With about 3.23 million public-sector wage earners against 71.53 million self-employed Nigerians, who balances better government pay with the infrastructure that sustains everyone’s livelihood?
A salary increase makes an immediate promise: more money for food, transport, rent and school fees. For workers struggling to keep their households afloat, that promise deserves serious attention. But every public wage increase also raises a question for citizens outside government employment: what happens to the services and infrastructure on which their livelihoods depend?
The Trade Union Congress has proposed raising the salary of the lowest-paid federal worker from N70,000 to N300,000, with adjustments for other grades. This distinction matters: a federal salary demand is not yet a universally applicable national minimum wage. Nevertheless, its possible extension across government deserves examination.
Moving from N70,000 to N300,000 means adding N230,000 monthly: a 328.6 per cent increase. The proposed salary is approximately 4.29 times the existing floor.
Read Also:Support small scale businesses, self-employed to bridge unemployment – ILO
New Minimum Wage:NLC gives FG 2-week ultimatum to reduce petrol price
NLC demands immediate release of withheld Osun LG funds
Yet multiplying the entire government wage bill by 4.29 would be misleading. Employees already earn different amounts; the eventual cost depends on workforce numbers, existing salaries and negotiated adjustments.
Consider an illustration. For every 10,000 employees moving directly from N70,000 to N300,000, the additional basic salary cost would be N2.3 billion monthly, or N27.6 billion annually. That excludes associated obligations and adjustments for higher grades. This is an arithmetic scenario, not an estimate of any particular state’s payroll.
Now consider the Nigerians beyond that payroll.
The National Bureau of Statistics reported that 85.6 per cent of employed Nigerians were self-employed in the second quarter of 2024. Only 14.4 per cent were employees receiving wages or salaries, across public and private employment. Put plainly, approximately 86 out of every 100 working Nigerians earned their living through self-employment.
These percentages describe employed people, not all adults. Using the same survey’s 76.1 per cent employment-to-population ratio, self-employment represented approximately 65.1 per cent of the population aged 15 and above. This calculated figure includes 15–17-year-olds; it should not be presented as an exact percentage of adults aged 18 and above.
The imbalance remains striking. The Lagos State Employment Trust Fund’s analysis of the 2023 national labour survey identified approximately 3.23 million public-sector wage earners nationwide, representing 25.6 per cent of wage employment. That is a historical survey estimate, not a current consolidated government payroll count.
The trader, mechanic, farmer, tailor and hairdresser therefore belong at the centre of this debate. Their earnings will not automatically rise when government announces a new salary floor. Their businesses depend on customers, electricity, transport, security and functioning markets.
State finances complicate the discussion. BudgIT’s November 2026 State of States report records Adamawa’s 2025 personnel costs at N66.33 billion, with internally generated revenue covering only 36.39 per cent. Gombe generated N43.97 billion internally against personnel costs of N50.11 billion. These figures reveal dependence on federal transfers, rather than proving insolvency.
Federal allocations are legitimate state revenue. A credible affordability assessment must therefore examine total recurring revenue, debt repayments, existing commitments and the proposed payroll increase. The evidence does not establish what percentage of government workers serve states unable to afford N300,000. Claiming such precision would manufacture certainty.
The danger is the choice governments may make when expenditure outruns dependable income. They could postpone roads, drainage, water projects or equipment purchases; accumulate arrears; borrow; or impose additional charges on businesses.
These are possible responses, not inevitable consequences.
For the artisan, the transmission is practical. An unrepaired road raises delivery costs. Unreliable electricity increases production expenses. Poor drainage destroys stock. A salary settlement financed by sacrificing productive infrastructure can improve one household’s income while weakening another household’s business.
There are benefits too. Better-paid workers can buy more from traders and artisans. Teachers, nurses and other public employees deliver essential services. Improved remuneration can support retention and morale. The balance depends on how the increase is financed and whether goods and services expand alongside spending. Inflation is a risk, not an automatic mathematical outcome.
Government must also account for its own excesses. Affordability claims deserve scrutiny where waste, inflated contracts and unnecessary overheads persist.
The responsible settlement should publish verified payroll numbers, cost alternative increases, identify dependable funding and protect essential investment. Any phased agreement should have clear dates and enforceable commitments.
Labour should demand purchasing power alongside higher pay: affordable transport, reliable electricity, functioning healthcare and lower food costs and not only on their own welfare alone. This is because these also improve life beyond the salary register.
Nigeria needs wages that sustain workers and public investment that sustains work. The test of N300,000 is whether its financing improves livelihoods across the economy. A settlement succeeds when the civil servant can live decently and the trader outside the government gate can still prosper. The demand and acceptance require critical thinking by all parties involved.
By Olusegun Oyero OLURIN | The Gauge
