Sisal estate ordered to pay Sh2.3m for unfair dismissal of ‘engineer’

A court has ruled the dismissal of its former general engineer unfair, awarding him more than Sh2.3 million in damages.  

The Employment and Labour Relations Court in Nakuru found that Majani Mingi Sisal Estate Limited sacked Joseph Petters without observing statutory procedures or proving valid grounds for dismissal.

Petters, employed as a general engineer from January 2022 to August 2024, claimed he was never issued notice, heard, or consulted before his exit, despite his ‘exemplary’ performance.

“He found very old equipment at the respondent’s plantation. They included light machinery, medium-sized and heavy machinery. He set up systems for maintenance. Heavy machinery, including tippers, were grounded. He revived them,” the court heard.

“He was not placed on a performance improvement plan. His contract was terminated unfairly. He was promised terminal benefits, which the respondent did not pay.”

When the company failed to pay his terminal benefits, he reported the matter to the Labour ministry and was heard on conciliation. 

"The conciliator found in favour of the claimant, recommending that the respondent pay to him notice at Sh503,117; annual leave at Sh419,254; gratuity at Sh940,325; and six months’ salary in compensation for unfair termination at Sh3,018,702—total Sh4,881,408. The respondent did not comply, paving the way for this litigation,” court documents show. 

The company said Petters had failed to meet operational needs and that the separation was consensual.

“He had at recruitment, misrepresented that he was able to manage both light and heavy-duty workshops. At a meeting held on August 26, 2024, he stated that he preferred to manage only light-duty workshop.”

The management also claimed Petters neglected daily reporting requirements, demonstrated a lack of interest in his work and outsourced repairs without authorisation.

But Petters defended his competence despite lacking formal academic credentials.

“Cross-examined, he told the court that he has over 40 years in his field. He did not go to university. He was not a member of the Institute of Engineers. He never received a formal contract of employment.”

He disputed claims that he insisted on handling only light repairs and refused heavy workshop work. 

Petters also denied saying he could not work, did not challenge the termination letter and could not recall meeting the director or manager about his exit.

Justice James Rika said that whilst Petters had extensive practical experience, the company had used the title "engineer" loosely.

“Under the Engineers Act, 2011, an engineer is a person registered as a professional engineer, a graduate engineer or a consulting engineer, who holds a valid licence…There is no other pathway to the title ‘Engineer.’

“The claimant was probably a mechanic, with a wealth of experience, but was certainly not an engineer.

“His supervisor, George Condos himself admitted he was not an engineer, but a sisal farmer. How would he be able to supervise the man entrusted with engineering works?” Justice Rika said. 

But the judge rejected the claim of mutual agreement. 

“The court is unable to find any record of an agreement on termination of the claimant’s contract.” 

The court awarded Petters one month’s salary in lieu of notice (Sh503,117), 25 days’ annual leave (Sh419,264) and compensation for unfair termination equivalent to two and three‑quarter months’ salary (Sh1,383,571), totalling Sh2,305,952. 

The judge declined a claim for unpaid salary from January 2022, finding no evidence that Petters had demanded it during his service.