Academic activities at the International School, University of Lagos (ISL), were disrupted on Wednesday after staff members staged a protest over their alleged removal from the university’s payroll, unpaid allowances and the failure of the institution to fully implement a court judgment reportedly delivered in their favour.
The protest, which took place at the school’s main entrance, interrupted teaching and affected a scheduled mid-term examination, as the aggrieved workers demanded the restoration of their names to the payroll and the payment of outstanding salaries, allowances and other employment benefits.
The demonstration brought renewed attention to a dispute that the workers said had persisted for years, despite previous interventions and legal proceedings. The protesters gathered at the school gate, chanting solidarity songs and displaying placards highlighting what they described as unequal treatment between them and other employees of the university.
Some of the placards carried messages such as “Equal Work, Equal Rights,” “ISL tutors deserve their due” and “Same university, Same commitment, Same rights.” Others drew attention to the alleged disparity in staff welfare, insisting that teachers at the secondary school should not be denied benefits enjoyed by other employees within the university system.
Although the pedestrian gate remained open throughout the demonstration, allowing students to enter the school premises, the protesting workers maintained that teaching activities had been suspended and the mid-term examination did not take place.
Speaking during the protest, the Chairman of the Senior Staff Association of Nigerian Universities, University of Lagos chapter, Dr Ademola Yusuf, alleged that the affected workers were removed from the university’s payroll without an adequate explanation.
Yusuf said the workers became aware of the problem when they attempted to register on the Integrated Personnel and Payroll Information System (IPPIS) but were reportedly informed that their names were no longer available on the platform.
He described the development as arbitrary, saying: “All of a sudden, whimsically and capriciously, our names were removed from the payroll.”
According to him, the workers only discovered the alleged exclusion when they assembled for the payroll registration exercise and were unable to complete the process because their names had been removed.
Yusuf further alleged that the intervention of Wale Babalakin, who was then the Pro-Chancellor and Chairman of the university’s Governing Council, had led to the temporary restoration of the workers’ names. However, he said the arrangement did not last, as the names were allegedly removed again after salaries were paid in February 2020.
“We were paid in February, only for them to remove our names again by March. What did we do? They gave no reason whatsoever,” Yusuf said.
The union leader argued that the affected employees were recruited by the university’s Governing Council and should therefore enjoy the employment rights and benefits attached to their appointments. He questioned why workers who, according to him, possessed appointment letters similar to those of other university employees should be excluded from the payroll.
“The way the vice-chancellor was employed is the way we were employed. We all have the same letters. So, what offence did we commit? Why did you remove our names?” he queried.
The dispute subsequently moved to the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, where the workers sought legal redress. Yusuf said the court ruled in their favour on May 11, 2026, but maintained that the university had yet to fully comply with the judgment by restoring the affected employees to the payroll and settling their outstanding entitlements.
He expressed concern that the workers remained uncertain about the university’s position on the judgment, including whether management intended to appeal or take other legal steps.
Beyond the restoration of their names, the protesters are demanding payment of outstanding benefits, including arrears arising from salary adjustments and components of the Consolidated Tertiary Institutions Salary Allowance. Yusuf said the workers had continued engaging the university authorities over the matter but had yet to secure a satisfactory resolution.
Another protester, Asaju Toye, a tutor who said he had spent 31 years working at the school, also accused the university of failing to implement the judgment despite repeated appeals by the affected employees and their legal representative.
Toye said the workers had previously enjoyed employment benefits available to other university staff before their names were removed from the payroll. He traced the emergence of the problem to 2019, when the affected employees attempted to register on IPPIS and discovered that their names had not been uploaded to the system.
He corroborated the account that the workers’ names were temporarily restored following the intervention of the then Pro-Chancellor before being removed again in March 2020.
According to Toye, the court subsequently upheld the workers’ position that they were employees of the university and were entitled to the same rights and privileges as other federal government staff members within the institution.
“We are asking for obedience to the court order, to restore us to the payroll, like every other federal government staff in the university,” he said.
Toye disclosed that approximately 60 employees remained affected by the dispute, compared with more than 100 workers who were initially involved. He attributed the reduction largely to the retirement of some of the affected staff members.
The protesters also expressed dissatisfaction with the response they received from the school’s principal, who reportedly addressed them on Wednesday morning but did not provide assurances that their demands would be met.
The workers said they were prepared to sustain the protest indefinitely until the university management addressed their grievances. Their position raises further concerns about the potential impact of the dispute on teaching schedules, assessment arrangements and the academic welfare of students at the school.
For students, the immediate concern is the disruption of scheduled academic activities, particularly the mid-term examination that the workers said was not conducted. Any prolonged interruption could require the school to review its teaching timetable and make alternative arrangements for affected assessments.
The dispute also places renewed focus on the importance of clear employment arrangements, transparent payroll administration and timely compliance with court decisions in public institutions. Where staff members believe that their employment rights have been violated, prolonged disagreements over payroll status and entitlements can deepen workplace tensions and affect the continuity of educational services.
The university’s position on the allegations remained unclear at the time the report was filed. Its spokesperson, Adejoke Alaga-Ibraheem, was contacted for a response and reportedly promised to respond, but no official reply had been received by the time of publication.
The central issues therefore remain the workers’ demand for reinstatement on the payroll, the payment of outstanding benefits and the implementation of the reported court judgment. Until the university management formally addresses the allegations, the extent to which the dispute can be resolved through dialogue and whether the protest will continue remains uncertain.
