BEYOND its foremost mandate of national unity and integration after the Nigerian Civil War, the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) is also saddled with addressing the uneven distribution of skilled manpower by deploying graduates to various parts of the country. Yet, 52 years since its establishment, recent developments, particularly the alarm raised by the NYSC Director-General, Brig-Gen. Olakunle Nafiu over the increasing rejection of corps members by their assigned employers for their mandatory one-year service, has raised concerns.
A situation where young graduates from the universities and polytechnics deployed to contribute their quota to national development and, in turn, get exposed to several opportunities, the most remarkable being practical experience, are rejected without cogent reasons is no doubt, unacceptable. This notorious trend, while not absolving the public sector, is more pervasive in the private sector.
Although there are no comprehensive nationwide statistics reflecting the percentage of corps members rejected in their places of primary assignment, it still persists not just among the top echelon of the NYSC but also among thousands of Nigerians, who have benefitted from the scheme.
We condemn this ugly trend, as every Nigerian firm should consider themselves partners of the NYSC. Rejecting corps members across the country is unacceptable to us.As a matter of fact, the absorption of corps members is a part of their corporate social responsibility, beyond the tangible prospects, these youngsters can offer during their service year.
While it is tempting to blame these corps members for purportedly lacking the requisite expertise, it is important to emphasize that the essence of the scheme is to avail them of the skills and experience, which are often more available in the private sector. Moreover, the psychological trauma that the rejection poses to corps members is also a source of concern. A situation where these youngsters, mostly in their 20s, are given no chance to prove themselves certainly leaves them with a permanent psychological scar and a rather bleak future.
There is a need for the government to embark on a sensitisation campaign and possibly make it mandatory for the private sector to absorb corps members. Allowing only the public sector to accept corps members will defeat the essence of the scheme.
Again, the government and the leadership of the NYSC should interface with the organized private sector to get their buy-in. Instances abound of cases where corps members are wrongly deployed to areas where they are least desired. Such cases would warrant an outright rejection of the corps member or tactical abandonment.
Furthermore, we are not unmindful that a preponderance of these rejections is initiated by the corps members themselves, who, for one reason or another, are not favourably disposed to their place of primary assignment or have earlier influenced their choice of employment for the service year.
To discourage such a trend, we recommend stricter orientation courses on camp to prepare these corps members and help them to understand the purpose of the scheme. Over the years, many corps members have come to place heavier weight on the emoluments offered at their various postings or other pecuniary considerations that they lose sight of the intention for service.
We further encourage the NYSC to keep accurate data or conduct a survey to find out areas where corps members are rejected and why they are rejected and find possible solutions to the issue. This will not only help avert future occurrences but also ensure that the scheme remains on course.
