Charles Kasisi & 10 others v Kenya Broadcasting Corporation [2020] KEELRC 218 (KLR)
The bottom line
#KBC's 2006 retrenchment of 257 workers was ruled unlawful because it skipped proper notice and consultation, with compensation now to be calculated.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Procedural fairness of the redundancy process
The retrenchment was procedurally flawed: the retrenchment letters took effect on 30/6/2006 but were received by the Union on 3/7/2006, with no one-month notice and no consultations
The court examined the retrenchment letters dated 28/6/2006 and found that although the letters were served on the Union, this was done too late, after the redundancy had already taken effect, and the requisite one-month notice period was not given. There was also no evidence of any consultation before the redundancy was effected, contrary to the repealed Employment Act and the principle of consultation explained in the Kenya Airways case.
Applicable law to a 2006 retrenchment
The law applicable to the 2006 retrenchment was the repealed Employment Act (Cap 226), particularly Section 16A
The court held that because the retrenchment occurred in 2006, before the current Employment Act 2007 came into force, Section 16A of the repealed Employment Act (Cap 226) governed. That section required notification of the union and Labour Officer, due regard to seniority, payment of leave, one month's notice or wages in lieu, and severance pay of not less than 15 days per completed year of service.
Legal principles established
#- Consultation with the union and affected employees is an imperative requirement before redundancy is effected
- Under Section 16A of the repealed Employment Act, no retrenchment could be effected without involvement of the union, proper notice and payment of dues
- The notices under Section 40 of the Employment Act are not merely informational but are intended to give parties an opportunity to consider measures to avert or minimise terminations and mitigate adverse effects
Court orders
#- 1.The Claimant to submit a schedule of the 257 employees with their attendant salaries multiplied by 12 months to indicate payments due against each, to be submitted to Court for consideration and adoption as part of the judgment
- 2.The Respondents to pay costs of this suit plus interest at Court rates with effect from the date of the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the ELRC Act following transfer from the High Court by order of Ougo J on 18/7/2014
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Charles Kasisi & 10 others v Kenya Broadcasting Corporation [2020] KEELRC 218 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Cause No. 845 of 2017 (Formerly HCC 719 of 2006). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2020/218/eng@2020-11-11
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.