Workers at Hallmark Marketing Management have raised fresh concerns over what they describe as a recurring pattern of delayed salary payments, disciplinary action against employees who demand their wages and failure to remit statutory deductions, with some employees now afraid to speak openly because they fear losing their jobs.

A worker who contacted Nyakundi Report has requested that their identity be completely concealed, saying employees are worried about possible retaliation if they are identified. The complaint also claims this is not the first time concerns about the company have been raised, with workers alleging that similar problems have continued despite previous exposure.

According to the complainant, employees have at times waited for their salaries for weeks and, in some cases, months, leaving workers who depend entirely on their monthly wages struggling to meet basic financial obligations.

What has particularly worried the employees is what they claim happens when they ask management about money they have already earned. The complainant says some workers who raised concerns about delayed salaries or declined to continue working without being paid were subjected to disciplinary action, while several employees were allegedly dismissed after questioning the delayed payments.

“The company has a history of delaying employees' salaries, sometimes for weeks and even months. What is particularly concerning is what happens when employees ask for the money they have already earned or refuse to continue working without being paid.”

The employee further states that demanding outstanding wages has itself become a source of trouble for workers, with disciplinary proceedings and dismissals allegedly being used against employees who speak about their pay.

“Raising the issue of unpaid salary has led to disciplinary action and, in a number of cases, dismissal. Several employees are known to have been let go after raising concerns about their unpaid salaries.”

This also extend to statutory deductions, with employees claiming that money is deducted from their salaries but there are concerns over whether the deductions are subsequently remitted to the relevant government agencies.

This is an issue that can be independently verified through employees' payslips and their respective statutory contribution records.

Under Kenya's employment framework, employees are entitled to payment of wages for work performed, subject to lawful deductions, while employers are required to provide employees with information relating to deductions from their wages.

For NSSF contributions specifically, the National Social Security Fund requires employers to ensure employees are registered and that contributions deducted on their behalf are properly remitted, with employers also required to submit returns and make payments within the prescribed timelines.

The complainant says workers are therefore asking why deductions should appear on their payslips if the corresponding amounts are allegedly not reaching the institutions for which they were collected.

There are also concerns about the independence of the company's internal human resources process. According to the complaint, the HR officer is a relative of the director, a relationship the workers believe could make employees less confident about raising grievances or challenging disciplinary decisions.

“Another issue is the company's management structure. The HR officer is reported to be a relative of the director, which raises legitimate concerns about how independently employee grievances and disciplinary matters are handled.”

The workers say this has created a workplace where employees would rather remain silent than risk being singled out, disciplined or dismissed.

“We are afraid to speak up openly because of what has happened to colleagues who raised these same concerns.”

The complainant argues that workers should not have to choose between keeping their jobs and asking for salaries that they have already earned.

“Employees should not be punished simply for asking to be paid their salaries. If the company is unable to pay employees on time, that should be addressed transparently instead of employees being subjected to disciplinary action when they demand what they are owed.”

Fresha Dairy also comes under scrutiny ¶

The complaint further raises questions about Fresha Dairy, described by the worker as Hallmark Marketing Management's primary employer, with the employee alleging that Fresha Dairy continues to renew its contract with the company every year despite allegedly knowing about the problems employees have been experiencing.

The allegation places the issue beyond the relationship between Hallmark and its individual workers because it raises questions about how companies that outsource or contract labour management monitor the employment conditions of people working under their arrangements.

The workers are not asking for special treatment. Their complaint is that they should receive their wages on time, have lawful deductions properly accounted for and be able to raise workplace grievances without fearing retaliation.

The State Department for Labour and Skills Development has the mandate to enforce labour laws and provide mechanisms through which workers can raise employment related complaints. The department lists complaints among its official contact services.

The NSSF can establish whether deductions made from employees' salaries have actually been credited to their individual accounts, while the Social Health Authority can verify whether SHIF contributions deducted from workers have been remitted. SHA has specifically reminded employers that employee contributions are required to be deducted and submitted within the prescribed monthly deadline.

If employees have evidence showing salary deductions that were never remitted, they can provide those records to the relevant statutory agencies for verification rather than leaving the matter as an internal dispute between workers and management.

The Employment and Labour Relations Court also provides a legal avenue for employment disputes, although workers should first be able to access the administrative labour mechanisms available to them without fear of victimisation.

For Fresha Dairy, the question is whether it is aware of these complaints and, if so, what it has done before repeatedly renewing its relationship with Hallmark.

Workers should not have to remain silent simply because they need their jobs. If Hallmark is meeting its obligations, the company should have no difficulty demonstrating that salaries are paid within the agreed timelines, statutory deductions are properly remitted and disciplinary action is not being used against employees simply because they demand payment for work already performed.