Kenya Union of Commercial Food & Allied Workers v G4s Security Services Kenya Ltd [2013] KEELRC 155 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Industrial Court dismissed a union's bid to force G4S to bargain, because the union proved no recognition agreement or majority membership.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Existence of a recognition agreement between the Claimant and the Respondent
The Claimant failed to prove a recognition agreement with the Respondent; the agreement at Annex 8 names Securicor entities and not the Respondent.
The recognition agreement dated 14th November, 1983 was between Securicor group companies and the Claimant. The Respondent, G4S Security Services Kenya Limited, is not listed. No addendum incorporated the Respondent, and the Claimant's assertion that the entities evolved into G4S lacked legal documentation. The claim therefore failed on a balance of probabilities.
Whether the Claimant met the simple-majority requirement for recognition under Section 54 of the Labour Relations Act, 2007
No evidence was presented that the Claimant had recruited a simple majority of the Respondent's 14,190 unionisable employees; the Respondent was therefore not bound to recognize or negotiate with the Claimant.
Recognition under Section 54(1) and (2) depends on a union representing a simple majority of unionisable employees. The Claimant made only bald allegations of majority recruitment. Without proof of majority membership, the employer is under no statutory obligation to recognize the union, and collective bargaining cannot be predicated absent recognition.
Whether the Claimant is bound by the Industrial Court decision in Cause No. 70 of 2002
The Claimant is bound by that unappealed decision, which directed it to delete 'watchmen organization' from its constitution, so it cannot represent security-sector employees.
The Industrial Court in Cause No. 70 of 2002 directed the Claimant to delete 'watchmen organization' from its constitution, effectively removing security personnel from its domain in favour of the Kenya National Private Security Workers Union. That decision was never appealed and remains in force; the Claimant's constitution does not permit it to represent security-sector employees.
Legal principles established
#- Section 54(1) and (2) of the Labour Relations Act, 2007 obliges an employer to recognize a union representing a simple majority of its unionisable employees; recognition is a precondition to collective bargaining.
- A party claiming an existing recognition agreement must prove it on a balance of probabilities; bald allegations of corporate evolution do not bind a company not named in the agreement.
Court orders
#- 1.The entire application is dismissed
- 2.Costs to the Respondent
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 69(a) of the Industrial Relations Act No. 14 of 2007 (certificate of unresolved dispute dated 10th November, 2009)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Union of Commercial Food & Allied Workers v G4s Security Services Kenya Ltd [2013] KEELRC 155 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2013). Memorandum of Claim dated 20th January, 2011 (Industrial Court Cause, filed 4th February, 2011). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2013/155/eng@2013-09-10
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.