Unilever Tea ordered not to eject employees from its houses

Employment and Labour Relations Court has ordered Unilever Tea Ltd not to kick out employees who had downed their tools last year from company houses.

Unilever Tea, a subsidiary of Brooke Bond Group Ltd lost its mission against the 49 employees on grounds that it had defied court orders that it ought not to terminate or suspend them until the case filed last year was determined.

Labour Court Judge Njagi Marete in his ruling against the tea company noted that the company instituted disciplinary proceedings, leading to the dismissal of the employees without adhering to the orders of the court.

 "It would further appear that throughout these proceedings, facts are disputed. The parties version and position do not tally. The claimant's (Unilever Tea) quest for removal of the dismissed employees from their allotted living quarters is therefore not feasible in the absence of a clear determination of the veracity of their employment status. I therefore dismiss this application." Justice Marete ruled.

In the case, Unilever Tea had claimed that it had lost more than Sh15 million as a result of the strike held last year September.

The court heard that on September 22, 2014 the employees uprooted tea bushes, destroyed and burned various company property leading to loss of property.

The company in its argument told Justice Marete that it issued the employees with various warnings and ultimatums to return to work but they allegedly refused to heed the same.

"The strike was unprocedural, unjustified and in all ways unreasonable and further that no dispute had been declared or notice issued for the strike." The court heard.

The company in its written submissions reiterated its employees had been summarily dismissed for gross misconduct after open hearing of their respective cases and that they should therefore vacate the premises allocated to them. The dismissed employees were notified of the need to vacate their premises within two days but they declined.

Disputed issues

"This matter is unduly convoluted. It is riddled with applications and counter applications by the parties thereby shrouding the issues in dispute. This is unfortunate. Moreover, most of the issues and evidence thereof is disputed. This court issued orders restraining the strike and directed employees to return to work but this was ignored," noted Justice Marete.

The employees who were represented by Kenya Plantation and Agricultural Workers Union in their defence told the court that they had sought audience with the company in tandem with the orders of court the management declined. They further denied being involved in any criminal activity or destruction.

"There is no evidence to this extent. In the absence of a determination of the suit touching on the reinstatement of these employees, they should be allowed to occupy the premises allotted to them," the union argued.

It was their argument that the application to have them vacate the houses was in total disregard of court orders directing that all matters relating to the strike be resolved in accordance with the grievance procedure that had been agreed by the parties.

"It would be insecure to determine the issue in dispute at this stage but instead allow the parties to prosecute these to a logical end." the Judge ruled.