Do you, as a result of prevailing circumstances of unemployment, cease to be human and by being so, robbed of your humanity, dignity and any self value whatsoever? The tyranny of employers knows no bounds, yet the law takes a sit by the ring-side, with a front view yet not observing the blows dealt by the heavy weight employers on the dignity of skinny employees.

Relevantly, the Labor Act does impose the duty on the company (the employer) to ensure that its employee is paid his salary, as soon as it becomes due. In reality, even though the salary becomes due immediately the month ends, most employers gives the employee a few more days, weeks, and most shockingly months before the employee can get access to his money. It is true that during these periods immediately sequel to the last day of the month, the money is as of right that of the employee, merely in the possession of the employee, and the former has the right to demand for his work’s pay.

Sections 5 and 15 of the Labor Act specifically covers this,
First, Section 5:

1) Except where it is expressly permitted by this Act or any other law, no employer shall make any deduction or make any agreement or contract with a worker for any deduction from the wages to be paid by the employer to the worker, or for any payment to the employer by the worker, for or in respect of any fines:

Provided that, with the prior consent in writing of an authorized labour officer, a reasonable deduction may be made in respect of injury or loss caused to the employer by the wilful misconduct or neglect of the worker.

(2) An employer may with the consent of a worker make deductions from the wages of the worker and pay to the appropriate person any contributions to provident or pension funds or other schemes agreed to by the worker and approved by the State Authority.
...
(5) Deductions may be made from the wages of a worker in respect of overpayment of wages, but only in respect of any such overpayment made during the three months immediately preceding the month in which the overpayment was discovered.
...
(7) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the total amount of deductions that may be made from the wages of a worker in any one month shall not exceed one-third of the wages of the worker for that month.


And now Section 15:
15. Wages shall become due and payable at the end of each period for which the contract is expressed to subsist, that is to say, daily, weekly or at such other period as may be agreed upon:
Provided that, where the period is more than one month, the wages shall become due and payable at intervals not exceeding one month.

You are invited to Google the sections yourself, to prevent conjecture as to what the law states. (I am no lawyer, but this is plain English).
So the position is clear, it is illegal for the employer to withhold/slash your salary, mid-month or after the month has ended. He has the duty to pay the employee immediately it becomes due, exactly the amount agreed in the contract of employment. He has no right to punitively deduct your salary either for lateness or whatsoever reason he gives for such measure in his ‘company policies’. I agreed to N1,000, I have done my side of the deal, so you better pay me what you owe. Don’t tell me my work was only worth N999, and so credit me with that. The law is on my side!
Is the law really on his side?

The Helpless Employee
He has become adapted to receiving his salaries late, if he receives them at all, and in whatever way the boss wants. When the employer is in the habit of paying half of last month’s salary in the middle of the succeeding month, and pays the balance later in bits (I know an employer who did this, not because he didn’t have the money, he just didn’t want his staff doing anything meaningful with the money), the employee thanks God he has a job at all. Else would you expect him to approach the Court of Law to enforce the rights out-listed in Sections 5 and 15 of the Labour Act, over late payment or slashing of one month’s salary? For one, suing your boss means automatic resignation. Two, hopefully the case will be completed in the lifetime of the employee. Why waste so much time and effort to fight late payment of last month’s salary/monthly salaries? What will the Judge say, okay give him his money? The employer says, ‘But I already have given him’. The Judge then says, ‘Good, here is a slap on the wrist. Now don’t do that again’. Of course you know the employee is not resuming to that office again. Besides, the employee will need to prove some sort of damage has been done by virtue of the late payment, quantifiable in monetary terms.
The law can’t help the employee these days. But from the view of the Law, the employee is king. The law will need glasses of course, as it seems not to see that the helplessness of the employee, more so now when the country is facing one of its worst economic seasons of all time, with a ripple negative consequence on the employment market. Losses suffered by companies are firstly transferred to the hapless low level employees, before the customers and then the bow-tie clad senior level executives. The Law simply cannot completely protect the employee.

I don’t recollect the time when an employee can whimsically resign his employment with hopes for a better job, simply because he didn’t like his boss’ face, or his boss was unfair to him. At such a time it is expected that the boss will plead for the employee to remain with him knowing how difficult it may be to find a replacement. And the employee, proudly negotiates better terms for himself; take-it-or-I-walk-out. That would have been such a time, and I assume such a clime did exist.
But these times we are in are not such a time. For now the employer is king. He can slash the salary at whim, and give the employee a take-it-or-walk-out look, armed with the knowledge that should the employee decide to leave the vacancy, hundreds if not millions of CVs will roll in before the end of the week, of more qualified subjects who are ready to do more for less pay. It is a mutual knowledge between both, and so the employee humbly gets back to work and even works harder. So when the boss asks him to jump in middle of a board meeting, the employee must spring to his feet no matter how demeaning, even though such athletics are not described in his employment letter.

Let’s understand with the employer, the economy is simply not favourable to his business so he needs to downsize. What we can’t understand is why he adopts the means of dehumanizing and complete disregard for the employees’ dignity with the hope that the latter would voluntarily resign. And so he asks you to jump some more, on a foot, and this time clap your hands over your head.

Ladies and gentlemen, that is the state we are left in; a state where the Nigerian employee feels like a slave, leaving home in the mornings without the certainty of returning with his job.
Let’s bring this narrative home.
It is important to employers to know that dignity of work is to be preserved, and the basic rights of workers must be respected--the right to decent and fair wages, and to economic initiative. True, the employee may not be working for just the money and simply enjoys his work and so it’s not all about money. However, bills and outstanding utilities hanging on the employee’s neck do not understand such concept as enjoying-your-work. The employee has basic needs, no matter how pleasant his work is, and the needs must be met, ergo he works for the company.
The employer should know that playing with his money is a huge de-motivating factor, which will affect the quality of his work. Besides, if the company doesn’t care about him, why should he care for the company?

Employers need to understand that the economic situation of the company is no licence for employers to treat employees without respect. As the economy bites, it bites the employee deeper than it does the employer. So show some respect, will ya?

p.s- wrong assumptions on the law is regretted. open to corrections from lawyers