Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedNot stated in the judgment· [2025] KEELRC 2143 (KLR)

Kenya Union of Commercial, Food and Allied Workers v New Murarandia Farmers Cooperative Society (Cause E003 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2143 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
21 July 2025
OMONESMUS N MAKAU
1,990 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~8 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court awarded a coffee cooperative's workers a 5% annual wage rise for 2020-2022 and ordered the employer to sign the CBA within 30 days.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The claimant, a registered trade union representing members employed by the respondent cooperative society engaged in coffee production, sued for the conclusion of the CBA covering 1st October 2020 to 30th September 2022, following a failed conciliation before the Cabinet Secretary. The claimant sought a 12 percent general wage increase in each year of the CBA, an order compelling the respondent to sign the CBA within 30 days, and costs. The respondent opposed, alleging conflict of interest in negotiations (its Secretary Manager being a union member) and financial incapacity due to low coffee production, an outstanding bank loan of Kshs.113,356,500 and unpaid staff dues exceeding Kshs.21,000,000, relying on Kenya Tea Growers Association v Kenya Plantation & Agricultural Workers Union (2012) eKLR on economic sustainability of CBAs. The court, on its own motion, obtained an economic report from the CPPMD dated 24th January 2025; the respondent failed to cooperate fully, withholding audited accounts, prompting adverse inferences. Framing three issues, the court held that under Article 41(2)(a) of the Constitution employees are entitled to fair remuneration, and that inflation of 9.39 percent over the retiring CBA period justified a general wage increase. Balancing productivity, cost of living and ability to pay, it awarded 5 percent per year (10 percent total). The negotiated 7 percent offer was invalidated for conflict of interest. Judgment was entered for the claimant: a 5 percent wage increase per year for 2020/2021 and 2021/2022, the parties to sign the CBA incorporating the increase within 30 days, and each party to bear its own costs. The claim was thus partially allowed - the wage increase awarded at less than sought, and costs denied.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the claimant was entitled to a general wage increase for the 2020-2022 CBA period

Holding

Yes. Inflation of 9.39 percent over the retiring CBA period eroded purchasing power, and under Article 41(2)(a) every employee has a right to fair remuneration; a 5 percent annual increase was awarded as reasonable and sustainable.

Reasoning

The court relied on the CPPMD economic report showing a Consumer Price Index of 9.39 percent for the retiring CBA period, translating to 4.7 percent compensation per year for inflation. The respondent withheld audited accounts and financial information despite court directions, so adverse inferences were drawn against it. Balancing compensation to employees against the employer's sustainability, and applying the Kenya Tea Growers principles of productivity, cost of living and ability to pay, the court settled on 5 percent per year as fair and affordable given the wage bill figures in the CPPMD report.

02

Whether the respondent should be compelled to sign the proposed CBA for 2020-2022

Holding

Yes, but on the court's terms: the parties to sign a CBA incorporating the 5 percent annual wage increase within 30 days of the judgment.

Reasoning

The court found the signing of the CBA long overdue and rejected the respondent's plea of financial inability, which was unsupported by any audit report. The respondent's non-cooperation with the CPPMD attracted adverse inference. The 7 percent offer made during negotiations was disregarded because the respondent's Secretary Manager who negotiated it was herself a union member, creating a conflict of interest. Judgment was therefore entered for the wage increase awarded, with the CBA to be signed incorporating that increase within 30 days.

p. 4
03

Whether the claimant was entitled to the costs of the suit

Holding

No. Each party was ordered to bear its own costs.

Reasoning

Although the claimant sought costs, the court, having entered judgment on the wage increase and the signing of the CBA, exercised its discretion to make no order as to costs, ordering each party to bear its own costs.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • A court faced with a question of wage increment ought to take into account productivity, cost of living and the ability to pay by the employer.
  • Adverse inference may be drawn against a party that fails to avail information, such as audited accounts, to a court-appointed expert despite directions.
  • A wage offer negotiated by a team labouring under a conflict of interest is invalid.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.General wage increase of 5 percent for the year 2020/2021 and 5 percent for the year 2021/2022
  2. 2.The parties to sign a CBA incorporating the said wage increase within 30 days of the judgment
  3. 3.Each party to bear its own costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Jurisdiction as the employment and labour relations court over the dispute; Article 41(2)(a) of the Constitution invoked on fair remuneration

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Union of Commercial, Food and Allied Workers v New Murarandia Farmers Cooperative Society (Cause E003 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2143 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2143/eng@2025-07-21

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