Kenyan Man Wins KSh 2 Million After 25-Year G4S Termination

Court Rules in Favor of Former G4S Employee

A recent ruling by the Employment and Labour Relations Court in Nairobi has determined that a former employee of G4S, David Mutisya, was unfairly terminated. The court found that the company violated his rights through a biased and procedurally flawed disciplinary process.

Mutisya, who had worked for G4S for over 25 years, was accused of insubordination, including failing to submit performance appraisals and not properly coordinating interviews. He was issued with a show cause letter on March 1, 2028, which led to a disciplinary hearing that he claimed was both unfair and unlawful. The case eventually reached the court, where Judge Stella Rutto ruled in his favor.

Key Allegations and Procedural Flaws

According to the court's judgment, Mutisya was fired primarily for insubordination and failure to comply with lawful instructions from his supervisor. However, the court found that the disciplinary process lacked fairness and adherence to proper procedures. Mutisya contested the inclusion of biased individuals on the disciplinary panel, arguing that they would not judge him fairly due to previous concerns about their hiring practices.

He also claimed that new allegations were introduced during the hearing without prior notice, preventing him from adequately defending himself. The court noted that the disciplinary panel did not include an impartial Human Resources representative and failed to conduct a thorough investigation into the allegations against him.

Court’s Findings on Unfair Termination

The court examined the evidence and arguments from both sides and concluded that G4S failed to demonstrate that Mutisya's dismissal was based on a valid or fair reason. While it acknowledged that he had been asked to submit his performance appraisal documents, the accusations against him were not sufficiently substantiated. Additionally, the court highlighted procedural flaws, including the presence of biased committee members and a lack of adherence to the company’s own disciplinary policies.

The court also emphasized that the disciplinary panel did not provide Mutisya with the opportunity to respond to new allegations or appeal the termination. He was barred from accessing the offices, which breached his right to a fair hearing.

Relief Sought by Mutisya

When Mutisya took G4S to court, he sought various forms of relief. This included a declaration that his termination was unfair, unjust, and unlawful. He requested compensation for lost earnings from the time of his termination until his retirement age, along with three months’ salary in lieu of notice. Additionally, he sought payment for accrued but unpaid leave, unpaid performance-based bonuses, salary underpayments, and car allowance benefits.

He also requested 12 months’ salary as compensation for both unfair dismissal and discriminatory treatment, along with costs of the suit, interest on the decretal sum, and a certificate of service. Furthermore, he asked for the return of personal items, including his wallet, necktie, and cologne bottle, which were not returned after his dismissal.

Court’s Award to Mutisya

The court awarded Mutisya several reliefs, including a declaration that his termination was procedurally unfair and unlawful. He was granted one month’s salary in lieu of notice, amounting to KSh 354,839.88, and compensatory damages equivalent to four months’ gross salary, totaling KSh 1,419,359.52. The court also awarded him KSh 283,871.90 for accrued leave days, calculated for 24 days.

The total award was Kshs 2,058,071.30, with interest on this amount at court rates from the date of judgment until full payment by G4S. Additionally, the court ordered G4S to issue Mutisya with a certificate of service within 14 days.

Significance of the Ruling

The court’s decision reinforces the principle that employers must adhere to legal and procedural safeguards to protect employees from unfair treatment in the workplace. It sets a precedent for future cases involving employee rights and fair labor practices in Kenya. The ruling highlights the importance of transparency, fairness, and due process in disciplinary actions, ensuring that employees are treated justly and given the opportunity to defend themselves.