Wanyama v United Nations Sacco Society (UN SACCO) Limited (Cause E581 of 2022) [2025] KEELRC 899 (KLR)

The email of 5 March 2021 came from the Human Resource Consultant whose terms of engagement did not include making appointments, a role reserved to the Board. Re-appointment signifies appointment to a position previously held, and the Claimant had not held the Head of Credit Management position. The Consultant was not called as a witness. The Court answered the question in the negative.

The re-advertisement corrected an omission of the Certified Credit Professional qualification in the initial advert. The Court held it could not micromanage the employer, and re-advertising fell within the Respondent's managerial prerogative in pursuit of its restructuring objectives. The Claimant nevertheless participated in the new interview process.

Although the termination was for operational reasons under section 45(2)(b)(ii), the Respondent never formally and unambiguously told the Claimant it intended to terminate her existing contract if she declined the offered Finance Officer position, nor invited her representations. The Court therefore found the termination procedurally unfair despite valid reasons.

The Claimant's substantive position was Finance Officer; she was offered the same position at higher remuneration under the new structure, declined, and did not apply for lower positions. Since the contract was for personal services, the Respondent could not coerce her to serve. The Court found valid and fair reasons proved for the restructuring-based separation.

Weighing 12 years of service against the Respondent's failure to follow fair procedure, the Court awarded the equivalent of 4 months' gross salary as compensation under section 49, allowed pay in lieu of notice admitted by the Respondent, and the leave allowances offered. A certificate of service is a statutory entitlement. Post-termination claims (salary, allowances, pension) were rejected.