Kenya Airports Authority v Kenya Aviation Workers Union (Cause E929 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2861 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court turned an unsigned KAA-KAWU conciliation report into a binding settlement: 507 contract workers get permanent jobs by 31 December 2025.
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 conciliation report dated 1st October 2025 should be adopted as a settlement agreement of the trade dispute and the case closed
Key legal issues
#Whether an unsigned conciliation report can bind the parties and be adopted by the court as a settlement
The conciliation report could not bind as a statutory settlement agreement for want of writing and signatures under section 68(1), but the court could decipher the agreed terms from the report and adopt them, resolving the deadlock
Section 68(1) of the Labour Relations Act mandates that terms of a settled dispute be recorded in writing and signed by the parties and the conciliator. No such signed agreement existed. However, both parties accepted the report's substance and only differed on wording of the draft consent. The court compared both drafts against the report, corrected exaggerations (the Claimant's qualifiers and the Respondent's extension of overtime to all airports), and adopted the report's terms with amendments, extending compliance timelines.
Legal principles established
#- For a conciliation settlement to bind parties under section 68(1) of the Labour Relations Act, the terms must be recorded in writing and signed by the parties and the conciliator
- The appointment of a General Manager Human Resource is a matter for the employer, not the employees
Court orders
#- 1.That the intended transfer of Ground Flight Safety (G.F.S) to KCAA be stopped and stakeholders, through a consultative process, document the functions and mandate of the current G.F.S; the Respondent to nominate two (2) representatives to the Technical Committee comprising the Claimant and the Kenya Civil Aviation Authority (KCAA), with the Committee's outcome discussed with the Respondent so that concurrence is reached before a decision is made
- 2.That all the 507 employees on fixed term contracts be employed on permanent and pensionable terms
- 3.That appointment letters be issued to all the promoted staff confirming them to their new positions
- 4.That all pending overtime payments for Wilson Airport staff be paid in the October 2025 payroll
- 5.Extension of the compliance timelines by the Claimant to 31st December 2025
- 6.The trade dispute is marked as resolved and the case closed
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 159(2)(c) of the Constitution and Part VIII of the Labour Relations Act (trade dispute conciliation); the court's power to adopt the conciliation report as a settlement
Relief refused
#Overtime payment extended to staff at all airports countrywide (as proposed in the Respondent's draft consent)
The grievance on failure to pay overtime was confined to Wilson Airport staff only; the Respondent's draft was an exaggeration beyond the strike notice and conciliation report
Costs
No order as to costs recorded in the final orders; the dispute was marked resolved and the case closed. (The Respondent's draft consent had proposed each party to bear its costs; the Claimant's draft proposed withdrawal with no order as to costs; the court did not adopt either costs provision.)
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.
Considering that the above timelines have been afiected by the delay in reaching amicable agreement on the terms settlement, and also that there are financial implications in the above terms, I extend the compliance timelines by the Claimant to 31st December 2025. On the basis of the foregoing terms, the trade dispute herein is marked as resolved the case closed.
In the instant case, there is no written settlement agreement dully signed by both parties and the conciliator as required by the above provision in mandatory terms.
Save for the foregoing slight exaggeration, I find the draft terms of settlement by the Respondent reasonable for adoption because they resonate well with the conciliation Report dated 1st October 2025. I therefore adopt the said draft with amendments.
The said move is the proper one because it is the employer, and not the employees, who should decide which person is to be appointed to serve as the General Manager Human Resource.
Issues in the judgment
#The strike notice cites 'Article 41 (2) (d) of the Constitution of Kenya 2020' although the Constitution is dated 2010; the error appears in the quoted letter
Costs not addressed in the final orders despite both draft consents containing costs provisions, leaving the costs position unresolved on the face of the disposition
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Airports Authority v Kenya Aviation Workers Union (Cause E929 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2861 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2861/eng@2025-10-23
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.