A Nairobi court found that seven disciplinary letters, WhatsApp group exclusion and pressure to hand over duties helped force Jeniffer Mulee Kyengo’s resignation.
The ruling exposes a damaging workplace dispute behind the company marketing Bingwa as “The Flour of Champions”.
A company selling flour to Kenyan households must now pay a former general manager KSh2.24 million after losing a pregnancy discrimination case.
Grainden Millers Limited, the manufacturer behind the Bingwa flour brand, was found to have constructively dismissed Jeniffer Mulee Kyengo.
The Employment and Labour Relations Court also ruled that the company discriminated against her because of pregnancy.
Justice Christine Baari delivered the judgement on October 15, 2026, awarding KSh1,238,544 for constructive dismissal.
He separately awarded KSh1 million for discrimination, alongside interest and legal costs.
The court dismissed the company’s counterclaim over allegedly unreturned property and unpaid customer invoices.
It also ordered Grainden Millers to issue Kyengo a certificate of service within 14 days.
The decision concerns the company’s employment practices, not the quality or safety of its flour products.
Bingwa Brand
Grainden Millers presents Bingwa as “The Flour of Champions”, promising quality, taste and consistency.
Its website markets maize flour and all-purpose home-baking flour to households seeking everyday cooking and baking products.
The company says it was established in 2009 and operates a milling plant in Nairobi.
Its published profile describes production capabilities spanning wheat, maize, sorghum and millet flour.
However, the court’s judgement placed the spotlight on an employment dispute rather than the company’s consumer products.
The case arose from Kyengo’s departure after approximately two years and five months working for Grainden Millers.
She joined the company on January 15, 2019, and eventually became its general manager.
She resigned on June 16, 2021, arguing that management’s conduct had left her with no reasonable alternative.
Her claim centred on seven show-cause letters issued during pregnancy and maternity leave.
She also cited removal from company WhatsApp groups and demands for handover while medically unwell.
Seven Letters
Company director Lucy Muthoni Mwangi confirmed that Grainden Millers issued seven show-cause letters between February 19 and June 16, 2021.
She acknowledged knowing Kyengo was pregnant when the disciplinary notices were issued.
The director maintained that the letters addressed separate concerns about Kyengo’s performance and responsibilities.
The company also argued that management was entitled to require a proper handover.
However, Mwangi acknowledged that no disciplinary hearing followed the notices.
She also confirmed that Kyengo received no written invitation to attend such a hearing.
Justice Baari considered those omissions alongside the timing and frequency of the letters.
The court also examined Kyengo’s exclusion from workplace WhatsApp groups used for official communication.
The company said removing her from those groups allowed her to concentrate on maternity leave and childcare.
The judge found that explanation insufficient when assessed against the broader pattern of treatment.
The judgement stated that disciplinary powers must be exercised fairly and in good faith.
It described the repeated notices, including those issued during maternity leave, as material circumstances.
The judge concluded, “I therefore have no difficulty finding, and which I hereby do, that the Claimant’s resignation amounts to constructive dismissal.”
Pregnancy Dispute
The court separately examined whether Grainden Millers disadvantaged Kyengo because of her pregnancy.
Section 5 of the Employment Act prohibits discrimination on pregnancy grounds, while Article 27 protects equality.
Article 41 of the Constitution also guarantees fair labour practices. The court relied on these provisions when assessing whether the employer’s explanations adequately justified its conduct.
Justice Baari found that the company knew about Kyengo’s pregnancy and issued the seven notices during the relevant period.
No disciplinary hearing followed, and the company failed to satisfactorily explain the wider pattern.
The judgement stated that the timing and frequency of the notices, combined with the missing disciplinary process, provided sufficient evidence of disadvantage.
It concluded that the company’s explanations did not satisfactorily rebut that inference.
The judge consequently found that Grainden Millers discriminated against Kyengo because of pregnancy.
The finding was separate from the court’s conclusion that her resignation amounted to constructive dismissal.
The ruling does not mean employers cannot discipline pregnant employees or investigate genuine performance concerns.
It means those powers must be exercised fairly without disadvantaging workers for exercising maternity rights.
KSh2.2 Million
The compensation calculation hinged partly on a dispute over Kyengo’s monthly salary.
She maintained that her salary increased to KSh206,424 in November 2020, supported by payslips and a salary-review letter.
Grainden Millers disputed the increase, arguing that her salary remained KSh156,000.
The company alleged that additional payments represented bonuses and questioned the authenticity of the salary-review letter.
Mwangi acknowledged that the alleged forgery had not been reported to police.
The court accepted Kyengo’s salary figure because her payslips supported it and contrary evidence was lacking.
Under Section 49 of the Employment Act, compensation for unfair termination can reach 12 months’ gross salary.
Justice Baari awarded six months, considering Kyengo’s relatively short service and other relevant circumstances.
The resulting constructive dismissal award was KSh1,238,544.
The separate discrimination award brought the principal compensation to KSh2,238,544, excluding interest and costs.
READ ALSO: Court Orders Cellulant Kenya to Pay Ex-Manager KSh15.9 Million After Unfair Redundancy
Grainden Millers’ counterclaim also failed because the company did not adequately prove its allegations.
Kyengo testified that she handed the laptop and keys to the company’s lawyer.
The employer did not establish what property remained outstanding or its value.
It also failed to produce delivery records proving that goods reached the customers linked to allegedly unpaid invoices.
The court dismissed the counterclaim with costs awarded to Kyengo. It also rejected her salary arrears and annual-leave claims for insufficient evidence.
Grainden Millers must pay interest on both compensation awards at court rates from October 15, 2026.
The company must also issue Kyengo’s certificate of service within 14 days.
PAY ATTENTION: Reach us at info@gotta.news.
