I will stick my neck here and question the business competence of the judge. If he spent time understanding how the government's ownership in companies works, he would know the government is ably represented by the Ps Finance and Ps transport. It has also been a strong party to recruitment of other board members starting with the chairman. The prime minister can never come into the equation. If the judge looked at the financials which I doubt he did, he would realize KQ is in serious financial problems if you look at the cash flow being generated and the debt in the balance sheet. The judge did not even bother to invite financial expertise to shed light on the cyclic losses caused by certain global factors but he goes ahead and pronounces himself on the same. I have said it in a different post, KQ in its current form will require a government bailout by 2016. It has to shed fat from all directions. And surely employment is a production factor in business and not social protection.

Quote from DN, read between the lines
It is a case that has caught the attention of various players in the job market and it is likely to change labour relations. Kenya Airways on Friday said that it intends to appeal the ruling, with FKE and KEPSA saying that they would consider being enjoined in the appeal.

Link

Why should the judge care about KQs financial status if KQ cannot care about abiding by the law?

My thinking the judge looked at the matter in 3D, employees and how the retrenchment was done, the economy and impact to shareholders and the law as has to be applied then he took decision. 3D doesnt necessary mean that he should have ruled in favour of KQ, I also believe the precedence is a good one, before retrenching one has to go through the process in a way accepted by the law.

NAIKUNI MUST GO!