[2021] KEELRC 2369 (KLR)

[2021] KEELRC 2369 (KLR)

The court found no serious contestation over the union's right to recognition, noting the claimant had demonstrated 100% membership among the respondent's employees and no rival union existed. However, the court observed ambiguity regarding whether the respondent had been served with the draft recognition agreement...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEELRC 2369 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kenya Union of Commercial Food & Allied Workers; Respondent: Turner Bakers & Hatfield (1968) Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Eldoret
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 1 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Recognition Application / Judgment
Outcome
interim orders granted, final orders pending verification
Legal Topics
Trade Union Recognition, Collective Bargaining, Employee Membership Verification
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Trade Union Recognition Collective Bargaining Employee Membership Verification

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenya Union of Commercial Food & Allied Workers

Applicant

Turner Bakers & Hatfield (1968) Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Recognition Application / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claimant union is entitled to recognition by the respondent as the representative body for its employees.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant union satisfied the simple majority rule for recognition.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent was served with the draft recognition agreement and check off forms for union dues deduction.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found no serious contestation over the union's right to recognition, noting the claimant had demonstrated 100% membership among the respondent's employees and no rival union existed. However, the court observed ambiguity regarding whether the respondent had been served with the draft recognition agreement and check off forms. To resolve this, the court ordered the claimant to resubmit the list of recruited members and the draft recognition agreement to the respondent for verification and signature. The matter was set for mention in thirty days for recording of final orders, pending verification and confirmation by the respondent.

Court Disposition

interim orders granted, final orders pending verification

Orders

  • The claimant is to resubmit to the respondent for verification and confirmation the list of members recruited and the draft recognition agreement for signature once the list is verified and confirmed by the respondent.
  • The matter is set for mention thirty days from the date of delivery of this judgment for recording of final orders.