The crisis within Nigeria’s aviation unions has deepened following a dispute over the sharing formula for the five per cent Ticket Sales Charge (TSC) collected from airline passengers.
The Nigeria Civil Aviation Authority (NCAA) chapter of the National Association of Air Traffic Engineers (NAAE) has distanced itself from its national leadership after the association backed calls for a review of the portion of the charge allocated to the NCAA.
The national body had urged the National Assembly to reconsider the current revenue-sharing arrangement, arguing that it no longer reflected the operational demands and funding requirements of Nigeria’s air navigation services.
Under the existing formula, the five per cent TSC is distributed among five aviation agencies, with the NCAA receiving 56 per cent, the Nigerian Airspace Management Agency (NAMA) 22 per cent, the Nigerian Meteorological Agency (NiMet) nine per cent, the Nigerian College of Aviation Technology (NCAT) seven per cent and the Nigerian Safety Investigation Bureau (NSIB) six per cent.
Those pushing for a change in the arrangement have called for the NCAA’s allocation to be reduced from 56 per cent to 40 per cent, while NAMA’s share would rise from 22 per cent to 40 per cent.
The NCAA chapter of NAAE, however, said it was not consulted before the national leadership publicly expressed support for the proposed changes.
In a communiqué signed by its chairman, Fredrick Agunloye, the chapter said the position taken by the national body did not represent the views of its members.
It argued that issues affecting national aviation policy required broad consultation among members across the various aviation agencies before a position was adopted.
The chapter said the TSC was a statutory levy collected from passengers and distributed among aviation agencies to enable them to carry out their respective responsibilities.
It maintained that the existing formula recognised the distinct but complementary roles played by the agencies in ensuring the safety, security and efficiency of the aviation system.
According to the engineers, the NCAA depends heavily on its TSC allocation to fund its regulatory responsibilities because, unlike service providers such as NAMA, it does not operate airports, provide air navigation services or generate significant commercial revenue.
The chapter said the funds support the certification and licensing of airlines, airports, maintenance organisations, air navigation service providers and aviation training institutions. They also contribute to safety surveillance, audits, consumer protection, accident prevention and enforcement of aviation regulations.
It warned that cutting the NCAA’s allocation could affect the agency’s ability to carry out these responsibilities effectively.
Among the potential consequences identified were reduced safety inspections and surveillance, delays in certification and licensing, inadequate training and requalification of aviation safety inspectors, difficulties in acquiring critical oversight equipment and weaker compliance with International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) Standards and Recommended Practices.
The chapter acknowledged that NAMA and other government agencies also faced funding constraints, but argued that addressing the financial challenges of one agency should not undermine another.
It called for a sustainable funding framework that would adequately support all aviation agencies while enabling them to fulfil their statutory mandates.
The NCAA chapter also urged the NAAE leadership and other stakeholders to adopt a broader consultative approach when dealing with major aviation policy issues.
It called for constructive dialogue and evidence-based engagement before public positions were taken on matters affecting the sector.
