logo
ADVERTISEMENT

Uasu sues Kemri over retirement age dispute

Scientists serving as lecturers say their terms of service governed by CBA.

image
by CHARLES MGHENYI

Coast24 July 2025 - 07:12
ADVERTISEMENT

In Summary


  • The petition was filed before Justice Hellen Wasilwa of the Employment and Labour Relations Court in Nairobi. 
  • Muya argued that Kemri recently issued a retirement notice to one of the affected staff, on April 7, 2025.

Uasu official Dr Shadrack Muya /FILE






Some University Academic Staff Union has sued Kenya Medical Research Institute (Kemri) for enforcing a retirement age of 65 years for its professors and research scientists.

The scientists, who also serve as lecturers, argue that their terms of service are governed by a Collective Bargaining Agreement that places their retirement age at 74 years, and not 65.

Uasu official, Dr Shadrack Muya, who is also the petitioner, filed an urgent application on May 5, 2025 seeking interim orders to block Kemri from retiring scientists involved in a collaborative faculty programme between the institute and the universities.

The petition was filed before Justice Hellen Wasilwa of the Employment and Labour Relations Court in Nairobi.

Muya argued that Kemri recently issued a retirement notice to one of the affected staff, on April 7, 2025.

The notice, based on Kemri’s internal Human Resource Manual, cited age as the reason and several other senior academics listed in the petition are expected to receive similar notices before the end of 2025, Muya said.

However, the petitioner argues that the CBA signed by the union, the Inter-Public Universities Council Consultative Forum and the Federation of Kenya Employers on November 23, 2024, provides for a retirement age of 74 for university lecturers and research scientists.

This agreement, Muya said, is legally binding under Section 59(3) of the Labour Relations Act, which mandates that CBA terms be incorporated into individual employment contracts.

Uasu had on April 3, 2025 confirmed that the affected staff are bona fide union members and requested that their union dues be remitted accordingly.

The petitioner believes this underscores the legal weight of the CBA and the legitimacy of their claims.

“The action by the first respondent (Kemri) is discriminatory and violates the constitutional rights to equality before the law, fair labour practices and the right to collective bargaining,” Muya submitted, citing Articles 27, 28, and 41 of the Constitution.

The petitioner wants the court to make a determination that Kemri together with the Public Service Commission, which is listed as the second respondents in the petition, erred in issuing the retirement notices, based on the existence of an active CBA that sets the retirement age of university lecturers and professors at 74 years.

Citing precedents such as the 2024 UASU-MMUST case, where the court barred a university from retiring lecturers before they turned 74, Muya urged the court to issue a temporary injunction.

He argued that failure to do so would result in irreparable harm to the careers and constitutional rights of the affected staff.

The court also referred to the government’s most recent circular dated June 16, 2025, which recognises retirement age flexibility for special categories such as university academic staff and research scientists.

Muya asked the court to preserve the status quo pending the full hearing of the petition.

Justice Wasilwa asked Kemri and the Public Service Commission to file their responses within 14 days.

The matter will come up again on September 29, 2025 for determination.

Related Articles

ADVERTISEMENT