A court has ordered the Teachers Service Commission (TSC) to compensate teachers who have been working as acting headteachers and deputy headteachers without corresponding pay, declaring the practice an unfair labour practice.
The Employment and Labour Relations Court also recognised teachers in Arid and Semi-Arid Lands (ASAL) and hard-to-staff areas as a marginalised group entitled to affirmative action, and directed TSC to budget for their allowances.
“The respondent's (TSC) conduct constitutes Unequal Pay for Equal Work, which is an unfair labour practice. The respondent is ordered to take immediate steps to remedy the unfair labour practice and, where it deploys a teacher to a higher position, pay compensation by way of an acting allowance,” said Justice Jemimah Keli.
The judgment follows complaints by 22 teachers who said the TSC had assigned them to perform higher administrative duties, such as headteachers, deputy headteachers and other institutional administrators for years without confirming their appointments, promoting them to the corresponding job grades or paying them acting allowances.
They told the court that some had served in these positions since 2012, 2016, 2017, 2019 and 2021 taking charge of school operations, supervising staff, managing discipline, overseeing examinations and handling other administrative responsibilities while remaining in lower job grades.
They argued that the arrangement denied them the pay, benefits and career progression attached to the positions they occupied, despite carrying the full workload and responsibility of senior administrators.
The legal dispute centred on how TSC deploys teachers to fill administrative vacancies in areas where qualified personnel are difficult to recruit and retain.
Teachers Service Commission (TSC) headquarters in Upper Hill, Nairobi.
Photo credit: File | Nation Media Group
Teachers said the arrangement left them performing duties reserved for headteachers, deputy headteachers and senior school managers while remaining in lower grades.
In their petition filed on September 2, 2025, the teachers challenged TSC's practice of retaining them in acting positions beyond six months instead of confirming them in the substantive posts they had occupied.
They welcomed the court judgment, arguing that some had served in acting administrative positions for over ten years without confirmation or payment matching their responsibilities.
“This is the sound of a profession finding its voice, and a reminder that justice, though it may travel slowly on dusty roads, always arrives. We now look to TSC and ask them to meet this moment with grace and fully implement this decision,” said Antony Barasa Mabonga, one of the petitioners welcoming the court decision.
He said the ruling recognized the difficulties faced by teachers who carry administrative responsibilities without formal recognition.
"For years, teachers in the far reaches of this country, and acting administrators in particular, have worked in the shadows of a title they were never allowed to wear," he said. "We led schools, steered staffrooms and answered for results, yet remained unconfirmed."
Mr Mabonga said the judgment recognised the responsibilities teachers had undertaken and called on TSC to implement the orders.
"We now look to TSC and ask them to meet this moment with grace and fully implement this decision," he said.
The teachers argued that prolonged acting appointments denied them professional advancement, benefits and fair remuneration. They also cited unequal opportunities for promotion in remote regions.
Their petition relied on the Constitution's provisions on fair labour practices, equality, affirmative action and the responsibilities of public institutions.
They further complained that teachers in hardship areas were disadvantaged by insecurity, isolation, harsh weather, poor infrastructure and inadequate opportunities for professional development.
The petition also challenged TSC's promotion practices, including requirements that teachers serving in hardship areas said disadvantaged them compared with colleagues in more accessible regions.
TSC opposed the case, arguing that promotions depended on qualifications, merit, vacancies and available funding. It said teachers were deployed temporarily to address staffing shortages and operational needs.
The commission maintained that it had introduced affirmative-action measures through agreements with teachers' unions, including preferential consideration for administrative vacancies in hardship areas.
It also relied on the 2021–2025 collective bargaining agreement, which provides for progressive promotion of teachers serving in ASAL and hard-to-staff areas until they attain grades matching their responsibilities.
Under the agreement, affected teachers remain in their current stations while awaiting the required grades. TSC said it had also relaxed some promotion requirements and promoted 5,291 teachers in the 2024/2025 financial year.
The court rejected TSC's explanation for withholding pay. "It is an unacceptable practice in a democratic and open society, and the limitation of the fair labour right for equal wages for work done is not justified," she said.
TSC was ordered to pay acting allowances from the dates teachers assumed higher duties. The court did not order automatic promotion or general damages.
