Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedNot stated in judgment· [2025] KEELRC 2973 (KLR)

Kenya Union of Commercial, Food and Allied Workers v Text Book Centre Limited (Cause E803 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2973 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
30 October 2025
BMB. O. M. Manani
1,482 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant trade union sued on behalf of its member, Kenneth Karangi (the Grievant), a former employee of the Respondent who resigned in February 2022 after rising to the position of Assistant Manager. The Claimant sought service gratuity under the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the parties and service pay under the Employment Act, contending the Grievant was a unionisable employee with a constitutional right to join the union and benefit from the CBA. The Respondent maintained that the Grievant was a member of management and therefore not unionisable under the Industrial Relations Charter, so the CBA did not cover him. The court framed two issues: whether the Grievant was a unionisable employee entitled to CBA benefits, and whether he was entitled to the reliefs sought. Relying on the Labour Relations Act's definition of unionisable employee and the Industrial Relations Charter's exclusion of management, and following the Court of Appeal's decision in Kenya Chemical and Allied Workers' Union v Bamburi Cement Limited, the court held that the Grievant, as Assistant Manager, was part of management and could not join the union or claim CBA gratuity. It further held that the limitation on his articles 36 and 41 rights was justifiable in an open and democratic society due to the conflict of interest management employees face in tripartite negotiations. The court also found no gratuity provision in his contract and, as an NSSF contributor under section 35(6) of the Employment Act, he was ineligible for service pay. The cause was dismissed with each party bearing its own costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Grievant was a unionisable employee entitled to CBA benefits

Holding

The Grievant, as Assistant Manager, was part of management and excluded from trade union membership by the Industrial Relations Charter; he was not unionisable and could not draw benefits from the CBA

Reasoning

Section 2 of the Labour Relations Act defines a unionisable employee by eligibility for trade union membership. The Labour Relations Act does not specify eligibility, so the court turned to the Industrial Relations Charter, which excludes management. The Court of Appeal in Kenya Chemical and Allied Workers' Union v Bamburi Cement confirmed that management employees cannot belong to a workers' union. The Grievant's position as Assistant Manager placed him in management.

p. 3
02

Whether excluding management employees from union membership and CBA benefits is discriminatory

Holding

No; the limitation on the constitutional rights under articles 36 and 41 is justifiable in an open and democratic society

Reasoning

Articles 41 and 36 protect the right to join a trade union and freedom of association, but these rights are not absolute and are not among the unlimitable rights under article 25. The Industrial Relations Charter's exclusion of management employees limits these rights, but the limitation is reasonable because management employees represent the employer's interest in tripartite negotiations, creating a conflict of interest if they also belonged to a workers' union.

p. 3
03

Whether the Grievant was entitled to gratuity under his contract of service

Holding

No; the contract did not provide for gratuity on exit

Reasoning

Although a non-unionisable employee could claim gratuity if incorporated in his contract of service, a perusal of the Grievant's contract showed no agreement that gratuity would be paid on exit from employment.

p. 3
04

Whether the Grievant was entitled to service pay under the Employment Act

Holding

No; as an NSSF contributor he was ineligible under section 35(6)

Reasoning

Section 35(6) of the Employment Act excludes employees who are members of the NSSF from claiming service pay. The Grievant's May 2021 pay slip, tendered in evidence, showed he was an NSSF contributor, so he is not eligible to claim service pay.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Members of management of an enterprise cannot form or belong to a workers' trade union under the Industrial Relations Charter and cannot claim benefits under a CBA
  • The limitation of the right to join a trade union imposed on management employees is justifiable in an open and democratic society due to conflict of interest
  • An employee who is a member of the NSSF is not eligible to claim service pay under section 35(6) of the Employment Act

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The cause is dismissed
  2. 2.Each party to bear own costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Labour Relations ActSection 2
  • Employment ActSection 35 and 35(6)
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Articles 36, 41, 25
  • Industrial Relations CharterClause B(10) and Appendix C
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) RulesRule 28(3)

Cases cited (2)

  • Kenya Chemical and Allied Workers’ Union v Bamburi Cement Limited
    [2017] KECA 20 (KLR)
  • Kenya Union of Sugar Plantation and Allied Workers v Mumias Sugar Company Limited & 6 others
    [2016] KEELRC 452 (KLR)
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act over the trade dispute referred after conciliation

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Union of Commercial, Food and Allied Workers v Text Book Centre Limited (Cause E803 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2973 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2973/eng@2025-10-30

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