Change.Org sued by Kenya ex-boss citing illegal firing, gender bias
A Kenyan woman has sued US-based Change.Org, the world's largest petition platform, and its local agents for illegal termination of her contract on account of her gender.
Ms Priscilla Muthoni Maingi, who served as Change.Org's country director, says in the petition certified as urgent that she was terminated in February on claims of her post becoming redundant, but that the California-based firm and its agents went ahead to replace her with a man.
Employment and Labour Relations Court Judge Byram Ongaya has granted Ms Maingi the permission to serve Change.Org and its agents by mail after arguing that her lawyers cannot effect service to the firm without the court's nod.
"I have considered the application and the accompanying supporting affidavit and exhibits thereto, and certify the application urgent," the judge said while directing that the case be mentioned within 21 days for directions.
Ms Maingi has sued LTSDL KYA Solutions Ltd, an outsourcing company registered in Kenya, DEEL Ke, an agent of DEEL INC, a multinational based in California, and Change.Org.
The multinational and its agents have no physical office in Kenya, she said.
According to court documents, she was employed as the country director in 2021 but was fired in February this year. She argues that she was not given reasons for the redundancy of her job as required by law in contravention of her rights.
Ms Maingi says her role in the company was to start campaigns, mobilise supporters and work with decision makers to drive solutions through the online platform https://www.change.org/t/kenya.
'Retrenchment without explanation'
Ms Maingi was appointed country director on October 29, 2021 and all was well until early this year when she was informed that she would be terminated as from February, but was not given reasons when she sought an explanation.
She says it is clear that her ejection from the company was intentionally orchestrated to replace her with a man.
"In summation, all through the termination process, the first respondent unequivocally expressed that the petitioner was being retrenched, a term akin to being ejected from employment on account of redundancy," she said.
However, she said the process followed did not conform with the law thus making the termination unfair and illegal.
She said that in the absence of such critical reasons, there were no valid or fair reasons provided that would sanction her retrenchment.
Ms Maingi says that the employer had in a letter on February 13 said the retrenchment was not on account of her performance.
"Therefore, in the absence of any valid reasons or any reasons at all for that matter, it remains that the first Respondent consciously ignored their obligation as an employer to afford the petitioner with reasons for her termination from employment," she said through her lawyers.
She said in the court documents that her employer was aware that it had not provided her with a notice and provide reasons for the decision to terminate the employment on account of redundancy.
She wants the court to declare that her rights were violated and the outsourcing firm and its agents compelled to pay her 12 months salary amounting to Sh11.7 million, insurance cover of Sh5.4 million and personal loan insurance for 13 months of Sh1.4 million. BY DAILY NATION
Post a Comment