Kenya Union of Domestic Hotels Educational Institutions, Hospitals and Allied Workers (KUDHEIHA) v Ugenya Diploma Primary Teachers Training College (Cause E052 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1209 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled an employer's redundancy of 10 workers was unlawful because it skipped mandatory notice, consultation, and fair selection steps under the Employment Act.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Compliance with Section 40(1)(a) - notice of redundancy to the union and Labour Officer
Non-compliant: no notice was given to the claimant union and no evidence proved a notice was forwarded to the local labour officer
The grievants were union members, so notice was required to the union and the Labour Officer at least one month before the effective date. RWI admitted no notice was given to the union and availed no proof of notice to the labour officer. His assertion that employees were notified could not cure the statutory default.
Statement of reasons for and extent of the redundancy
Non-compliant: no letter setting out in concise terms the reasons and extent of the redundancy
RWI had no letter setting out in concise terms what occasioned the redundancy beyond alleged declining enrolment. Although declining enrolment and reduced government grant had been discussed by the Board of Management, the statutory notice requirements were not met.
Selection criteria under Section 40(1)(c)
Non-compliant: the respondent could not explain how the 10 of 27 non-teaching staff were selected
When asked by the court how the number 10 was arrived at, RWI could not identify any selection criteria guided by seniority, skill, ability and reliability as required by Section 40(1)(c).
Consultation as an integral part of the redundancy process
No consultations took place; the BOM Committee informed employees of a decision already taken the day before the letters were dispatched
Relying on Kenya Airways and Cargill, consultation is implied in Section 40(1)(a) and (b). Since the union was not notified, no consultations occurred, and the meeting with employees merely announced a fait accompli.
Whether the court can compel the signing of a CBA
No: collective bargaining is voluntary and the court's only role under the Labour Relations Act is registration of a concluded collective agreement under Section 60
A collective agreement is one voluntarily agreed in writing between a union and an employer. Compelling a party to agree would negate freedom of contract. Following Teachers Service Commission v KNUTC and the words of Odek JA, the prayer was declined.
Quantum of compensation under Section 49(1)(c)
The equivalent of two months' gross salary per grievant is fair compensation
The court considered that the grievants did not appeal the termination, did not contribute to it, served between 5 and 8 years, and were paid gratuity for the duration served, making two months' gross salary fair in the circumstances.
Legal principles established
#- Section 40(1) of the Employment Act mandatorily prescribes the conditions for a fair redundancy, including notice to the union and the Labour Officer at least one month before the effective date
- Consultation between the employer, relevant unions, labour officers and employees is implied by Section 40(1)(a) and (b) of the Employment Act
- Failure to comply with Section 40(1) converts a purported redundancy into an unfair and unlawful termination entitling employees to relief
- Courts cannot compel parties to sign a collective bargaining agreement; collective bargaining is voluntary and grounded on freedom of contract
Court orders
#- 1.Declaration that termination of employment by the respondent was unfair and unlawful
- 2.Equivalent of two (2) months' gross salary compensation for each grievant
- 3.Respondent shall reimburse the claimant's costs assessed at Kshs.30,000.00
- 4.Interest on the compensation from date of judgment till payment in full
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, Section 12 (first-instance jurisdiction over employment and labour relations disputes)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Union of Domestic Hotels Educational Institutions, Hospitals and Allied Workers (KUDHEIHA) v Ugenya Diploma Primary Teachers Training College (Cause E052 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1209 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1209/eng@2025-04-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.