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

Kenya Chemicals and Allied Workers Union v Milly Glass Works Limited [2019] KEELRC 2256 (KLR)

[2019] KEELRC 2256 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
2256
Citation
[2019] KEELRC 2256 (KLR)
Decided
8 February 2019
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCollective Bargaining Agreement DisputePostureAppeal from a decision of the Employment and Labour Relations CourtCoramHon. Lady Justice Maureen Onyango
Holding

The Court finds the current number of hours of work (48 hours per week) reasonable and awards that the same be retained. The Court also finds the effective date of the CBA to be the date it is signed, as the Respondent has not signed the CBA due to unresolved issues.

Facts

The Claimant is a trade union representing workers in the chemical and allied industries, and the Respondent is a glass manufacturing company. They signed a Recognition Agreement in 2013, leading to negotiations on a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). The parties have not yet concluded the CBA, and there are disputes over working hours and the effective date of the CBA.

Issues

  1. What hours of work are applicable in the instant case
  2. What should be the effective date of the CBA

Reasoning

The Court upholds the current working hours of 48 hours per week and the Respondent's position that the CBA is effective from the date it is signed, as the Respondent has not signed the CBA due to unresolved issues.

Outcome

Affirming the Respondent's position on working hours and the effective date of the CBA.

Authorities cited

Cases cited (1)
  • Teachers Service Commission Vs Kenya National Union of Teachers (KNUT) and 3 Others (2015) eKLR
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case