Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedNot stated in the extract provided· [2013] KEELRC 126 (KLR)

Kenya Union of Commercial Food and Allied Workers Union v Delmonte Kenya Ltd [2013] KEELRC 126 (KLR)

Industrial Court of Kenya (Employment and Labour Relations Court)
4 October 2013
373 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court refused to upgrade seasonal workers' notice pay beyond what their union had negotiated, leaving them with the statutory one month.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a first-instance quantum determination arising from a labour dispute between a claimant union (represented by Mr. Atela) and a respondent employer (represented by Mr. Okeche), following a prior judgment in which the court had ordered service pay under clause 5 of the CBA. On 23/5/2013 the parties sought time to compute quantums; by 25/6/2013 they had agreed on quantums for permanent employees but not for seasonal staff, which fell for the court's determination. On notice pay, the claimant sought 65 days for seasonal staff, as for permanent staff, under clause 10 of the CBA. The respondent contended the CBA made no provision for seasonal staff, so Section 35, providing one month's notice or salary in lieu, applied. The court accepted the respondent's position, holding that the claimant had negotiated the CBA, knew the seasonal staff were distinct from permanent staff, and deliberately omitted them from clause 10; the court would not correct a bad bargain. On service pay, the court reiterated its earlier order but found there were neither proper pleadings nor evidence; persuaded by the respondent's evidence that some grievants had been paid all or part of their service pay, it directed that those who had not collected theirs could claim it in the sums indicated in the respondent's document filed on 16/7/2013, and criticised the claimant for dishonestly concealing the true position. The judgment was signed, dated and delivered on 4th October 2013.

Key legal issues

#
01

Entitlement of seasonal staff to notice pay under clause 10 of the CBA

Holding

Seasonal staff are not entitled to the 65 days' notice pay in clause 10; they get one month's notice or salary in lieu under Section 35

Reasoning

The claimant, which represented the staff in negotiating the CBA, knew the seasonal staff were distinct from permanent staff and deliberately omitted them from clause 10. The court declines to correct what was a bad bargain. In the absence of a CBA provision, the statutory regime under Section 35 governs.

p. 2
02

Service pay for grievants who were not paid or partly paid

Holding

Grievants who did not collect their pending service pay may claim it in the sums indicated in the respondent's document filed on 16/7/2013; the claimant concealed the true position

Reasoning

Although the earlier judgment ordered service pay under clause 5 of the CBA, the court found there were neither proper pleadings nor evidence on it. The respondent's evidence showed some people were paid all or part of their service pay, and the court was persuaded that the claimant dishonestly concealed that fact.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A court will not rewrite or correct a bad bargain voluntarily entered into by the parties in a CBA
  • Where the CBA does not provide for a notice period for seasonal staff, the statutory default under Section 35 (one month's notice or salary in lieu) applies

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Notice pay for seasonal staff to be governed by Section 35 (one month's notice or salary in lieu), not the 65 days in clause 10 of the CBA
  2. 2.Grievants who did not collect their pending service pay to claim it in the sums indicated by the respondent in her document filed in court on 16/7/2013

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment Act (implied by reference to notice provisions)Section 35
Jurisdiction invoked
Jurisdiction as the first-instance labour court over CBA/employment disputes; no specific constitutional or statutory provision invoked in the extract

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Union of Commercial Food and Allied Workers Union v Delmonte Kenya Ltd [2013] KEELRC 126 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2013). Not stated in the extract provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2013/126/eng@2013-10-08

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.