Abstract:
There have been notable concerns in the current dual dispute resolution system in
Kenya. The problems include protracted referral timeframes for dismissal disputes,
non-regulation of maximum timeframes for the agreed extension after 30 days
conciliation period has lapsed, the absence of statutory timeframes for appointing a
conciliator/ commissioner and arbitration process under both the Labour Relations
Act, 2007 and the Employment Act, 2007. Likewise, the responsibility of resolving
statutory labour disputes in Kenya is still heavily under the control of the government
through the Ministry of Labour. There is still no independent statutory dispute
resolution institution as envisaged by the Labour Relations Act, 2007. As a result, the
Kenyan dispute resolution system has been criticised for lack of impartiality leading
to the increase in strikes and lockouts.
This article examines the effectiveness of the Kenyan labour dispute resolution
system. The article evaluates the provisions of international labour standards
relevant to labour dispute resolution. The article illuminates and describes the
bottlenecks in the current Kenyan system and argues that it does not adequately
respond to the needs of parties in terms of the international labour conventions. A
comparative approach with South Africa is adopted to see how independent
institutions, such as the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration,
Bargaining Councils and specialised Labour Courts can lead to effective dispute
resolution. In view of that, a wide range of remedial intervention intended to address
the gaps and flaws highlighted in the study are made. Systematically, the article
provides suggestions and possible solutions for a better institutional framework and
processes to address them.
