The Kenya Union of Sugar Plantation Workers (Kuspaw) has urged Mumias Sugar Company workers to be patient before the court makes a ruling on the management of the troubled miller.
Speaking in Kisumu on Saturday, Kuspaw general secretary Francis Wangara cautioned workers against being used to sabotage the company’s revival efforts.
He termed it unfortunate that some former employees were inciting workers to protest over accrued salaries even before Ugandan firm, Sarrai Group Ltd is allowed to operate the company.
“Our initial efforts to engage the employer on how to settle the salary arrears were thwarted by the High Court decision which halted every activity by Sarrai Group Ltd,” he said.
“It is wrong for a section of workers to claim that the union has abandoned them,” he said.
He assured workers that the union had agreed with the new receiver manager that all former employees will be absorbed.
He further cautioned workers against initiating any court case to push for the settlement of their arrears saying that the move will derail the whole process.
“Unless some people want to sever links with the company, [Mumias Sugar Company] it will be difficult for the new investor to re-engage individuals who have taken them to court,” he said.
He, however, called for the protection of the company assets until court issues its final decision on the fate of Mumias Sugar Company.
“We have some reports that some people are vandalising Mumias Sugar Company property, this should stop since the case could go either way,” he said.
His sentiments came a day after a section of workers accused Mr Wangara, Central Organisation of Trade Union (Cotu) secretary general Francis Atwoli and Kakamega Governor Wycliffe Oparanya of abandoning them.
In a ruling made last week, the judge said interim orders will stay in place until March 14, when the matter comes up for hearing.
Justice Wilfrida Okwany, while dismissing an application to lift the orders stopping the company from continuing to run operations of the troubled miller, said the case by five applicants was urgent “and worthy of the orders to protect the subject matter”.
