SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Kenya Union of Commercial Food and Allied Workers v Tusker Mattresses Limited [2017] KEELRC 257 (KLR)

[2017] KEELRC 257 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
257
Citation
[2017] KEELRC 257 (KLR)
Decided
1 December 2017
Beta Machine-generated summary. Automatically produced by AI from the judgment text — it may be incomplete or inaccurate. Always verify against the full judgment below. Not legal advice.

Summary at a glance

TypeLabor DisputePostureAppeal from a previous decisionCoramAbuodha J. N.
The claim is without merit and is hereby disallowed with costs to the respondent.

Facts

The respondent, Tusker Mattresses Limited, engaged outsourced labor in its core functions, which the claimant, Kenya Union of Commercial Food and Allied Workers, argued was discriminatory and against the right to freedom of association.

Issues

  • Whether engaging outsourced labor in core functions is permissible under the recognition agreement and CBA.
  • Whether the claimant's opposition to outsourcing was based on merit and whether it hindered the right to represent outsourced labor.

Reasoning

The court found that outsourcing core functions was not prohibited by the recognition agreement or CBA, and the claimant failed to demonstrate how outsourcing would prevent or hinder its right to represent outsourced labor.

Outcome

Disallowed with costs to the respondent

Authorities cited

Cases cited (2)
  • Mr Wringley Company (EA) Ltd Vs the Attorney General & Others Pet No. 22 of 2012
  • Kenya Ferry Services Ltd Vs Dock Workers Union [2015] eKLR
⚠ This summary is experimental and generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It can contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations and must not be relied on for legal decisions. The authoritative source is the full judgment. Please confirm every point against the original before use.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case