Case Law[2026] KEELRC 335Kenya
Banking Insurance and Finance Union v Smep Microfinance Bank Limited (Cause 890 of 2019) [2026] KEELRC 335 (KLR) (6 February 2026) (Ruling)
Employment and Labour Relations Court of Kenya
Judgment
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT
AT NAIROBI
ELRC CAUSE NO. 890 OF 2019
BANKING INSURANCE AND FINANCE
UNION………….CLAIMANT
-VERSUS-
SMEP MICROFINANCE BANK LIMITED……….……
RESPONDENT.
(Before Hon. Justice Abuodha Jorum Nelson)
RULING
1. By a judgment of this Court delivered on 28th September,
2024, the Court directed that the Labour Officer undertake
a headcount of all unionisable employees working for the
respondent to ascertain whether the claimant had
ascertained the needed simple majority under the Labour
Relations Act for purposes of entering into a recognition
agreement for purposes of collective bargaining.
2. The Chief Industrial Relations Officer appointed a
Conciliator for that purpose. The headcount was conducted
1
RULING Cause 890 of 2019
and by its report dated 28th March, 2025, the Conciliator
stated that the respondent had 174 unionisable staff. Both
parties however contend that the findings by the conciliator
did not finally resolve the dispute as it did not state that the
claimant had attained the simple majority to enable the
respondent enter into a recognition agreement with the
claimant union for purposes of collective bargaining.
According to the claimant they had by virtue of the finding
by the conciliator attained the required simple majority
therefore the respondent was obliged to sign the
recognition agreement and start remitting to it the
necessary union dues.
3. The respondent on the other hand contended that some of
the alleged members had either withdrawn their
membership to the claimant union, promoted to
management or resigned or dismissed from employment.
The respondent therefore denied that it refused to sign the
recognition agreement but defended their position by
saying that the claimant union had not attained the
requisite simple majority under section 54 of the Labour
2
RULING Cause 890 of 2019
Relations Act. In response to this allegation, the claimant
union stated that the respondent did not notify them of the
withdrawal from membership as required by section 48(6)
(7) and (8) and that resignation letters were only brought to
the attention of the claimant union when they filed these
proceedings.
4. The Court in its judgment delivered on 27th November,
2024 observed that the respondent had remitted a cheque
of Kshs. 23,124 without attaching the list of those in
respect of whom it made the remittance and further that
the respondent had admitted that it had in its employment
78 unionisable employees.
5. The conciliator’s report dated 19th May, 2025 found that the
respondent had in its employment 252 employees spread
across its 39 branches. Out of these, 174 were unionisable
which translated to 69.04% and that 78 were not
unionisable. The Conciliator having so found, coupled with
the fact that the respondent while alleging that some
unionisable employees withdrew their membership did not
comply with section 48 of the Labour Relations Act referred
3
RULING Cause 890 of 2019
to above, there is therefore no reason why the respondent
cannot enter into a recognition agreement with the union
for purposes of collective bargaining.
6. Union membership is one of the fundamental principles of
the International Labour Organization (ILO) primarily
protected by Convention No. 87 (Freedom of Association)
and Convention No. 98 (Right to Organize and Collective
Bargaining). Workers are guaranteed the right to form and
join unions without fear of discrimination, retaliation, or
employer interference, including protection against
dismissal for union activities. In this regard and from the
foregoing and based on the directions by the Court in its
judgment delivered on 28th September, 2024 which has
since been operationalized by the conciliators report dated
19th May, 2025 which found that the respondent had in its
employment 252 employees spread across its 39 branches
out of which 174 were unionisable, there remains no
justification to refuse to enter into recognition agreement
with the claimant union.
4
RULING Cause 890 of 2019
7. The Court therefore orders that the respondent
signs a recognition agreement with the claimant
union within 30 days of this order and thereafter
deduct and remit union dues as from the date of
signing the recognition agreement. Parties to
thereafter be at liberty to engage in collective
bargaining for the purposes of augmenting and
protecting the interest of the claimant union
members in accordance with ILO Conventions, the
Constitution and applicable labour laws of Kenya.
8. It is so ordered.
9. Dated at Nairobi this 6th day of February, 2026
Delivered virtually this 6th day of February, 2026
Abuodha Nelson Jorum
Presiding Judge-Appeals Division
5
RULING Cause 890 of 2019
Similar Cases
Wanjala v Roche Kenya Limited (Cause 428 of 2019) [2026] KEELRC 273 (KLR) (29 January 2026) (Judgment)
[2026] KEELRC 273Employment and Labour Relations Court of Kenya76% similar
Kenya Engineering Workers Union v Morals Business Consulting Ltd & another (Cause E100 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 387 (KLR) (17 February 2026) (Ruling)
[2026] KEELRC 387Employment and Labour Relations Court of Kenya76% similar
Ngongo v Roche Kenya Limited (Cause 426 of 2019) [2026] KEELRC 266 (KLR) (29 January 2026) (Judgment)
[2026] KEELRC 266Employment and Labour Relations Court of Kenya76% similar
Arende v Ge East Africa Services Limited (Cause E936 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 3679 (KLR) (18 December 2025) (Judgment)
[2025] KEELRC 3679Employment and Labour Relations Court of Kenya75% similar
Oyawa v Kenya Plantation & Agricultural Workers Union (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E010 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 264 (KLR) (23 January 2026) (Judgment)
[2026] KEELRC 264Employment and Labour Relations Court of Kenya75% similar