Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCAllowedMemorandum of Claim dated 5th May 2022, filed 6th May 2022 (ELRC, Eldoret)· [2023] KEELRC 2805 (KLR)

Kenya Building Construction Employees Union v Vaghjiyan Enterprises Ltd (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 286 of 2022) [2023] KEELRC 2805 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
2 November 2023
3,857 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~15 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

An employer cannot sack workers for refusing contracts that pay less than the law's minimum wages; unions can represent members without a recognition agreement.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant union, registered to represent employees in the building and construction sector, sued Vaghjiyani Enterprises Ltd on behalf of two members, Kellen Wambui Maina and Mary Jepkorir Tanui, storekeepers employed since 2018. In March 2022 the Respondent issued new contracts with commencement dates of 1st March 2022 and terms inferior to the Building and Construction Industry (Wages) Order, 2012 in salary, Saturday hours, annual leave and sick pay. When the Grievants declined to sign and sought amendments, the Respondent issued 30-day termination notices dated 19th April 2022. The court granted interim stay orders and directed disposal by written submissions. The Respondent opposed on the grounds that it had no recognition agreement with the union, the Grievants' clerical and data-entry work fell outside the union's scope, and the wages order did not apply. The court framed three issues: the union's locus, the validity of the termination notices, and entitlement to remedies. It held that union representation depends on the sector in which the employer operates - and the Respondent's letterheads describe it as civil and general building contractors - not on the employees' specific roles, and that a recognition agreement is not a precondition to representation. Since the new contracts breached statutory minimum terms under section 26 of the Employment Act and section 48 of the Labour Institutions Act, the Grievants' refusal was a genuine complaint and no valid reason for termination existed. The court allowed the claim, suppressing the termination notices, ordering review of the contracts and recognition of prior service, with costs to the Claimant.

Key legal issues

#
01

Locus of a union without a recognition agreement to represent grievants

Holding

The Claimant union has locus because the Respondent operates in the building and construction sector and the Grievants proved membership by membership cards; recognition is not a precondition for representation.

Reasoning

Article 41 of the Constitution and sections 4 and 33 of the Labour Relations Act give every employee the right to join a union of their choice, with qualification being the sector in which the employer operates plus payment of subscriptions. Union membership is distinct from recognition and collective bargaining, which arise under sections 54 and 57 only once a simple majority is achieved. The Respondent's letterheads describe it as civil and general building contractors, placing it in the Claimant's sector, and membership cards proved the Grievants' membership. The authorities relied on by the Respondent were distinguishable for want of proof of membership.

p. 7
02

Validity of termination notices issued for refusing to sign inferior contracts

Holding

There was no valid reason to terminate because the contracts the Grievants declined to sign offended statutory minimum terms under the wages order.

Reasoning

Section 26 of the Employment Act and section 48 of the Labour Institutions Act make wages-order minima mandatory terms that cannot be varied by agreement. The Respondent did not deny that the new contracts offered less than the Building and Construction Industry (Wages) Order, 2012 in salary, leave and sick pay. Further, section 46 of the Employment Act forbids termination for raising genuine complaints. Declining to execute an unlawful contract was therefore a genuine complaint and not a valid reason for termination.

p. 8

Legal principles established

#
  • Union representation turns on the sector in which the employer operates, not on the particular role the employee performs.
  • A recognition agreement and a collective bargaining agreement are not prerequisites for a trade union to represent its members.
  • An employer may not contract out of the minimum terms in a wages order; terms less favourable are substituted by the statutory minimum.
  • An employer may not terminate employment for pursuing genuine complaints about statutory entitlements.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.An order suppressing the notice of termination of the 2 Grievants dated 19th April 2022
  2. 2.An order directing the Respondent to review and/or amend the contracts of employment dated 1st March to align with the minimum legal requirements
  3. 3.An order directing the Respondent to first discharge the previous oral contracts it had with the 2 Grievants, or in the alternative, directing the Respondent to incorporate the duration served under the oral contract into the new employment contracts
  4. 4.The Respondent to pay the Claimant's costs of the suit

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 41
  • Labour Relations Actsections 4, 5, 33, 49, 54, 57
  • Employment Actsections 26, 45, 46, 51
  • Labour Institutions Actsection 48
  • Regulation of Wages (Building and Construction Industry) Order / Building and Construction Industry (Wages) Order, 2012minimum terms for storekeepers

Cases cited (4)

  • Paul Iling'a Ichilayi v Gilly's Security & Investigation Services Ltd
    [2016] eKLR
  • Communication Workers Union v Safaricom Ltd
    [2014] eKLR
  • Kenya Shoe & Leather Workers Union v Modern Shop Factory Ltd
    [2017] eKLR
  • Kenya Building, Construction, Timber & Furniture Industries Employees Union v Kafunapasa Company Limited
    [2017] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act and Labour Relations Act (trade union representation of employees)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Later judgments citing this (1)

#

Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Building Construction Employees Union v Vaghjiyan Enterprises Ltd (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 286 of 2022) [2023] KEELRC 2805 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Memorandum of Claim dated 5th May 2022, filed 6th May 2022 (ELRC, Eldoret). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/2805/eng@2023-11-02

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