The Employment and Labour Relations Court has halted Public Service Commission’s (PSC) decision to enforce retirement of university professors at the age of 70, handing a reprieve to dozens of senior academics across public universities.
The court issued conservatory orders barring the PSC and the Attorney General from implementing the directive pending the hearing of a petition filed by the Universities Academic Staff Union (Uasu) challenging the revised retirement age.
This means the professors will for now continue retiring at the earlier agreed age of 74 years under the existing collective bargaining agreement pending resolution of the legal dispute.
The court certified the case as urgent and directed the respondents to file responses before the matter proceeds to a full hearing later this month.
The legal dispute was triggered by a PSC circular dated March 2, 2026, which set the mandatory retirement age for lecturers and research scientists in public universities and research institutions at 70 years.
The circular also directed all public universities, research institutions and equivalent bodies to implement and ensure immediate compliance with the new retirement policy across institutions under the PSC’s mandate.
The union argues the directive would abruptly remove senior academics currently in service and disrupt teaching and research programmes in universities.
“The lecturers above the age of 70 years have with immediate effect been relieved of their duties yet they are in the middle of academic work, teaching in classes, marking exams and supervising PhD and Masters students,” says the Uasu’s lawyer Titus Koceyo.
According to the petition, universities have existing Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA) that set different retirement ages for academic staff.
The union says the current CBA signed in November 2024 harmonised retirement ages, allowing graduate assistants, tutorial fellows and assistant lecturers to retire at 70, while lecturers, senior lecturers, associate professors and professors retire at 74.
Uasu argues that the PSC circular effectively overturns those negotiated terms without consultation.
“The circular intends to violate the current and existing Collective Bargaining Agreement between itself and the employer federation,” Mr Koceyo argues.
He further claims the directive was issued without involving key stakeholders, including academic staff representatives and universities.
The lawyer said the sudden change had already triggered uncertainty across public universities and could affect ongoing academic programmes.
“The surprise move by the first respondent (PSC) has plunged the higher education sector to unprecedented chaos, disorder, disruption of ongoing programmes and if not stopped forthwith will have fair reaching negative ramifications on the higher education sector which the country may not recover from for many years to come,” Mr Koceyo states in the court papers.
Court filings indicate that the PSC had already demanded compliance with the circular across institutions before the matter was taken to court.
“The said circular fails to take into account the reasons and justification on why professors in Public Universities retire at age 74 as it takes effect immediately yet there are ongoing classes, exams, supervisions by lecturers who are 70 years but below 74 years,” says lawyer Koceyo.
Uasu claims the directive could lead to the immediate loss of employment for lecturers aged over 70 without due process.
“That the urgency of the matter is that if the circular is implemented now it will lead to loss of employment of lecturers over 70 years with immediate effect yet the Constitution does not envisage abrupt loss of employment without following due process,” Mr Koceyo told the court in his application for instant orders halting implementation of the circular.
The case also raises broader questions about who has the authority to determine retirement terms for university staff.
Uasu argues that the retirement age for academic staff was deliberately excluded from conditions of service regulated by the PSC, and should instead be governed through collective bargaining agreements negotiated with universities.
The union further contends that academic staff had a legitimate expectation that the agreed retirement age would remain in force after being formally communicated and implemented by universities.
Public universities have in recent years faced disputes over retirement policies for senior academics. Previous court decisions have affirmed retirement at 74 for lecturers and professors under negotiated agreements between universities and academic staff unions.
In its petition, Uasu is asking the court to quash the PSC circular, arguing that it undermines labour rights and collective bargaining arrangements already registered in court.
“The respondents’ actions are tainted with illegality which the court should not countenance,” the union states in its filing.
The conservatory orders will remain in force until the court hears and determines the union’s application. Hearing is slated for March 24, 2026.
