Defining Enough: The Nigerian Salary Question – F.O. Tiamiyu
For professionals, the sobering conclusion is this: “enough” is negotiable, contingent and strategic. It is negotiable because individuals can shape their value through skills, reputation and mobility. It is contingent because personal circumstances—location, dependants, and career stage—alter the arithmetic.
Photo by Joslyn Pickens
For many Nigerians, the question “how much is enough?” has ceased to be theoretical and become existential. The National Minimum Wage Act, signed in July 2024, set the federal floor at ₦70,000 per month, a figure that was widely celebrated at the time for doubling the previous minimum. Reality, however, has outpaced that statute. Headline inflation was reported above 32 per cent in late 2024, and although inflation has moderated in 2025, prices for food, transport and energy remain painfully elevated, eroding the real value of wages.
The government and labour unions are in ongoing negotiations; organised labour has already declared ₦70,000 unsustainable, and several states have moved to raise pay locally, a tacit admission that the federal floor is no longer sufficient.
These headline facts matter because they convert what often reads as a personal grievance into a national problem. A minimum wage that cannot sustain basic consumption increases precariousness across households and obliges workers—especially those in the private sector and informal economy—to make impossible trade-offs between food, rent and school fees. Compounding the pressure are structural shocks: devaluation, subsidy removal and a severe humanitarian context that has driven food insecurity for millions. In short, the economic backdrop has shifted the definition of “enough” for many Nigerian professionals from aspirational to immediate.
Saying “enough” is not a single arithmetic problem but a contextual judgement. In Lagos, the cost of housing alone consumes a substantial share of salaries; even modest accommodation in safe neighbourhoods demands rents that are a material bite out of monthly income. Transport and energy costs add further burden. Families often stretch a single salary across extended kin networks, and cultural obligations—school fees, weddings and ceremonies—place recurring, large demands on cash flow. These realities mean that a figure that looks generous on paper may prove inadequate in practice.
Adequacy also shifts across career stages. Younger professionals may prioritise exposure and skills over immediate pay, accepting lower starting salaries for the promise of a stronger CV. But tolerance declines with experience. Middle managers, whose responsibilities have broadened and who are more likely to support dependants, expect remuneration to reflect accumulated value. When pay stalls while prices rise, perceived injustice grows: the professional is not merely underpaid, they are disinvested in. Employers that fail to correct course risk attrition of mid-career talent and the loss of institutional memory.
How should an individual worker approach the question pragmatically?
The starting point is a precise personal budget that anticipates monthly essentials, annual obligations and a modest buffer for savings or emergencies. That figure becomes the baseline for negotiation. Beyond personal arithmetic, benchmarks matter. Employers, particularly multinational firms and large Nigerian firms, typically reference market data when setting salaries; workers should do the same. Similarly, independent pay surveys and HR consultancies publish sectoral compensation reports that permit realistic benchmarking. Where organisations cannot match competitive pay, value can be delivered non-monetarily through training, flexible work arrangements and credible promotion pathways that compensate for short-term pay gaps.
Negotiation should also factor in the economy’s volatility. In Nigeria’s current climate, indexed reviews—contracts that allow scheduled adjustments to reflect inflation or currency shifts—are not unreasonable. Labour unions and some state governments have already moved ahead of the federal floor, with examples from Lagos and Imo states altering local pay realities and feeding demands for a broader review of the national minimum wage. For many workers, asking for periodic, data-driven reviews is a defence against silent wage erosion.
Organisations bear an undeniable responsibility. Competitive pay is not only a cost line; it is a retention strategy and a signal of corporate health. Firms that offer below-market salaries often face hidden costs: lower morale, reduced productivity, and higher turnover. In the Nigerian context, paying staff adequately also reduces pressure on social networks, which in turn can stabilise local consumer markets and labour supply. For employers constrained by cashflow, creative remuneration—profit-sharing, targeted allowances for housing or transport, subsidised training—can bridge gaps without sacrificing long-term incentives.
Public policy has its place, too. A minimum wage must be credible, enforceable and aligned with macroeconomic realities. The federal government’s decision in 2024 to raise the minimum wage was politically significant, but its durability depends on accompanying interventions: stabilising food supply chains, controlling inflationary pressures, and targeting social safety nets to the most vulnerable. The events of the past year illustrate that piecemeal adjustments by states are likely to continue unless a coherent national strategy reconciles fiscal capacity with social protection. In the absence of that alignment, the debate about “enough” will remain fractious and reactive.
For professionals, the sobering conclusion is this: “enough” is negotiable, contingent and strategic. It is negotiable because individuals can shape their value through skills, reputation and mobility. It is contingent because personal circumstances—location, dependants, and career stage—alter the arithmetic. It is strategic because salary decisions have ripple effects for career trajectory, well-being and bargaining power. At a national level, achieving a meaningful definition of “enough” requires policy that addresses root causes—food security, inflation management and fiscal stability—while employers must recognise that adequate compensation underpins organisational resilience.
The task for the Nigerian professional, then, is twofold: to define a personal threshold for “enough” that reflects realistic costs and future goals, and to demand that threshold with data, discipline and a willingness to prioritise long-term opportunity when it is the sensible trade. For firms and policy makers, the task is to meet that demand where possible, and to create the conditions in which a wage is not just a nominal number but a living income that affords dignity and opportunity.
About The Author
