The Employment and Labour Relations Court has ruled that employers are liable under the law if they breach their duty to provide a conducive working environment.
This decision was made in a case where the court found that the Mombasa Parents Club, owner of Nyali Primary School, had placed the school’s former deputy principal, Tony Ongugo, in an insecure and hostile work environment.
The court noted that evidence proved that, at the time of Mr Ongugo’s departure, there was tension and disagreement between the board and parents, which affected operations within the school and forced him to leave his employment due to threats to his life.
“By placing the claimant in an insecure working environment, the respondent breached the employment contract and he was justified in seeking new employment,” the court ruled in its October 30 decision.
The court also ruled that Mr Ongugo’s employment with the Mombasa Parents Club had been unfairly terminated and directed that he be paid a total of Sh1.6 million, including compensation, notice pay, leave allowance and gratuity pay. The court also ruled that Mr Ongugo had made various reports to the police about threats to his life at work, but that the school had done nothing in response.
“Even in the scenario where there were disputes between the board and parents within the respondent’s entity, the claimant, as an employee, was entitled to a secure work environment,” ruled the court.
The Labour court noted that the respondent failed to address the claimant's procedural concerns, as he was placed in an unproductive working environment, which eventually resulted in his dismissal. The court also found that the claimant was justified in not returning to his employment.
“The court finds there was wrongful and unfair termination of the claimant’s employment by the respondent,” the judgment states.
Despite the respondent facing various management challenges arising from ongoing court disputes over the recruitment process for a principal, the court noted that the claimant was entitled to due process.
The court said that the Mombasa Parents Club could not claim that the claimant had absconded without securing itself, as no notice had been issued to him since March 28 or after June 18 last year, and none had been made available to the court.
“The claimant, a professional teacher, is allowed to mitigate his circumstances and secure new employment. The employee should mitigate loss of employment positively. Upon being frustrated in his employment, he had good cause to put his skills to use,” the court said.
Mr Ongugo informed the court that he had been employed as deputy principal of Nyali Primary School and Kindergarten since June 16, 2023. He said that on June 18, 2024, he reported to work, but the management board of the respondent, together with parents and members of the school, made his work environment hostile and dangerous.
He said that these actions arose from an election dispute between the outgoing management committee and the newly elected board. He told the court that the management committee had created a hostile working environment, terminated his employment, and then committed acts of vandalism and threatened his life.
Mr Ongugo said that he was unable to resume his duties after reporting the acts of violence against him to the police, and that his office had been broken into, forcing him to leave the school.
The Mombasa Parents Club informed the court that the claimant had been appointed acting principal of the school until March 29, 2024, when he was relieved of his duties and instructed to hand over to another person, returning to his position as deputy principal.
The club also told the court that the allegations of threats, eviction or termination of employment lacked proof.
In its counterclaim against Mr Ongugo, the Mombasa Parents Club argued that he had breached his employment contract by absconding from and deserting his duties as deputy principal without lawful justification from March 29 last year.
The Mombasa Parents Club also argued that, despite having been instructed to hand over the office of the principal on March 29 last year, the claimant refused and failed to obey the chain of command. The Club also sought a declaration that the claimant had breached the employment contract.
