[2018] KEELRC 2262 (KLR)
The court found that the claimant union had fulfilled the requirements for recognition under section 54 of the Labour Relations Act by recruiting a sufficient number of unionisable employees and serving the necessary check off forms, which were acknowledged by the respondent. The respondent failed to provide...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELRC 2262 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kenya Union of Employees of Polytechnics, Colleges and Allied Institutions (KUEPCA); Respondent: The Board of Management, Nairobi Technical Training Institute
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 1901 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Labour Cause / Judgment
- Outcome
- Claim allowed. Respondent directed to sign recognition agreement.
- Judges
- DI Wasike
- Legal Topics
- Trade Union Recognition, Collective Bargaining, Labour Relations Act Compliance
- 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 Employees of Polytechnics, Colleges and Allied Institutions (KUEPCA)
Applicant
The Board of Management, Nairobi Technical Training Institute
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Labour Cause / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claimant union met the legal requirements for recognition by the respondent for purposes of collective bargaining.
- 2 Whether the respondent was justified in refusing to sign the recognition agreement with the claimant union.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the claimant union had fulfilled the requirements for recognition under section 54 of the Labour Relations Act by recruiting a sufficient number of unionisable employees and serving the necessary check off forms, which were acknowledged by the respondent. The respondent failed to provide evidence of any legitimate request for additional documentation from the claimant and did not demonstrate a valid reason for refusing to sign the recognition agreement. The court held that the respondent was under a statutory obligation to sign the recognition agreement for purposes of collective bargaining.
Court Disposition
Claim allowed. Respondent directed to sign recognition agreement.
Orders
- The respondent shall forthwith sign the recognition agreement with the claimant for purposes of collective bargaining.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF
KENYA AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NUMBER 1901 OF 2015
KENYA UNION OF EMPLOYEES OF POLYTECHNICS,
COLLEGES AND ALLIED INSTITUTIONS (KUEPCA)...CLAIMANT
VERSUS
THE BOARD OF MANAGEMENT,
NAIROBI TECHNICAL TRAINING INSTITUTE.........RESPONDENT
JUDGEMENT
1. By motion dated 19th October, 2015, the claimant sought orders that the Honourable Court issues declaratory orders that the parties herein sign a recognition agreement forwarded to the respondent by a letter dated 28th April, 2014 for purposes of collective bargaining.
2. According to Mr Japheth Anyire Agura, who described himself as the Secretary General of the claimant union the claimant organized and recruited employees of the respondent into its membership through check off forms under section 48 of the Labour Relations Act. The claimant served the said forms upon the respondent on 2nd April and 14th August, 2014 and the respondent duly acknowledged receipt of the check off forms. According to Mr Agura, the respondent was therefore obligated to recognize the claimant for purposes of collective bargaining. Efforts to resolve the dispute by conciliation through the Ministry of Labour, Social Security Services failed due to the respondent’s refusal to attend conciliation meetings.
3. The respondent filed a replying affidavit through one Fredrick Magua who deponed among others that the claimant had failed to supply the respondent with a certificate of registration, copy of its constitution and rules, returns filed with the Registrar of Trade Unions confirming the registered officials of the claimant.
4. According to Mr Magua, he was therefore unable to admit or confirm whether Mr Agura was indeed a registered official of the claimant. Mr Magua further stated that he was aware the claimant had recruited 21 out of 51 unionisable employees of the respondent and this was readily apparent that the number of members recruited by the claimant did not constitute a simple majority of the total number of the respondent’s unionisable employees.
5. Mr Magua further stated that it was not true that the respondent had refused to attend conciliation meetings organized by the conciliator appointed by the Ministry of Labour.
6. The letter dated 30th June, 2015 addressed to Mr A. K. Nyaga the conciliator refuted that the respondent had refused to sign the recognition agreement. The letter further stated that on 19th June, 2015 the claimant’s officials failed to go to the respondents premises for purposes of signing the recognition agreement in the presence of the Chairman of the Board of management.
7. Whereas the respondent has stated that it had asked severally from the claimant to be furnished with a copy of the claimant’s constitution and returns from Registrar of Trade Unions confirming the claimants’ registered officials prior to signing the recognition agreement no evidence of such request has been produced before the court.
8. This fact together with the letter dated 30th June, 2015 shows that there is no valid reason why the respondent should not sign the recognition agreement with the claimant for purposes of collective bargaining. An employer is under obligation to sign a recognition agreement once a union has fulfilled the requirements of section 54 of the Labour Relations Act.
9. The court therefore directs that the respondent forthwith signs the recognition agreement with the claimant for purposes of collective bargaining.
10. It is so ordered.
Dated at Nairobi this 9th day of February 2018
ABUODHA J. N.
JUDGE
Delivered this 9th day of February 2018
In the presence of:-
……………………for the claimant
……………………for the Respondent
ABUODHA J. N.
JUDGE