[2017] KEELRC 1730 (KLR)
The court found that the Respondent, having recognized the Claimant Union under a court order, was under a statutory obligation to engage in good faith negotiations towards a Collective Bargaining Agreement. The Respondent's persistent non-cooperation, including failure to respond to the draft CBA, non-attendance at...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELRC 1730 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Kenya Union of Domestic, Hotels, Educational Institutions and Hospitals Workers Union [KUDHEIHA]; Respondent: Board of Management, Waa Boys High School
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 395 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Judgment
- Outcome
- Claim allowed.
- Legal Topics
- Collective Bargaining Agreements, Recognition Agreements, Conciliation Process, Employer Obligations
- 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 Union of Domestic, Hotels, Educational Institutions and Hospitals Workers Union [KUDHEIHA]
Claimant
Board of Management, Waa Boys High School
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Respondent is obligated to negotiate a Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Claimant Union.
- 2 Whether the Respondent's failure to participate in conciliation and negotiation processes violates statutory industrial relations procedures.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Respondent, having recognized the Claimant Union under a court order, was under a statutory obligation to engage in good faith negotiations towards a Collective Bargaining Agreement. The Respondent's persistent non-cooperation, including failure to respond to the draft CBA, non-attendance at conciliation meetings, and disregard for the conciliation process, demonstrated a refusal to comply with the established industrial relations framework under the Labour Relations Act. The court held that judicial intervention was necessary to compel the Respondent to fulfill its legal obligations and ordered the Respondent to enter into CBA negotiations within 90 days.
Court Disposition
Claim allowed.
Orders
- The Respondent shall enter into Collective Bargaining Agreement negotiations with the Claimant Union and come up with a CBA within 90 days of this judgment.
- Costs to the Claimant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR
RELATIONS COURT AT MOMBASA
CAUSE NUMBER 395 OF 2015
BETWEEN
KENYA UNION OF DOMESTIC, HOTELS,
EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AND HOSPITALS
WORKERS UNION [KUDHEIHA].……………………………………………………..CLAIMANT
VERSUS
BOARD OF MANAGEMENT, WAA BOYS HIGH SCHOOL….……………….….RESPONDENT
Rika J
Court Assistant: Benjamin Kombe
Claimant Union in Person
No appearance for the Respondent
_____________________________
JUDGMENT
1. The Claimant Union filed its Statement of Claim, on the 15th June 2015. It seeks to have the Respondent compelled to negotiate a Collective Bargaining Agreement.
2. The Respondent did not file any Response to the Claim, and failed to attend Court. There are Affidavits of Service filed by the Claimant showing the Respondent was notified.
3. The Respondent signed a Recognition Agreement with the Claimant, under the coercive power of a Court Order, on 19th May 2014.
4. Subsequently, the Claimant forwarded a draft CBA to the Respondent for consideration in June 2014. There was no response from the Respondent.
5. The Claimant reported the existence of a dispute to the Cabinet Secretary for Labour, under the Labour Relations Act. A Conciliator was appointed, and proceeded to invite Parties for conciliation meetings. The Respondent neither attended these meetings, nor sent its proposals to the Labour Office.
6. In the end the Conciliator issued a Certificate of Disagreement, paving the way for institution of this Claim.
The Court Finds:-
7. The Respondent recognized the Claimant Union, only after the intervention of the Court. Subsequently, the Respondent was invited by the Claimant Union to negotiate CBA. There was no response from the Respondent. There was report made to the Minister on the presence of a dispute. A Conciliator was appointed and set in motion the conciliation mechanism. The Respondent adamantly gave the process a cold shoulder.
8. It is the view of the Court that the Respondent is an Employer who will not submit to industrial relations structures, without being coerced through a judicial command.
IT IS ORDERED:-
a) The Respondent shall enter into Collective Bargaining Agreement Negotiations with the Claimant Union, and come up with a CBA within 90 days of this Judgment.
b) Costs to the Claimant.
Dated and delivered at Mombasa this 24th day of February 2017.
James Rika
Judge