Kenya Union of Domestic, Hotels,Educational Institutions, Hospitals & Allied Workers (Kudheiha) v British Army Training Unit Kenya [2015] KEELRC 839 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court refused a union recognition order against the British Army Training Unit because the employees fell outside the union's constitutional mandate.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Claimant union had attained the simple majority required for recognition
The simple majority was attained, but only after the filing of suit; nevertheless it satisfied one condition for recognition
Following the joint verification exercise, the Claimant had 211 of 421 employees at filing, barely half. By the verification date it had recruited 265 of 427, exceeding the 50%+1 threshold at 62%. Although achieved after filing suit, fair labour relations aim at industrial peace and unionisation, so the Claimant met one condition for recognition.
Whether the Claimant is the appropriate union to represent the Respondent's employees
No - the Respondent does not fall within the purview of the Claimant's constitution, so recognition was refused
The Respondent is an arm of the UK Ministry of Defence whose mandate is enhancing defence cooperation under the MOU, not operating an educational institution. The Claimant's constitution covers educational and training institutions for human resources, but the court found no mandate covering the Respondent's defence cooperation role. The unionisable employees were therefore outside the union's mandate, and recognition was declined.
Whether the Respondent was obliged to deduct and remit union dues
Deduction and remittance of dues under section 48 is separate from recognition, but the Respondent had already complied and this was not contested
Under section 48 of the Labour Relations Act an employer must remit dues deducted where there are more than five union members, based on a Ministerial order in the Gazette designating the account, without any recognition agreement. The union's duty is to submit check-off forms with names and ID numbers. The Respondent had complied with this, so no dispute remained on this head.
Legal principles established
#- Deduction and remittance of union dues is separate in law from recognition of a union and does not require a recognition agreement
- Recognition under section 54 of the Labour Relations Act requires both a simple majority and that the majority comprises unionisable employees falling within the union's mandate
- Where which employees are unionisable is challenged, the union's constitution comes into focus to determine eligibility
Court orders
#- 1.Directions seeking recognition of the Claimant union by the Respondent declined
- 2.Each party to bear their own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Industrial Court Act over employment and labour relations disputes (trade union recognition and check-off)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Union of Domestic, Hotels,Educational Institutions, Hospitals & Allied Workers (Kudheiha) v British Army Training Unit Kenya [2015] KEELRC 839 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2015). Cause No 684(B) of 2014. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2015/839/eng@2015-06-10
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.