Kenya Eningeering Workers Union v Abyssinia Iron and Steel Limited (Cause E013 of 2022) [2025] KEELRC 47 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court dismissed a union's claim for dues because it could not prove the listed workers were actually the company's employees.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.whether the court should direct the respondent to deduct and remit trade union dues to the claimant
- 2.whether the court should order and compel the respondent to pay union dues arrears of 2% of the total basic wage bill of all the union members from March 2022 from its account
Key legal issues
#Whether the respondent should be directed to deduct and remit trade union dues to the claimant
The claim was dismissed because the claimant failed to prove that the persons on the check-off forms were employees of the respondent
The court analysed the 114 persons listed in the letter of 20 February 2020 and found 58 unknown, 31 no longer employed, and 70 engaged through outsourced third parties (Labour Planet, Real Labor, Consolidated HR Solutions, JEO Investments). The claimant did not contest these records. The Recognition Agreement alone did not establish current membership of the respondent's employees, so the claimant did not discharge its burden on a balance of probabilities.
The legal effect of a Recognition Agreement and Section 48 of the LRA on union dues
A Recognition Agreement enables negotiation of a collective bargaining agreement, and Section 48 obliges an employer served with check-off forms for its employees to deduct and remit dues - but only for genuine employees
The court held that the essence of a Recognition Agreement is to allow the parties to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement under Section 54 of the LRA. Section 48 requires an employer served with check-off forms concerning its own employees to deduct and remit dues; where the employer fails, the union may demand payment from the employer's accounts. However, this presupposes proof of an employer-employee relationship with the listed members.
The duty of a union to maintain current membership records given shop-floor dynamics
Unions must constantly update their members' lists; a Recognition Agreement is not sufficient where membership has changed
The court noted that employees leave employment for various reasons, causing constant changes on the shop floor. The alleged membership as of August 2019 had changed by the time of the claim. The union was directed to verify its members' employment with the respondent and, in the interim, rely on Section 52 of the LRA permitting direct payment of dues by members.
Legal principles established
#- Where an employer is served with check-off forms concerning its employees who have joined a trade union, such an employer must deduct and remit union dues to the subject union
- A union claiming remittance of dues bears the burden of proving, on a balance of probabilities, that the listed persons are employees of the employer and must keep its membership records up to date
- Holding a Recognition Agreement alone is not sufficient to justify remittance of union dues; the union must keep its members' records updated
- A member of a trade union may pay dues directly to the union pending verification of membership, per Section 52 of the LRA
Court orders
#- 1.The claim is dismissed
- 2.The claimant shall meet costs due to the respondent
- 3.The claimant should, in the interim, apply the provisions of Section 52 of the LRA allowing members to pay dues directly to their union while it verifies its membership records
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over trade union dues disputes under the Labour Relations Act, specifically Sections 48, 52 and 54 of the LRA
Relief refused
#Order against the respondent to deduct and remit union dues immediately
The claimant failed to discharge its burden of proving that the persons listed in the check-off forms are employees of the respondent
Payment of union dues arrears of 2% of the total basic wage bill amounting to Ksh.1,368,000 for Abyssinia Mombasa and Ksh.612,000 for Abyssinia Athi-River plus continuing accruals of Ksh.80,471 and Ksh.17,000 monthly
The respondent demonstrated that listed persons were unknown, had left employment, or were employed by outsourced third parties, hence no unionisable employees of the respondent on the shop floor
Costs
The claimant shall meet costs due to the respondent
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
Where an employer is served with check-ofi forms concerning its employees who have joined a trade union, such an employer must deduct and remit union dues to the subject union.
The claimant has not discharged its burden on a balance of probabilities. The assertion that it has members employed by the respondent does not hold.
Holding a Recognition Agreement is not suficient. The claimant should constantly keep its members updated and, hence, keep up-to-date records.
The orders sought are without merit and the claim is hereby dismissed. The claimant shall meet costs due to the respondent.
Issues in the judgment
#The full names of both parties are not stated anywhere in the judgment; the claimant is described only as a registered trade union and the respondent only as an iron and steel manufacturer, although a Recognition Agreement with 'Abyssinia Iron and Steel Limited' and a prior Cause No.92 of 2019 relating to 'Top Steel Kenya Limited' are mentioned
The case number of the present suit is not stated in the judgment
Internal inconsistency in the claimant's pleaded arithmetic: claimant's witness testified 114 members were recruited at Mombasa and 25 at Athi-River (139 total), while the relief claims amounts for 'Abyssinia Mombasa for 24 months and ... Abyssinia Athi-River for 3 years'
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Eningeering Workers Union v Abyssinia Iron and Steel Limited (Cause E013 of 2022) [2025] KEELRC 47 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/47/eng@2025-01-23
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.