Bakery Confectionary Food Manufacturing & Allied Workers Union (K) v Karibu Flour Mills Limited (Cause 132 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 1089 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan union lost its bid to force recognition and dues deductions because it relied on stale membership records instead of proving current members.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Entitlement to recognition under section 54 LRA
While section 54 obliges an employer to recognise a union with a simple majority, the union must prove current membership; stale check-off forms are insufficient
The court accepted the claimant's pleaded 86 of 100 employees but noted no desegregation of numbers and no evidence of membership status between 30 September 2022 and the filing of the claim on 4 December 2023. Given the fluidity of employment, the shop floor changes daily, and recognition cannot issue on the strength of dated records alone.
Adequacy of proof by filed records and affidavit
A verified affidavit and filed records, without a witness statement, do not suffice to justify mandatory recognition and dues orders
The claimant relied only on the filed records and the Verified Affidavit of Danchael Mwangure, with no witness statement. The court held that issuing the orders on such a record would not meet the ends of justice given possible shop floor changes, and directed the union to return to the shop floor to audit and ascertain membership month by month.
Protection against victimisation
Employees listed in the check-off forms are protected under Article 41 and sections 46(d) and (h) of the Employment Act from victimisation for pursuing the claim
The court, of its own motion, drew the respondent's attention to section 46(d) and (h) of the Employment Act, which bar unfair reasons for disciplinary action, including trade union participation and legal proceedings against an employer. The employees should not be victimised regardless of the outcome.
Legal principles established
#- Recognition under section 54 of the LRA requires a trade union to ascertain its current membership within the unionisable cadre; the process is not mechanical
- Employees who assert their rights at work under Article 41 of the Constitution, whether successful or not, should not be victimised
Court orders
#- 1.The orders sought (recognition agreement and deduction/remittance of dues) shall not be issued as couched
- 2.The claimant shall return to the shop floor and audit its membership, obtaining monthly numbers as a basis for the simple majority claimed
- 3.The claimant is at liberty to apply the provisions of Section 52 of the LRA (direct payment of dues by members)
- 4.No orders on costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and labour relations jurisdiction over trade union recognition and dues disputes; sections 48, 52, 54 of the Labour Relations Act; Article 41 of the Constitution
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Bakery Confectionary Food Manufacturing & Allied Workers Union (K) v Karibu Flour Mills Limited (Cause 132 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 1089 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated on record as reproduced. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1089/eng@2025-04-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.