Transport Workers Union (K) v Turkish Airlines INC (Cause E030 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 1060 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court found Turkish Airlines bargained in bad faith and ordered the airline back to conciliation to finish the CBA within 21 days.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Respondent engaged in the CBA negotiations in good faith
- 2.Whether the parties should be compelled to conclude the outstanding CBA issues through conciliation
Key legal issues
#Whether the Respondent failed to negotiate the CBA in good faith
The Court found the Respondent did not participate in the negotiations in good faith
The Respondent attributed the stall to the Union's failure to provide minutes, but produced no agreement obliging the Union to provide secretarial services. The Conciliator's report indicated the Respondent's head office had directed withdrawal from negotiations, and the Respondent did not rebut that assertion. The Court held such a stance dulled employee morale and was contrary to good faith.
Legal principles established
#- Employers must dialogue with employees; good industrial relations are pivotal to a business running optimally
- A party alleging that an agreed procedural obligation (such as taking minutes) rested on the other side must place an agreement to that effect before the Court
- Unresolved assertions raised in a Motion remain proved where the respondent does not respond to them
Court orders
#- 1.The parties to appear before the Conciliator and engage in deliberations on the 6 outstanding issues within the next 21 days
- 2.If agreement is reached, the parties to sign a Collective Bargaining Agreement in the usual manner
- 3.If there is no agreement, the Court will give further directions on a date to be agreed on hereinafter
- 4.Costs in the cause
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Not expressly stated; the dispute was referred to the Court by the Conciliator under the trade dispute machinery following the Union's report to the Cabinet Secretary
Relief refused
#Order compelling the Respondent to conclude the ongoing CBA negotiations directly
The Court instead directed the parties back to the Conciliator on the 6 outstanding issues
Order directing the Ministry of Labour – CPMU division to conciliate within one month
Not granted in the terms sought; the Court adopted its own timeline and mechanism
Costs
Costs in the cause
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
It is clear that the Respondent did not participate in the negotiations in good faith. The efiect of its stance would only serve to dull employee morale at the workplace.
Employers cannot make their profits without dialoguing with employees. Good industrial relations at the workplace is pivotal for a business to run optimally.
The parties to appear before the Conciliator and engage in deliberations on the 6 outstanding issues within the next 21 days.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment does not state the case number or citation under which it was delivered
First limb of the Motion (order i) appears as ellipsis in the judgment; the relief sought is not recorded
Neither party's submissions were on record despite directions, yet the Court determined the Motion
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Transport Workers Union (K) v Turkish Airlines INC (Cause E030 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 1060 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1060/eng@2025-04-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.