Blow for Labour Cabinet Secretary Kazungu Kambi as judge halts NSSF rates

A plan to deduct more money from workers to boost the State-run pension fund suffered a jolt after a court stopped its implementation.

Industrial Court judge Bryan Ongaya stopped implementation of the new National Social Security Fund (NSSF) rates that were to take effect at the end of this month until a suit filed by the Kenya Plantation and Workers Union (KPWU) is heard and determined.

Until then the old NSSF rates will apply. Justice Ongaya directed Labour Cabinet Secretary Kazungu Kambi to convene a meeting with KPWU and NSSF to end the dispute and report the proceedings to the court.

"Pending the inter-parties hearing of the application filed by the petitioner, the parties are encouraged to convene a tripartite meeting convened by the Labour Cabinet Secretary towards amicable resolution of the dispute and the relevant report of the proceedings filed by the hearing date," ordered Ongaya.

KPWU moved to court seeking to halt the deduction of the new rates arguing that the move contravenes the Constitution. In his finding, Justice Ongaya said the union had raised serious and relevant issues on the supremacy of the Constitution that must be resolved.

Unions under the umbrella of the Central Organisation of Trade Unions (Cotu), independent associations and even employer organisations have moved to court seeking suspension of the implementation of the new rates, terming them unconstitutional.

The unions, which include Kenya Quarry and Mine Workers Union, Kenya Building Construction Employees Union, Kenya Union of Entertainment Music Industry Employees, Kenya Glass Workers Union among others have already moved to court seeking to block the new levy.

The workers' organisations want the new Act declared unconstitutional and NSSF barred from implementing the new rates.

"The Act violates the petitioners and their members' right to equal protection and benefit and rights to administrative action that is expeditious, efficient, lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair of the law contrary to Article 21(1) and Article 47(1) of the Constitution," they submitted. 

The say the new law contravened the values and principles of public service in the Constitution as it sets high standards of professional ethics.

"By concentrating to benefit the working class at the expense of the underprivileged and providing no alternative to benefit persons who are unable to support themselves and their dependants the State has acted against the spirit of the Constitution," they submitted.