IOSR Journal Of Humanities And Social Science (IOSR-JHSS) Volume 23, Issue 11, Ver. 3 (November. 2018) 42-49 e-ISSN: 2279-0837, p-ISSN: 2279-0845. www.iosrjournals.org DOI: 10.9790/0837-2311034249 www.iosrjournals.org 42 |Page Oil And Gas Workers Industrial Actions And Associated Problems: A Micro-Macro Theoretical Integration Badom, Monbari Porbari, Prof. Anele, Kinikanwo Azununda, Badey, Dinebari, Phd PhD Candidate, Department of Sociology,Faculty of Social Sciences,University of Port Harcourt,P. M. B. 5323, Port Harcourt, Nigeria Professor of Sociology, Department of Sociology,Faculty of Social Sciences,University of Port Harcourt, Nigeria Lecturer, Department of Sociology,Faculty of Social Sciences,University of Port Harcourt, Nigeria Corresponding Author: Prof. Anele, Kinikanwo Azununda Abstract: On sundry occasions, NUPENG and PENGASSAN, trade unions in Nigeria which encompass oil and gas workers have embarked on industrial actions. These industrial actions impacted on the Nigerian society and on individuals. It is imperative to situate theoretically these industrial actions and associated impacts. Owing to the micro level and macro level theoretical divide which had been an issue in sociological theorizing; it was necessary to use Wright Mills‟ Sociological Imagination to explain the impacts of the oil and gas workers industrial actions. This paper observed that there is a dialectical relationship between public issues and private problems, thus a social problem that arise from the NUPENG and PENGASSAN industrial actions can also generate personal problems; the same way personal problems generated could become public issues. Thus, the paper established that oil and gas workers‟ industrial actions generated impacts are intertwined with private problems and public issues. Keywords: Industrial actions, theory, micro theory, macro theory, private problems, public issues and theoretical integration. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date of Submission: 15-11-2018 Date of acceptance: 30-11-2018 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I. INTRODUCTION In the investigation of social issues, sociologists adopt theories in the explanation of the observed issues. In this bid, sociologists adopt different perspectives, methods and values that suit their orientation. Theories which, in the opinion of Bryjak and Soroka (2001:13), refer to a set of logically coherent, interrelated concepts that attempts to explain some observable phenomena or group of facts, are utilized for a proper understanding and explanation of the social world. While it is imperative to point out that all sociologists who explain the social world utilize theories, it is apparent that sociologists differ in their choice of theories and values. Sociologists in their theoretical divide adopt either structural theories which are macro in nature, and/or micro-theories. Structural sociological theories such as structural functionalism, conflict theory and some variants of neo-Marxian theory (especially economic determinism) stress the importance of society in shaping human behaviour; therefore the unit of analysis is the social network and not the individual (Mayhew, 1980:349; Haralambos and Holborn, 2008:17). On the polar side of structuralists are the micro-extreme side such as symbolic interactionists, exchange theorists, rational choice theorists, and ethno-methodologists. The micro-theorists‟ emphasis is on the individual and not the social. They tend not to value the higher level of abstraction. The micro-theorists are concerned with small scale, micro-level social phenomena and their analyses stem from a rather widely perceived subjectivistic perspective unlike the structuralists whose analyses are mostly perceived to be objectively based. These two polar theoretical extremists have seemingly been at war with each other, over methods, perspectives and values. Sequel to this theoretical divide, Mill (1959) in Haralambos and Holborn (2008:17) gave a clue to the issue of sociological theoretical divide. Mills argued that the sociological imagination is the solution to the problem of differing theoretical orientations. He stressed that through the sociological imagination society could comprehend their private problems in terms of public issues. In the conception of Mills, the sociological imagination is not beneficial to only the sociologists, but rather the whole society. Similarly, Kemeny (1976:731) argued for a synergy between micro-macro distinctions. Still in the bid of linking micro-macro