All parties must do everything possible to avert tutors strike

Kenya National Union of teachers (KNUT) Secretary General Wilson Sossion at a past press briefing. They have vowed to continue with the strike. [File, Standard]

The confusion and uncertainty triggered by a looming teachers strike does not augur well for thousands of pupils set to open school tomorrow.

The stalemate in talks called by the Labour ministry on Monday to forestall the strike was unnecessary and avoidable.

All the four grievances raised by teachers, namely promotions, mass transfers, teacher professional development modules and performance contracting can be addressed and this strike averted. But to do this, both Knut and the Teachers Service Commission must return to the negotiation table in good faith.

The union has every right to feel slighted that TSC CEO Nancy Macharia failed to turn up for the talks. As such, the TSC boss must be seen to be leading the push to avert the strike. Knut on the other hand must be less confrontational and seek a middle ground in its list of demands.

Both sides must respect orders from the Employment and Labour Relations Court. The court directed Knut to call off the strike, and the TSC to accept the list of teachers due for promotion and make decisions on applications for review or appeal by teachers who feel aggrieved by transfers.

The court also ordered both sides to continue with negotiations on performance contracting and stopped the implementation of any contentions processes and procedures that went against the collective agreement

It is only fair that both sides respect these orders. Anything short of this would be not only prejudicial but also set a bad precedence.

In August last year, President  Uhuru Kenyatta at some point directed TSC to review the delocalisation policy, which will see teachers who have served for more than nine years at their stations moved to other schools. This followed protests that the transfers would separate families and break up some.

It would seem that the labour court agreed with the president in directing the commission to conclude all appeals against transfer. It is still not clear whether the president’s directive was implemented and whether TSC adequately addressed individual cases of teachers who feel that a transfer will work against their careers and families.

Education experts have also questioned the rationale of the mass transfers, pointing out that they might not serve the purpose that TSC says they will. TSC avows that the transfers will inject new blood in schools and transfer tested skills.

But TSC should also listen to voices that point out that mass transfers might disrupt vital bonds formed between teachers and their students.  Perhaps more research ought to go into the long-term effects of mass teacher transfers.

In the past, similar transfers triggered a wave of student unrest and protests from school managers.

It is not clear whether these crucial education stakeholders and others, have been involved in this phase of transfers.

In the past, teachers have accused TSC of not engaging all education stakeholders in formulating and implementing policies. The commission must use this as a chance to engage teachers, instead of threatening to sack those who participate in the strike.

Ultimately, both sides must look for ways to avoid unnecessary labour rows in future. It is unfortunate that this is not the first time that Knut if facing off with the TSC. The way forward would be continuous engagement by both sides to ensure that this rows are forestalled before they occur.