Kenya Union of Commercial Food & Allied Workers v Isiolo Teachers Sacco Society Limited [2020] KEELRC 1364 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenyan employees who skip disciplinary hearings cannot later claim unfair dismissal — the court dismissed the union's entire multi-million shilling claim.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the dismissal of the Grievants was fair and for just cause
The dismissal was for just cause and procedurally fair; the Grievants were issued show cause letters, failed to appear before the staff advisory board, and did not appeal under the code of conduct.
The court applied Sections 41, 43 and 45 of the Employment Act. The inquiry report had adversely mentioned the Grievants in relation to irregular loan disbursement. Show cause letters were issued and collected, and the Grievants were to appear with a fellow staff member or union representative, but none attended. The code of conduct provided an appeal process which none used. The employer discharged its burden of proving valid reason and fair procedure.
Whether the delay in issuing show cause letters (a year after the inquiry report) rendered the process unfair
The delay did not render the termination unfair because the show cause letters still afforded the Grievants an opportunity to be heard.
The Claimant argued the show cause letters came a year after the April 2016 inquiry report. The court held the employer's obligation was to give the employees a chance to defend themselves, and the show cause letters constituted that opportunity. The court also noted the inconsistency of the Claimant disavowing receipt of the letters while producing them in evidence, and the union's own delay of about nine months in reporting the dispute.
Whether the Grievants were entitled to the monetary reliefs claimed
The reliefs were refused as the Grievants failed to prove non-payment and their suit lacked merit.
The Claimant sought half salaries, house allowance, terminal benefits per the CBA, untaken leave and notice pay totalling Kshs. 13,225,879.06 plus provident fund contributions. The Respondent denied the CBA's existence and entitlement. The court found the Grievants were paid half salary during suspension, that salary was inclusive of house allowance, that no leave claim had been made, and that the Grievants in fact owed the SACCO approximately Kshs. 8 million in loans.
Legal principles established
#- An employer must prove the reason for termination; failure renders the termination unfair under Section 45
- An employee who is issued show cause letters and declines to attend a disciplinary hearing cannot later complain of denial of a hearing or unfair termination
- A union should report a trade dispute to the Ministry of Labour within 60 days under the Labour Relations Act
Court orders
#- 1.The Claimant's suit is dismissed
- 2.No order as to costs due to the nature and origin of the dispute
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and labour relations dispute referred after conciliation under the Labour Relations Act; court seised under the Employment Act, 2007
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Union of Commercial Food & Allied Workers v Isiolo Teachers Sacco Society Limited [2020] KEELRC 1364 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2020/1364/eng@2020-03-05
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.