.
The cameras are rolling. The microphones are on. The transmitters are running. But who is listening to the people who keep them running?
