Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedCause No. E019 of 2022· [2023] KEELRC 2548 (KLR)

Kenya Engineering Workers Union v Consulting & another (Cause E019 of 2022) [2023] KEELRC 2548 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
19 October 2023
2,916 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~12 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court ruled that dismissing workers soon after they joined a union, without notice or reasons, was unfair and the direct employer must pay compensation.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ELRC Kisumu judgment, delivered by Christine N. Baari, J on 19 October 2023, determined a claim by a trade union on behalf of seven grievants who were verbally dismissed in May 2021 shortly after joining the union. The grievants, engaged as barbed wire machine operators at a monthly wage of Kshs. 25,000 and outsourced by the 1st Respondent to the 2nd Respondent, were told their services were no longer needed. The 1st Respondent asserted they were merely stopped temporarily owing to raw material shortages and COVID-19 protocols, then dismissed for absconding. The court held the 1st Respondent, as undisputed direct employer, bore full responsibility for a lawful separation notwithstanding the outsourcing arrangement. The employer failed to communicate the work stoppage, give reasons for termination, issue redundancy notice under Section 40 of the Employment Act, or attempt to contact alleged deserters. The timing of the dismissal, immediately after union membership and check-off demands, confirmed anti-union motive, violating Articles 36, 41 and 47 of the Constitution. Reinstatement was refused as impracticable. The court declared the dismissal unfair and awarded one month's salary in lieu of notice, severance pay based on NSSF records showing service from 2015, one month's salary as compensation, and one year's house allowances and accrued leave, the latter being continuing injuries limited by Section 90. The 2nd Respondent did not participate. Costs and interest until payment in full were awarded to the Claimant.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the grievants were unfairly terminated

Holding

The grievants were unfairly dismissed by the 1st Respondent, whether characterised as redundancy or desertion; neither process complied with the law.

Reasoning

The 1st Respondent never communicated the shortage of raw materials or COVID-19 roster to the grievants, gave no reasons for termination and issued no redundancy notice under Section 40 of the Employment Act. Dismissal followed hard on the grievants joining the union, evidencing anti-union motive. No efforts were made to reach the alleged deserters. The direct employer bore responsibility despite the outsourcing.

p. 5
02

Whether reinstatement should issue

Holding

Reinstatement refused; it was not practicable as the 1st Respondent no longer controlled work with the 2nd Respondent.

Reasoning

Reinstatement under Section 49(3) of the Employment Act and Section 12(3)(vii) of the ELRC Act requires exceptional circumstances and practicability. Here there was no evidence the 2nd Respondent had work for the grievants or that the 1st Respondent held a valid outsourcing contract, so reinstatement could not be effected meaningfully.

p. 6
03

Severance pay entitlement

Holding

Grievants awarded severance pay since the circumstances of dismissal pointed to redundancy, not desertion.

Reasoning

Shortage of raw materials and COVID-19 are grounds justifying redundancy, which is termination without employee fault. NSSF statements showed service from 2015, contradicting the 1st Respondent's claim of barely three months' service, supporting severance at 15 days per completed year as tabulated.

p. 6
04

House allowances and accrued leave beyond one year

Holding

Such claims are continuing injuries limited by Section 90 to one year.

Reasoning

Although the employer bore the record-keeping burden and failed to show house allowances were paid or salary consolidated, house allowance and accrued leave accrue monthly, amounting to continuing injury under Section 90, so recovery is confined to one year before filing.

p. 6

Legal principles established

#
  • An employer alleging desertion must demonstrate efforts made to reach out to the employee; it is not enough to simply allege desertion.
  • Where an employer outsources employees, responsibility for a lawful separation remains with the direct employer.
  • Dismissal shortly after joining a trade union, absent a lawful process, confirms suspicion of anti-union victimisation and violates Articles 36, 41 and 47 of the Constitution.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.A declaration that the grievants' dismissal is unfair
  2. 2.Payment of one month's salary in lieu of notice to each grievant
  3. 3.Award of severance pay (15 days per completed year of service, as tabulated in the memorandum of claim)
  4. 4.One-month salary as compensation for the unfair dismissal to each grievant
  5. 5.Payment of one-year house allowances and accrued leave
  6. 6.Costs of the suit and interest until payment in full

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment Act, 2007Section 20
  • Employment Act, 2007Sections 40, 43, 45, 47(5), 49(3), 49(4), 62, 90
  • Labour Relations ActSection 62
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court ActSection 12(3)(vii)
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Articles 36, 41, 47

Cases cited (6)

  • William Gituma v RAA Limited
    [2020] eKLR
  • Ronald Nyambu Daudi v Tornado Carriers Limited
    [2019] eKLR
  • Simon Mbithi Mbane v Inter Security Services Ltd
    [2018] eKLR
  • Kenya Union of Journalists and Allied Workers v. Nation Media Group
    (2013) eKLR
  • Joseph Nzioka v Smart Coatings Limited
    [2017] eKLR
  • Kenya Airways Limited v Aviation Workers Union Kenya & 3 Others
    [2014] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, Section 12(3)(vii), and the Employment Act, 2007

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Engineering Workers Union v Consulting & another (Cause E019 of 2022) [2023] KEELRC 2548 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Cause No. E019 of 2022. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/2548/eng@2023-10-19

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