Kenya Engineering Workers Union v Standard Engineering Works Limited [2022] KEELRC 695 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court ruled an employer must pay Kshs. 2.8 million in redundancy dues it had already calculated, despite claiming no valid CBA existed.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether tabulations based on an unregistered CBA are binding
The tabulations are binding; the Respondent was aware of the CBA pending execution and relied on negotiated terms
The Respondent computed redundancy packages about two weeks before the CBA was executed on 10th August 2018, and the copy it exhibited was merely the pre-execution version of the same CBA. Having relied on negotiated and settled terms, the Respondent could not undo the tabulations on the ground that the CBA was unexecuted at the time.
Whether the dues survive absence of a CBA
The tabulated figures are consistent with standard statutory redundancy payments under Section 40 of the Employment Act and need no CBA support
The computed dues comprised severance pay, salary arrears, notice, salary for days worked and pro-rata leave - all standard redundancy payments under Section 40 of the Employment Act. No item hinged entirely on the CBA, so the presence or absence of a valid CBA was immaterial to the Grievants' entitlement.
Relevance of Recognition Agreement
Absence of a Recognition Agreement is not an issue; it suffices that the Respondent engaged the Claimant as the relevant Union
The Respondent addressed redundancy correspondence to the Claimant Union and engaged it throughout the dispute. Recognition was therefore not in issue before the Court, and the Respondent could not use its absence to defeat a claim it had already conceded and part-paid.
Whether the Claimant proved the sums claimed
The Claimant established that the Grievants are owed the sums claimed
The Respondent conceded liability, computed the benefits, made initial instalment payments, then resiled by casting doubt on the CBA and Recognition Agreement. The Grievant's evidence confirmed part-payments. The Court found the conduct unacceptable and held the sums claimed proved.
Legal principles established
#- Redundancy dues tabulated by an employer are binding and cannot be undone merely because the CBA underpinning them was not executed at the time
- Standard redundancy payments under Section 40 of the Employment Act are payable with or without a CBA
- An employer who concedes liability, computes benefits and proposes instalments cannot later resile by casting doubt on the CBA and Recognition Agreement
Court orders
#- 1.The Claim is allowed
- 2.The Respondent shall pay the Grievants through the Claimant: Simon Macharia Kshs. 829,837; Joseph Ng'ang'a Kshs. 1,290,973; Mary Mueni Kshs. 709,228; Total Kshs. 2,830,038
- 3.The amount shall be paid less amounts already received by the Grievants, and less P.A.Y.E.
- 4.Costs to the Claimant
- 5.Interest allowed at court rates from 23rd July 2018 until payment in full
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment and Labour Relations Act (redundancy dues claim under Section 40 of the Employment Act)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Engineering Workers Union v Standard Engineering Works Limited [2022] KEELRC 695 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Cause Number 1517 of 2018. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2022/695/eng@2022-02-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.