[2022] KEELRC 14678 (KLR)
The court found that the respondent's reasons for failing to sign the collective bargaining agreement—namely, the lapse of the 30-day period and COVID-19 protocols—were not genuine or bona fide. The court emphasized the expectation of utmost good faith and cooperation between capital and labour in industrial...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEELRC 14678 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kenya Engineering Workers Union; Respondent: Farm Engineering Industries Ltd
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 32 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Ruling on Post Judgment Enforcement Motion
- Outcome
- Application partially allowed; contempt orders declined; timelines set for execution of CBA.
- Judges
- S Radido
- Legal Topics
- Collective Bargaining Agreement, Contempt of Court, Industrial Relations, Wage Increments
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Kenya Engineering Workers Union
Applicant
Farm Engineering Industries Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Post Judgment Enforcement Motion
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondent and its directors are in contempt of court for failing to sign the collective bargaining agreement as ordered.
- 2 Whether the respondent should be compelled to sign the collective bargaining agreement and face sanctions for non-compliance.
- 3 Whether the reasons advanced by the respondent for non-compliance are valid.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the respondent's reasons for failing to sign the collective bargaining agreement—namely, the lapse of the 30-day period and COVID-19 protocols—were not genuine or bona fide. The court emphasized the expectation of utmost good faith and cooperation between capital and labour in industrial relations. While the respondent had not complied with the earlier order, the court decided to grant a final indulgence, setting out a clear timeline for the union to submit a draft CBA, for the respondent to confirm compliance with the judgment, and for both parties to sign the agreement before the County Labour Officer. The court declined to grant the contempt orders sought but made...
Court Disposition
Application partially allowed; contempt orders declined; timelines set for execution of CBA.
Orders
- The union to submit a draft collective bargaining agreement to the respondent on or before 30 March 2022.
- The respondent to confirm the amendments comply with the court judgment on or before 8 April 2022.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
Kenya Engineering Workers Union v Farm Engineering Industries Ltd (Cause 32 of 2019) [2022] KEELRC 14678 (KLR) (23 March 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEELRC 14678 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kisumu
Cause 32 of 2019
S Radido, J
March 23, 2022
Between
Kenya Engineering Workers Union
Claimant
and
Farm Engineering Industries Ltd
Respondent
Ruling
1. Before the court is a motion dated 11 June 2021, by the Kenya Engineering Workers Union seeking orders:(1)That the Honourable Court deem fit and be pleased to issue an order against the Respondents Directors (Mr Gurpit Bhurji & Panvir Bhurji) and Managing Director (Mr Swarjit Singh Bhurji) directing the OCS Kondele Police Station to arrest and produce them before the Honourable Court for sentencing them to civil jail.(2)That the forementioned Directors be compelled to sign the CBA before this Honourable Court.(3)That the Respondent to meet the costs of this application.(4)That any other relief the Honourable Court may deem fit to grant.
2. The grounds advanced in support of the Motion were that the Court had delivered judgment on 3 February 2021 directing the parties to sign a collective bargaining agreement within 30-days, the judgment and decree were served upon the Respondent and the County Labour Officer and that despite the service and invitations by the County Labour Officer, the Respondent had declined to comply with the decree.
3. The Respondent’s Executive Chairman filed a replying affidavit on 16 September 2021, wherein it was deponed that the Respondent had not refused or declined to sign a collective bargaining agreement with the Union within 30-days, but it is the County Labour Officer who had acted outside the 30-days; that the 30-days having lapsed, it would have been null and void to execute the collective bargaining agreement; that the Union had not involved the Respondent in drafting the collective bargaining agreement; that the Union had failed to supply a copy of the draft collective bargaining agreement; that there was a pending application for stay of execution of the judgment and that due to COVID-19 protocols, it was not possible to attend a physical meeting to sign the collective bargaining agreement.
4. The Respondent further asserted that the application was fatally defective because there was no competent contempt application before the Court.
5. The Union’s submissions were not on record by the agreed timeline while the Respondent filed its submissions on 14 February 2022.
6. The Court has considered the application, affidavits and submissions.
7. It is not in dispute that in a judgment delivered on 3 February 2021, the Court directed the parries to execute a collective bargaining agreement within 30-days incorporating a general wage increase from 1 August 2017.
8. By the time the Court was delivering the judgment, the parties had already agreed on the terms of the collective bargaining agreement save for effective date and general wage increment.
9. The Respondent has attempted to explain why it has not signed the agreement.
10. The reasons such as the 30-days given by the Court had lapsed and that due to COVID-19 protocols, the parties could not meet are not genuine or bona fides. The reasons are equally not inspiring considering the utmost good faith is expected of social partners in industrial relations.
11. Both capital and labour must realise that they can only achieve their objectives and desires through a cooperative spirit. Capital won’t get its profits without the workers’ sweat, nor will the workers earn a livelihood without production.
12. The court will indulge the respondent for the last time and order:i.The Union to submit a draft collective bargaining agreement to the respondent on or before 30 March 2022. ii.The respondent to confirm the amendments comply with the court judgment on or before 8 April 2022. iii.The parties to sign the collective bargaining agreement on or before 15 April 2022 before the County Labour Officer, Kisumu.
13. Costs in the cause.
DELIVERED THROUGH MICROSOFT TEAMS, DATED AND SIGNED IN KISUMU ON THIS 23RDDAY OF MARCH 2022. RADIDO STEPHEN, MCIARBJUDGEAppearancesFor Union Mr. Makale, Industrial Relations OfficerFor Respondent M.M. Gitonga Advocates LLPCourt Assistant Chrispo Aura