Kisumu Barclays bank branch.


Former Kisumu Barclays bank General Manager has lost his bid to seek for 11 million from the former boss.

This is after Employment and Labour Relations court dismissed an application by former Kisumu Barclays bank General Manager who was seeking compensation of Sh11million for unfair termination of employment.

Kennedy Maina moved to court in 2015 claiming that he was unfairly dismissed from work and was demanding for the money in respect to 27 years of service as a General Manager.

Justice Mathews Nduma dismissed the application saying that the suit by Maina and the counter claim by the bank have no merit.

“The Respondent did not pursue the counterclaim.  The Claimant demonstrated that he had paid all the loans advanced to him by the company and the counter claim is dismissed”, the judge said.

Barclays bank had opposed the claim in 2016 in which the entire claim was denied and counter claim in the sum of Sh3, 495,582.37 was made comprising of Staff housing loan Shs.895, 442.15, Staff personal loan Kshs.2, 565,287.80 and Card balance Sh.34, 852.42.

Maina He told court that he was employed by the bank on October 31, 1988 at a salary of Sh.41, 880 per annum.  He added that he rose through the ranks overtime and at the time of termination on March 6,2015, he earned a consolidated salary of Sh3 million per annum.

“An investigation was conducted at the Barclays bank Kisumu Branch where Maina was a General Manager following a whistle blowing that there were lapses in the security and operational procedure at the Branch and that he was demanding sexual favours from staff members hence jeopardizing the staff employment relations in the branch”, the court was told.

In addition to allegations of sexual harassment, it was alleged that the Kisumu branch was not opening on time and that on October 18, 2014 a member of management Immaculate Ayuko reported to work late and the keys to the doors were brought by her husband and the incidence was never reported timeously, contrary to bank policy that “key holder, must ensure that keys are not handed to any other person without the manager’s authority and never to a member of the public”.  It was also alleged that management was taking leave without following laid down procedure.

He said he received a letter of suspension on February 13, 2015 and he was invited to attend a disciplinary hearing on 20th February, 2015.

“The Claimant alleges that the Respondent disregarded the recommendations of the investigations.

And that the disciplinary committee was biased and did not give the Claimant a fair hearing”, Maina said.

The bank opposed the claim as earlier stated by a statement of defence and counter claim filed on 3rd March, 2016.

Justice Nduma said furthermore, a disciplinary process followed forensic investigations and evidently, without having to hear the side of the Respondent, there was justification to discipline and terminate the employment of the Claimant.

“The Claimant was paid all his terminal benefits.  The Claimant has not proved he was entitled to payment of gratuity as claimed or at all.  Consequent on the finding of the court on liability, the claimant is also not entitled to any compensation since the termination was lawful and fair.