[2017] KEELRC 994 (KLR)

[2017] KEELRC 994 (KLR)

The court found that the grievant, while serving as an assistant accountant in the administrative cadre, was not eligible to join the union or benefit from the collective bargaining agreement. The proper procedure required her re-assignment to a unionisable position before she could enjoy union membership and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELRC 994 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kenya Union of Commercial, Food and Allied Workers; Respondent: Kapa Oil Refineries Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 174 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
claim dismissed
Judges
B Ongaya
Legal Topics
Collective Bargaining Agreement, Union Membership Eligibility, Salary Arrears, Administrative Cadre, Unionisable Cadre
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Collective Bargaining Agreement Union Membership Eligibility Salary Arrears Administrative Cadre Unionisable Cadre

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenya Union of Commercial, Food and Allied Workers

Applicant

Kapa Oil Refineries Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the grievant was entitled to salary arrears under the collective bargaining agreement prior to her re-assignment from administrative to unionisable cadre.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent was justified in withholding the pay for the period the grievant was ineligible for union membership.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the grievant, while serving as an assistant accountant in the administrative cadre, was not eligible to join the union or benefit from the collective bargaining agreement. The proper procedure required her re-assignment to a unionisable position before she could enjoy union membership and related benefits. The respondent followed due process by re-assigning the grievant effective 31.03.2014, after which she became entitled to union benefits. The claim for salary arrears for the period prior to re-assignment was therefore unfounded, as both the claimant and the grievant were aware of her ineligibility during that period. The respondent's actions were consistent with...

Court Disposition

claim dismissed

Orders

  • The memorandum of claim is dismissed.
  • Each party to bear its own costs of the suit.