Controversy Trails Disengagement Of 65 Workers By Premium Pensions

The recent disengagement of approximately 65 workers from Premium Pensions Limited is shrouded in controversy, as both parties are pointing accusing fingers at each other.

While the affected staff have filed a suit against their former employer over alleged failure to provide them with their entitlements, Premium Pensions Limited (PPL) has since denied this, claiming that all the affected staff were duly compensated.

To this end, the National Industrial Court will soon commence hearing on a multi-billion-naira lawsuit filed by the 65 disengaged workers, who are seeking redress over what they describe as ‘wrongful, illegal and unconscionable termination of their employment without notice or payment of agreed benefits.’

In the suit marked NICN/ABJ/__/2025, the claimants, led by Ibrahim Usman Raji, Emmanuel Folorunsho, Mustapha Ibrahim, Saidu Sulaiman, Muhammed Baba Ibrahim, among others, are suing in a representative capacity on behalf of themselves and 61 others whose employment was terminated in August 2025.

The claimants are asking the court to declare that valid employment contracts existed between them and Premium Pension up to the date of their disengagement and that their abrupt sack “without notice and without salary in lieu of notice” violated their employment terms and international best labour practices.

According to court filings obtained by LEADERSHIP, the former employees alleged that they were issued disengagement letters between August 4 and August 2025, but that the letters were back-dated to July 29, 2025 and made effective from August 1 in a deliberate attempt to deny them earned benefits, including the mandatory three-month notice period and August education subsidies.

They argued that their removal occurred at a time when the company continued to post rising profits, stating that several of them had worked faithfully for several decades, received commendations, and attracted major Retirement Savings Account portfolios for the company; yet, they were denied incentives and commissions paid to other exiting staff.

The suit also alleged that Premium Pension violated an exit-benefit scheme approved by its Board on January 27, 2023, which provided between six months and three years of gross salary as gratuity depending on length of service.

The claimants asserted that the Board further reaffirmed the funding structure on December 19, 2023, approving 10 per cent of the company’s annual profit as gratuity allocation.

Despite these alleged approvals, the claimants insist that Premium Pension has refused to release their gratuities, profit-sharing entitlements, and 13th-month salary for 2025, alleging that the funds were diverted to profit-sharing for shareholders rather than being paid to eligible exiting employees.

In addition, the aggrieved workers told the court that some disengaged staff were not paid ‘a dime’ over alleged liabilities, even though they opted to continue servicing such liabilities from their salaries.

Counsel for the claimants, RegCom Attorneys, stated that the former staff members are seeking monetary orders compelling the defendant to pay three months’ gross emoluments in lieu of notice, a lump-sum disengagement allowance, full gratuity, unpaid commissions, the 2025 13th-month salary, and a productivity bonus.

Meanwhile, they are also demanding 10 per cent monthly interest on the total sum from the date of their alleged wrongful disengagement until execution of judgment.

Additionally, the disengaged workers are also praying that the court award N30 million each as general damages for physical and mental hardship, financial loss, and emotional distress, and N50 million as the cost of litigation.

Correspondence attached to the suit shows that the claimants’ lawyers issued formal demands to Premium Pension on August 20 and October 10, 2025. While the company allegedly acknowledged entitlement to profit-share and performance bonuses, it denied the existence of any approved gratuity scheme in its October 16 reply.

Consequently, the National Industrial Court is expected to set a definite hearing date after the defendant’s appearance.

Earlier, the affected ex-workers said, there were a series of liaisons and follow-up by  representatives of the ex-staff to the previous Board Chairmen of the company, namely Alhaji Aliyu Abdurrahnan Dikko,  Mr Ibrahim Alhassan Babayo and Arc—Yunusa Yakubu but to no avail.

When contacted by LEADERSHIP yesterday for a response to the allegations, the spokesperson for the Pension Fund Administrator (PFA), Silas Anji, stated that, according to the company’s records, the disengaged workers had been duly paid their entitlements and benefits.

He disclosed that some of the claimants had previously received allowances, such as Wardrobe, housing, and car allowances, which are mostly annual payments. The company then deducted the balance, as their disengagement occurred within a year.

He said some of them owed car or housing loans or both, which the company is entitled to deduct at the point of exit, from their severance packages.

Even then, he said, Premium Pensions had to waive some of this debt for some of them, so that both parties could be satisfied, wondering why his former colleagues had decided to take legal action on this development.

“All these are well spelt out at the point of engagement, to which they signed. Therefore, the company is not engaging in any unlawful activities. It is only carrying out the oath and agreements they signed when the PFA employed them, ” he pointed out.