The Employment and Labour Relations Court has ruled against the Ministry of Health for unfairly terminating the employment of a principal radiation protection officer who remained in the United States after completing his studies.

Kibet Korir, who joined the ministry in 2004 and was promoted in 2010, left Kenya in 2008 to pursue a PhD at the University of Massachusetts Lowell. Despite completing his Master’s in 2012 and PhD in 2013, he did not return to his job, prompting the ministry to dismiss him in 2016 citing desertion of duty.

Key Court Findings

  • The court acknowledged the ministry had valid grounds to terminate Mr Korir’s contract due to failure to resume duty.
  • However, the dismissal was procedurally unfair as he was never issued a show cause notice nor given a disciplinary hearing.
  • Mr Korir’s claim for over Sh8.4 million in damages was rejected as it was filed beyond the three-year statutory deadline.
  • The court clarified that internal appeals or negotiations do not pause the time limit for filing employment disputes.

Background and Legal Process

Mr Korir’s sponsorship for studies was initially approved in 2008 with conditions including a three-year bond and partial salary remission. The ministry later suspended and then reinstated funding after appeal. Despite his academic achievements abroad, he returned only for research visits and did not resume official duties.

Following his dismissal, Mr Korir’s appeal to the Public Service Commission went unanswered, leading him to file a lawsuit in 2022. The court noted that although the PSC had approved negotiations on payment, the agreement was never formalised by the ministry’s Permanent Secretary.

Entitlements and Ministry Obligations

  • The court found no evidence supporting Mr Korir’s claims for various allowances and service pay.
  • It noted he was not an NSSF member during his service but could qualify for a pension and must be issued a certificate of service within 45 days.

This ruling highlights the importance of following proper disciplinary procedures even when an employee absconds after study leave, and underscores strict adherence to legal timelines for employment claims.