Court Upholds Decision to Cancel MCAs’ Extra Allowances

The Labour Relations Court has upheld a decision by the Salaries and Remuneration Commission (SRC) to abolish certain allowances previously paid to Members of County Assemblies (MCAs).

I has ruled that the payments amounted to unjustified double compensation.

In a judgment delivered in response to a petition filed by the County Assembly of Embu, Justice Onesmus Makau found that the SRC acted within its legal mandate when it scrapped retreat, task force, and sitting allowances in August 2023. The court ruled that the allowances had no valid justification, as the duties they covered were already part of MCAs’ salaried responsibilities.

Justice Makau dismissed claims that the SRC’s decision was arbitrary or unconstitutional, stating that the Commission’s action did not violate the rights of MCAs. He noted that paying additional allowances for duties already covered by regular salaries undermined fairness in public sector pay and contributed to inefficiencies in the remuneration structure.

The SRC argued that its review of public officers' roles revealed that MCAs’ core functions, such as attending plenary and committee meetings, did not warrant extra compensation. It further maintained that eliminating such allowances was necessary to control the rising public wage bill and ensure consistency across salary grades.

The Embu County Assembly challenged the move, alleging that the SRC had unfairly downgraded MCAs from Job Grade D5 to D4, which they claimed reduced their entitlements, including subsistence allowances and foreign travel benefits. They also contested the withdrawal of non-practising allowances for professionals serving in the Assembly.

However, the court found no evidence that MCAs had previously been graded at D5. Justice Makau confirmed that the SRC had classified the role at Grade D4 across three remuneration review cycles and said the petitioners failed to provide any proof to the contrary. The court also rejected allegations of discrimination, stating that the SRC's grading was based on objective job evaluations.