Railways Workers' Union (Kenya) v Kenya Railways Corporation (Cause E456 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 1444 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court ruled that Kenya Railways' years of refusing to negotiate a new collective bargaining agreement was an unfair labour practice and ordered talks within 90 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's failure to negotiate and conclude a Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Claimant amounts to an unfair labour practice
- 2.Whether the Court should order the parties to commence and conclude CBA negotiations within a specified time
- 3.Whether the Labour Commissioner should be directed to chair the negotiations and file a report in Court
Key legal issues
#Whether the Respondent's failure to negotiate and conclude a CBA constitutes an unfair labour practice
Yes. The last CBA expired in 2017; despite proposals in 2017, a trade dispute in 2020, conciliation, and SRC advice approving proposals in May 2024, the Respondent gave no reasonable justification for not concluding negotiations.
The Court traced the chronology: the 2014 CBA expired in 2017, proposals were tabled the same year with no positive response, a dispute was reported in 2020 and conciliation did not resolve it. The Respondent blamed court cases, lack of a Board, and SRC advice requiring a salary structure, but could not explain a two-year failure to develop that structure. Unexplained delay justified the declaration of unfair labour practice.
What remedy follows from the unfair labour practice
A mandatory order compelling the Respondent to negotiate and conclude the CBA within 90 days, rather than the 30 days sought or the Labour Commissioner chairing negotiations.
The Court declined to direct the Labour Commissioner to chair negotiations as sought, but substituted its own compliance timeline of 90 days, giving the Respondent a defined period to discharge its duty to bargain after roughly a year had elapsed since SRC advice.
Legal principles established
#- An employer's unexplained failure to negotiate and conclude a collective bargaining agreement amounts to an unfair labour practice
- An employer relying on regulatory advice (such as from the Salaries and Remuneration Commission) as a reason for delaying CBA negotiations must explain the delay in implementing the conditions attached to that advice
Court orders
#- 1.A declaration that the Respondent's failure to negotiate and conclude a Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Claimant amounts to an unfair labour practice
- 2.The Respondent is ordered to negotiate and conclude a Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Claimant within 90 days
- 3.Each party to bear own costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over unfair labour practice and collective bargaining dispute (Labour Relations Act dispute reported to the Cabinet Secretary)
Relief refused
#Direction that the Labour Commissioner, Ministry of Labour, chair the negotiations for the Collective Bargaining Agreement and file a report in Court within 45 days after judgment
Not included in the final orders; the Court instead ordered the Respondent itself to negotiate and conclude the CBA within 90 days
Costs
Because of the ongoing social partnership between the parties, each party to bear own costs.
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.
A declaration is hereby issued that the Respondent's failure to negotiate and conclude a Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Claimant amounts to an unfair labour practice.
The Respondent is hereby ordered to negotiate and conclude a Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Claimant within 90 days.
Because of the ongoing social partnership between the parties, each party to bear own costs.
The Respondent has not explained why it has not developed a salary structure 2 years down the line.
Issues in the judgment
#Chronology inconsistency: SRC advice dated 15 May 2024 is stated before the Respondent's requests to the Commission which the Commission 'replied on 9 November 2023'
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Railways Workers' Union (Kenya) v Kenya Railways Corporation (Cause E456 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 1444 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Cause stated as Issue in Dispute: Refusal by the Management of Kenya Railways Corporation to negotiate a Collective Bargaining Agreement (sued on 8 June 2023). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1444/eng@2025-05-08
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.