Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedELRC Cause (Memorandum of Claim dated 28th November 2016)· [2023] KEELRC 3482 (KLR)

Kenya Union of Domestic, Hotels, Educational, Institution Hospitals and Allied Workers v Nakuru War Memorial Hospital (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 470 of 2016) [2023] KEELRC 3482 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
11 December 2023
3,039 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

#

A Kenyan court ruled hospital staff unfairly declared redundant must receive both terminal benefits and severance pay under their Collective Bargaining Agreement.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The claimant trade union, representing four grievants (Simon Ndirangu, Dan Muthui, Erick Okiri and Simon Gachigi) employed by the Respondent hospital, sued over their declaration of redundancy on 9th December 2016. It sought declarations of unfair termination, reinstatement, or alternatively terminal benefits under the CBA and 12 months' salary compensation. The Respondent admitted the CBA but maintained the redundancy followed the law and the CBA, and paid severance. After protracted negotiations collapsed, the parties agreed on all issues save the interpretation of clauses 10 and 11 of the CBA regarding computation of dues. The Respondent argued severance pay alone was payable under clause 11; the Claimant argued both clause 10 terminal benefits and clause 11 severance were due. The court found the redundancy unfair because the notice issued on 4/11/2016 fell short of the statutory 30 days. On computation, the court held that clause 10 entitles every employee leaving other than on gross misconduct to 30 days' benefits per completed year of service, and clause 11(iii) entitles redundant employees to both terminal benefits and severance pay. The court directed that dues be calculated on both clauses with the figure agreed by the parties for adoption as part of the judgment, and awarded costs to the claimants. The reliefs of reinstatement and 12 months' compensation were not granted.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the redundancy was fair

Holding

The redundancy was unfair because the notice fell short of the 30 days required by law

Reasoning

The union was served with the notice of redundancy on 4/11/2016 to run for 30 days, ending 4/12/2016, yet the members were declared redundant on 9th December 2016. The notice period was therefore shorter than the 30 days envisaged in section 40(1)(a) of the Employment Act and clause 11 of the CBA, rendering the redundancy unfair.

p. 6
02

Whether grievants are entitled to both terminal benefits under clause 10 and severance pay under clause 11 of the CBA

Holding

They are entitled to both; dues to be calculated on both clauses with the figure agreed by the parties for adoption by the court

Reasoning

Clause 10 entitles every employee leaving the hospital for any reason other than gross misconduct to 30 days' benefits per completed year of service. Clause 11(iii) entitles redundant employees to all terminal benefits under the agreement plus severance pay. Since the grievants' departure was not based on gross misconduct, both clauses apply, and the Respondent's argument that only severance pay is payable was rejected.

p. 7

Legal principles established

#
  • A redundancy notice falling short of the 30 days envisaged in law renders the redundancy unfair
  • Where clause 11(iii) of a CBA provides that redundant employees are entitled to all terminal benefits and also severance pay, both are payable

Court orders

#
  1. 1.A finding that the grievants are entitled to their terminal benefits provided for under clause 10 of the CBA as their departure was not based on gross misconduct
  2. 2.A finding that the grievants are also entitled to their redundancy package under clause 11 of the CBA
  3. 3.That the dues of the grievants shall be calculated based on clauses 10 and 11 of the CBA and a figure agreed upon by the parties for adoption by the court as part of the judgment
  4. 4.Costs to the claimant

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Labour Relations Actsection 59
  • Labour Relations Actsection 62(4)
  • Employment Act 2007section 40(1)
  • Employment Act 2007section 40(1)(g)

Cases cited (3)

  • Addah Adhiambop Obiero -v- ARD Inc
    ELRC Cause No. 421 of 2012
  • Nairobi City County Government -Vs- Kenya County Government Workers Union, Salaries and Remuneration Commission (Interested Party/Applicant)
    (2019) eKLR
  • MP Shah Hospital Vs. Kenya Union of Domestic, Hotels, Education Institutions and Allied Workers
    (2018) EKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act and Labour Relations Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Union of Domestic, Hotels, Educational, Institution Hospitals and Allied Workers v Nakuru War Memorial Hospital (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 470 of 2016) [2023] KEELRC 3482 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). ELRC Cause (Memorandum of Claim dated 28th November 2016). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/3482/eng@2023-12-11

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