The court declared that Ms Achieng’s dismissal was procedurally flawed, constitutionally offensive, and carried out with clear intent to remove her from the payroll following a period of injury-related absence.
Ms Achieng’s ordeal began on 6th July 2022, when she was involved in a road accident and hospitalised at MP Shah Hospital. After being discharged, she took two weeks of sick leave, returning to work on crutches due to mobility issues. Despite producing a doctor’s note, she was denied reasonable accommodation and asked to return to the office, prompting her to request remote work, which Betika allegedly viewed unfavourably.
On 13th December 2022, she was summoned to a meeting titled “Job Shadow Way Forward”, but was unable to attend due to persistent knee pain. She rescheduled the meeting twice. In a subsequent session, Ms Achieng was stunned to learn that some colleagues had accused her of being unreliable, citing her health-related absences as a disruption to office operations.
Matters worsened in late December, when Ms Achieng discovered she had been excluded from the payroll ahead of the Christmas holiday. While other staff had been paid on 23rd December, she had to pursue human resources before finally receiving her salary on 29th December, a clear indication, she claimed, that a targeted disciplinary process was already underway.
In January 2023, Betika distributed shopping vouchers and year-end bonuses, but Ms Achieng was deliberately excluded, with HR confirming her name was no longer on the staff list. “This was a cruel and calculated signal that my days were numbered,” she told the court.
Ms Achieng alleged that the accusations levelled against her were malicious, unfounded, and constituted workplace harassment. She argued that the disciplinary process was a sham, as the panel ignored her evidence, and the dismissal letter was drafted based on a personal opinion, rather than a collective decision of the disciplinary committee.
The court agreed.
In her ruling, Justice Wasilwa condemned the employer’s conduct, declaring the termination to be in breach of Articles 41 and 47 of the Constitution, which guarantee fair labour practices and administrative action.
Heavy Financial Penalty for Betika
The judge ordered Betika to compensate Ms Achieng as follows:
One month’s salary in lieu of notice – Kshs 61,250
Ten months’ salary for unfair termination – Kshs 612,500
General damages for breach of constitutional rights – Kshs 3 million
This brings the total award to Kshs 3,673,750, less statutory deductions.
The explosive ruling has sent shockwaves through Kenya’s corporate and human resources circles, with labour rights activists hailing the judgment as a “win for justice, dignity, and accountability.”
“This case demonstrates how even powerful firms must be held to account when they violate the rights of their employees, especially vulnerable ones recovering from injury,” said a labour law expert who spoke to The Weekly Vision.
As Betika grapples with the reputational fallout and possible further scrutiny, this case is expected to set a precedent for how Kenyan companies treat staff during periods of illness or disability.
[/full]
