Kenya is increasingly a country where essential services are repeatedly disrupted by industrial action. When doctors are not on strike, teachers, lecturers, nurses, aviation workers, or other public servants may be preparing to walk out.
At the heart of this cycle is a familiar problem: collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) are negotiated, signed and celebrated, only for disputes over their implementation to emerge later.
This is more than a labour relations problem. It is a governance crisis that exposes the gap between government promises and its ability or willingness to honour commitments.
Ordinary Kenyans bear the consequences. Patients face interrupted care, students lose learning time, parents incur extra costs, and businesses suffer when essential services become unpredictable.
Workers and government should be partners in delivering public services. Instead, repeated disputes have created suspicion, confrontation and costly disruption.
Signed agreements must mean something
The government must restore credibility to collective bargaining through realistic financial projections, clear implementation schedules and genuine commitments.
A CBA is not a political speech, campaign promise or public relations document. It is a binding undertaking between an employer and employees.
Officials must stop signing agreements merely to end strikes or calm public anger. If implementation will be phased, the timelines, funding arrangements and payment obligations should be agreed from the outset.
Workers also have a responsibility to negotiate in good faith, recognise public-finance realities and use established dispute-resolution mechanisms. But good faith cannot mean repeatedly accepting promises that are abandoned or indefinitely postponed.
Signing agreements without a credible financing plan only postpones conflict. When deadlines pass without implementation, disputes return with greater bitterness and economic cost.
The public purse cannot be a permanent excuse
The government is right that public finances face competing demands, including education, healthcare, infrastructure, security, social protection and debt obligations. But fiscal constraints cannot become a blanket excuse for failing to honour negotiated commitments.
Public confidence weakens when workers are told there is no money while allegations of corruption, waste, inflated procurement costs and unnecessary extravagance persist.
The answer is not to assume that every disputed shilling can immediately fund salaries. It is to show, through transparent audits and effective expenditure controls, that every reasonable effort has been made to eliminate waste.
The government should publish credible cost estimates, identify available resources and explain how competing obligations will be met. Savings from better procurement, reduced waste and stronger accountability should be considered alongside other legitimate funding options.
Fiscal discipline must apply to government spending as much as to workers' expectations. The public deserves evidence that the government has done everything reasonably possible before pleading inability to honour its commitments.
Strikes punish the wrong people
The people most affected by prolonged disputes often have the least influence over negotiations.
When lecturers strike, students lose instructional time and may face delayed examinations, graduation and entry into the labour market. Parents continue paying for accommodation, food and other expenses despite the disruption. When teachers withdraw their services, learners lose classroom time, especially those whose families cannot afford private tuition.
Healthcare strikes can be even more serious, delaying treatment and forcing patients to seek costly alternatives. Businesses and families also suffer when public services become unreliable.
Industrial action can be a lawful and necessary last resort. Its wider social cost, however, makes preventing avoidable disputes a national priority. The answer is not to deny workers their bargaining rights but to create a system in which those rights can be exercised without repeatedly bringing essential services to a standstill.
Government must stop negotiating under pressure
Kenya's labour relations system often gives disputes serious attention only after workers threaten or begin industrial action. This rewards confrontation over dialogue and forces emergency negotiations under pressure.
The government should establish regular monitoring of CBAs, with clear milestones, designated implementing agencies and early-warning mechanisms. When implementation falls behind, officials should disclose the reasons, present a corrective plan and engage unions before frustration escalates into a strike.
Unions should receive timely, accurate information rather than political assurances. They should be able to determine whether delays result from genuine financial constraints, administrative failures or a lack of political commitment.
Parliament and oversight institutions should scrutinise the government's record of honouring agreements, including the financial implications of commitments made by public employers. Accountability must extend beyond signing to the officials responsible for budgeting, releasing funds and implementing agreements.
Workers need honesty, not just promises
Public resources are finite, and every commitment must be assessed against revenue and competing expenditure needs.
Unions should demand transparent negotiations based on credible financial information and distinguish between fully funded commitments, phased obligations and proposals still under discussion. This would help workers make informed decisions and limit politically attractive but unfunded promises.
Transparency, however, must be mutual. Workers cannot be expected to exercise restraint when the government withholds information, changes positions without explanation or repeatedly shifts deadlines. Trust grows when both sides understand the facts, acknowledge financial realities and accept responsibility for their commitments.
Recurring disputes across sectors should also be treated as evidence of deeper weaknesses in public-sector planning, budget execution and labour relations, not as isolated incidents.
Industrial peace is a national economic asset
Kenya cannot build a competitive economy on unreliable public services and recurring labour disputes.
Universities need uninterrupted teaching and research, schools need stable learning environments, hospitals need dependable staffing, and airports and other critical services need reliable operations. These are essential to economic growth, social stability and national development.
The government must treat collective bargaining as a core part of public-sector management, not an emergency exercise. It should negotiate responsibly, budget realistically, honour signed agreements and explain unavoidable delays openly. Unions should uphold their obligations, pursue lawful remedies and protect the public interest.
Kenya's strike crisis will not be solved by blaming workers, threatening unions or issuing fresh promises whenever another dispute erupts. It will be solved when agreements become dependable, public spending more accountable and negotiations guided by facts rather than political expediency.
Industrial peace must be earned through trust, financial discipline and integrity. A government that repeatedly signs agreements but fails to honour them does more than provoke strikes. It undermines the credibility of every future negotiation.
Reader Discussion (0)
Sign in to comment