Jerotich Seii Houlding v International Rescue Committee (IRC) [2019] KEELRC 494 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court dismissed an unfair termination claim, holding that a documented performance plan and a fair hearing justified dismissal—no PIP is legally mandatory.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether there was substantive reason to terminate the Claimant
Yes - the Claimant's poor performance, evidenced by appraisals, an agreed action plan with unmet deliverables, and her own email acknowledging areas of improvement, justified termination under section 45
The Claimant was rated 'Mostly Meets Expectations' and agreed to an action plan with deliverables and check-ins. Deliverables remained incomplete by June 2014. Her own email of 10 March 2014 acknowledged areas needing improvement. The agreed action plan was the equivalent of a PIP, and the Claimant did not improve despite this preferable mode of improvement. The reasons were explained in the notice to show cause.
Whether the termination was unprocedural
No - the Claimant was given a notice to show cause, responded, and attended a disciplinary hearing as required by section 41; she was not on sick leave at the time
The Claimant received the notice to show cause on 18 July 2014, responded, and attended the hearing on 22 July 2014 where she was entitled to be accompanied. Her emails showed her sick leave ended on 17 July and she confirmed she had moved to administrative leave during the show-cause period. She did not object to the hearing and was given sufficient opportunity to respond.
Whether the Claimant is entitled to the reliefs sought
No - reinstatement is time-barred and unwarranted, and claims for damages, medical bills and sick pay were unproved
Reinstatement under Section 12(3)(vii) of the ELRC Act cannot be granted more than 3 years after dismissal; in any event the termination was found fair. The medical bills claim failed because the Claimant was on a medical scheme and did not prove when, why or how the bills were incurred, and she was on full pay during sick leave.
Legal principles established
#- An employer is not obligated to place an employee on a Performance Improvement Plan before terminating for poor performance where the parties have agreed on an alternative performance-improvement mechanism
- A contractual 'employment-at-will' clause cannot displace the mandatory statutory requirement of a valid reason for termination under the Employment Act
Court orders
#- 1.The entire claim fails and is dismissed with no orders for costs.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, Section 12 (incl. Section 12(3)(vii) on reinstatement); Employment Act Sections 41, 43, 45 and 47(5)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Joshua Mwaniki v Andela Kenya Limited [2020] KEELRC 653 (KLR)[2020] KEELRC 653 (KLR)16 Jul 2020
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Jerotich Seii Houlding v International Rescue Committee (IRC) [2019] KEELRC 494 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Cause (Memorandum of Claim filed 18th December 2014). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2019/494/eng@2019-10-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.