Court rules employees can’t claim constructive dismissal for rejecting reassignment
Court rules employees can’t claim constructive dismissal for rejecting reassignment
The Employment and Labour Relations Court at Machakos has ruled that constructive dismissal is not automatically established simply because an employee disagrees with a transfer or change of duties.
Justice Jemimah Keli held that for a claim of constructive dismissal to succeed, an employee must demonstrate a fundamental breach of the employment contract by the employer that leaves resignation as the only reasonable option.
The court further ruled that employers retain the managerial prerogative to reasonably reassign employees.
“The warning is therefore twofold: employees must think carefully before rejecting reassignment outright, while employers must ensure every transfer is lawful, reasonable, and procedurally fair,” the court stated.
According to the court, this particularly falls where attempts are made to accommodate their circumstances and follow due process.
In the dispute before the court, a Company had reassigned an employee who developed hearing complications in a noisy factory environment to cleaning duties.
Senior KFS manager goes missing
Jeremah Kioni alleges victimization in Jubilee Party
Barred Somali referee to receive full World Cup pay
Investigators unable to identify police officer who shot Rex Masai; IPOA tells Court
The employee rejected the offer and insisted instead on being deployed as a security guard, a position the employer said was unavailable.
The court noted that the employee had been engaged through meetings and subjected to a disciplinary process under Section 41 of the Employment Act.
Additionally, there was an alternative role that had been offered but declined.
The court held that disagreement with a transfer or preference for a different role does not in itself amount to constructive dismissal.
As a result, the appellate court cancelled the earlier ruling award of Kshs. 259,668, leaving the employee with only one month’s salary instead of notice and a certificate of service.
The court expressly noted that workplace injury claims belong under the Work Injury Benefit Act (WIBA) and may still proceed separately.
DCI officer killed, MCA injured after 9 vehicles collide along Nairobi-Nakuru Highway
Why I rejected Raila’s preferred candidate for Treasury CS; Ruto
The right to demonstrate is not a favour, but a constitutional guarantee – Ruto
Israel removes Kenya from Ebola travel restrictions list
Follow us
