Johnson Arthur Sakaja

All parliamentary appearances

Entries 361 to 370 of 5036.

• 2 Dec 2021 in Senate: Thank you, Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir. I beg to lay the following Petition Reports on the Table of the Senate today, Thursday, 2nd December, 2021. I have three Reports to issue. I will just give a brief summary. view
• 2 Dec 2021 in Senate: The first is a Petition by Mr. Daniel Matendechere concerning unfair dismissal and lack of compensation by Broadway Bakery Limited. The Petition concerning this unfair dismissal was presented to the Senate on 16th September, 2021 by Sen. (Dr.) Musuruve, who is passing in front of me. The concerns raised in the Petition were that Mr. Matendechere, while on duty on Thursday, 26th April, 2018 was involved in an accident that left him with a physical disability that affected his mobility and required him to use an artificial leg. view
• 2 Dec 2021 in Senate: On 1st October, 2019, his employer, Broadway Company Limited, deployed him from the transport section to the wrapping section, which involved a lot of standing, inflicting a lot of pain on the gentleman. On 16th November, 2020, he received a notice of termination of employment and was sacked 14 days later on the 30th, November, 2020, without compensation. Upon his dismissal, he has tirelessly made an effort to seek justice, but his efforts have not borne any fruits. In considering this Petition, the Committee took into consideration the submissions and supporting documents by the Petitioner and the reports from Broadway ... view
• 2 Dec 2021 in Senate: If a matter is of great public interest or about human rights: The present matter concerns human rights and as such, should not be curtailed by an existing court case. I am glad that Sen. (Dr.) Musuruve is listening. Based on these observations, the Committee, therefore, recommends that in order to access his benefits, the Petitioner complies with the law; the Work Injury Benefits Act (WIBA), as provided under Section 16 and 23 as follows- (1) The petitioner has a discretion to withdraw his case at Baricho Law Courts. (2) The petitioner will continue with adjudication of this matter by ... view
• 2 Dec 2021 in Senate: Mr. Speaker, Sir, I beg to lay the Report of the Standing Committee on the Petition. view
• 2 Dec 2021 in Senate: Mr. Speaker, Sir, the second Petition is regarding the plight of former workers, former employees of the Kenya United Steel Company (KUSCO) Limited. It was presented to the Senate by Sen. Faki of Mombasa County on 7th July, 2021, pursuant to Standing Order No.230. The Petition was referred to the Committee on Labour and Social Welfare pursuant to Standing Orders 232(1). view
• 2 Dec 2021 in Senate: The Committee held five sittings and engaged the following stakeholders- (i)The petitioners. (ii)The former Director of KUSCO LTD. (iii)PricewaterhouseCoopers; the Receiving Managers. (iv)The Kenya Commercial Bank, which was the Receiving Bank. view
• 2 Dec 2021 in Senate: Mr. Speaker, Sir, the Committee made the following observations- (1) KUSCO was registered on 12th July, 1965 as a private company. (2) There is evidence that KUSCO obtained a loan from KCB Limited vide a Debenture dated 9th March, 1998. view
• 2 Dec 2021 in Senate: (3) KUSCO was unable to pay the loan and its land and other assets were sold to another company called S.R.M Limited (KUSCO (2006) Limited) in the year 2005. (4) That KUSCO was placed under receivership on 18th September, 2003 as it was indebted to the Kenya Commercial Bank (KCB) hence the appointment of the receiver managers, PWC Limited. (5) The dispute was initiated under the then Trade Disputes Act, Cap.234, Laws of Kenya, and is therefore not time barred. (6) KUSCO (2006) Limited, which is different from KUSCO Limited - S.R.M Limited, changed their name in 2006 to KUSCO ... view
• 2 Dec 2021 in Senate: purchaser for value without notice. (7) The claim against the receiver manager (PricewaterhouseCoopers) was dismissed and the ruling was not challenged on appeal. (8) Some employees who previously worked for KUSCO were absorbed into the new company, KUSCO (2006) Limited. Those employed, worked under KUSCO (2006) Limited from around 2007 to 2012 when their contracts were terminated by KUSCO (2006) Limited. Those employed by KUSCO (2006) Limited, did not raise issues of any obligations owed to them by KUSCO (2006) Limited, at the time they executed the contracts of employment in 2007. (9) With the sanction of a special resolution, ... view