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 judgment· [2019] KEELRC 566 (KLR)

Kenya Engineering Workers Union v Crom Impex (K) Limited [2019] KEELRC 566 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
8 October 2019
1,185 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court ruled employers must deduct union dues once workers sign check-off forms, even without a recognition agreement.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was an interlocutory application dated 25 April 2019 by a trade union (the Claimant/Applicant) seeking orders compelling the Respondent employer to deduct and remit union dues under section 48 of the Labour Relations Act, 2007, and to refrain from victimising the Applicant's members on account of trade union activities. The Applicant averred that it had recruited seven of the Respondent's employees whose duly signed check-off forms were forwarded to the Respondent, which refused to deduct dues, declined to sign a recognition agreement, and threatened its members with suspension and termination. The Respondent opposed, contending that three of the listed persons were no longer its employees, leaving the Applicant with only 4 of over 20 employees - below the simple majority required for a recognition agreement - and that there was no evidence of employee authorisation for deductions. Only the Respondent filed submissions, relying on authorities holding that a union without a recognition agreement lacks locus standi. The Court, per Wasilwa J, held that under Article 41 of the Constitution every worker's right to join a trade union is not dependent on a recognition agreement, and that deduction of union dues is pegged on membership, not recognition. Having been served with duly signed check-off forms, the Respondent was obliged to effect deductions, which the Court ordered done with effect from the end of October 2019. The question of recognition was reserved for the main claim. Costs of the application were to be in the cause. The application was partially allowed.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether recognition is a precondition to an order for deduction and remittance of union dues under section 48 of the Labour Relations Act

Holding

It is not. The right to union membership under Article 41 is independent of recognition, and deduction obligations arise once the union serves check-off forms in the prescribed form.

Reasoning

The Court anchored its decision on Article 41 of the Constitution, which guarantees every worker the right to join a trade union of choice, and held that this right does not depend on recognition. Section 48(2) and (3) of the Labour Relations Act places the duty on the union to notify the employer in the prescribed form; once check-off forms signed by employees are served, the employer must commence deductions within thirty days. The Respondent's arguments about lack of a recognition agreement and lack of instructions from employees did not accord with the statutory scheme.

p. 2
02

Whether the Applicant is entitled to interim orders compelling deduction and remittance of union dues

Holding

Yes. The Court ordered the Respondent to effect the deductions with effect from the end of October 2019.

Reasoning

The Court found the Respondent had been served with check-off forms duly signed by employees, which is all the law requires. The Respondent's contention that employees had not authorised deductions was contrary to the statutory expectation. The Court accordingly directed that deductions and remittances commence immediately from the end of October 2019.

p. 2
03

Whether the Applicant has attained a simple majority of unionizable employees to warrant a recognition agreement

Holding

This question was not decided at the interlocutory stage; the Court directed that it be established through evidence in the main claim.

Reasoning

The Respondent argued that only 4 of its over 20 employees were the Applicant's members, below the simple majority required for a recognition agreement. The Court held that recognition is a matter the Applicant must prove through evidence and reserved it for the main claim, deciding only the deduction issue at this stage.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • An employee's right to join a trade union and have dues deducted does not depend on the employer having signed a recognition agreement with the union
  • Deduction of union dues is pegged on union membership, not on employer recognition of the union
  • An employer served with duly signed check-off forms is obliged to effect deductions; the employer cannot resist on the ground that employees have not instructed it

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Respondent is ordered to deduct and remit union dues immediately with effect from the end of October 2019
  2. 2.Costs of the application to be in the cause
  3. 3.The question of recognition is left for determination in the main claim

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Labour Relations ActSection 48(2) and (3)
  • Labour Relations ActSection 54
  • Labour Relations ActSection 62
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 41

Cases cited (4)

  • Kenya Union of Employees of Voluntary and Charitable Organizations vs. Board of Governors & Maina Wanjigi Secondary School
    [2015] eKLR
  • Communication Workers' Union vs. Safaricom Limited
    [2014] eKLR
  • Kenya Union of Printing, Paper Manufacturers and Allied Workers vs. Packaging Industries Limited & Another
    [2014]
  • Kenya National Union of Nurses vs. County Public Service Board Homabay
    [2018] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 41 of the Constitution and the Employment and Labour Relations Court's jurisdiction over labour disputes; Section 48 of the Labour Relations Act, 2007 invoked

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Engineering Workers Union v Crom Impex (K) Limited [2019] KEELRC 566 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2019/566/eng@2019-10-08

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