Isaac Leaburia believed his career trajectory was on an upward path. On August 30, 2018, he began working at Dumisha Sacco Limited as an Internal Auditor, earning a modest but respectable gross monthly salary of Kshs 47,800. A year later, the Sacco’s Board recognized his potential.
On July 12, 2019, he was promoted to the position of Acting Chief Executive Officer (CEO), which came with an increased salary of Kshs 78,596.
Isaac held the CEO position for 14 months, navigating the Sacco through regulatory challenges and daily operations. However, he claims his remuneration was kept in a state of administrative uncertainty. Despite effectively serving as the substantive CEO, he argued that he was largely compensated as an “Acting” CEO, receiving less than the full entitlement for the role.
In 2020, the situation worsened. The Board expressed dissatisfaction with his performance, citing a lack of leadership, loss of funds, and missed deadlines. Instead of confirming his appointment after probation, the Board extended it. In July 2020, they placed him on compulsory leave to investigate his conduct.
When Isaac returned on September 1, 2020, he faced a professional and financial shock: the Board had decided to demote him back to his previous position of Internal Auditor. This demotion came with a significant pay cut, reverting his salary to the original amount.
Feeling he had been “driven to the wall” by an employer who refused to compensate him fairly for his time in the executive role, Isaac resigned in October 2021. He subsequently filed a lawsuit at the Maralal Law Courts, seeking over Kshs 1 million in compensation for constructive dismissal and unpaid wages.
The legal battle, Leaburia v. Dumisha Sacco Limited, was adjudicated by Senior Principal Magistrate Hon. T. A. Sitati. The courtroom became an accounting floor where every shilling was closely examined.
The Sacco claimed that Isaac was never fully confirmed in his role due to poor performance and alleged that he owed them money, citing arrears on a loan that had escalated to over Kshs 2.6 million. They argued that his resignation was voluntary and not coerced.
Magistrate Sitati delivered a balanced judgment, distinguishing between emotional grievances and contractual obligations regarding payment. The court rejected Isaac’s claim of “unfair termination,” ruling that the Sacco had the right to revert him to his former position after he failed probation. Consequently, the reduction of his salary back to Kshs 47,800 upon his return to the auditor role was deemed legal. Isaac lost his bid for 12 months’ compensation and salary in lieu of notice.
However, the court found that Dumisha Sacco had shortchanged Isaac during his time as CEO. The Magistrate ruled that for the 14 months Isaac served in the CEO position (acting and probationary), he was entitled to the full salary for that role, rather than the reduced amount he had been paid. The court awarded him Kshs 431,144 in unpaid salary differentials.
The court noted that when Isaac was placed on compulsory leave, he was still acting as CEO. The Sacco had failed to pay him during this suspension, leading to an additional award of Kshs 235,788 (equivalent to three months of CEO salary).
Since the Sacco could not prove they had remitted pension deductions for Isaac, the court ordered them to pay him Service Pay for his 3.5 years of work, totaling Kshs 71,700.
