The document discusses disparities in salaries between public sector jobs in Kenya and calls on the Salaries and Remuneration Commission to address this issue. It presents a hypothetical scenario where two graduates are offered different jobs with a 5:1 salary ratio and says the one with stronger political connections would likely get the higher-paid job instead of it being based on merit. To remedy this, it proposes rationalizing salaries based on qualifications and experience across all public sector jobs, with allowances added for seniority and responsibilities of specific roles. This would depoliticize the system and reduce wage-related strikes by making compensation more equitable and performance-based. The Commission has an opportunity to reform salaries and restore fairness and productivity in the public

1. A chance for the Salaries and Remuneration Commission to make good History
Lately remuneration-based strikes have become common practices in Kenya. People tend to strike
when they realise the glaring disparities between their remunerations and those of others with similar
academic and/or professional qualifications. The implications of industrial actions on national
development and stability cannot be overemphasised. Further the strain put on CEOs to contain these
strikes can be avoided because a solution exits. Its implementation however requires political will
driven by the love for positive change. Whether the current crop of leaders can rise to the challenge
remains an open question. But I have my doubts because as long as people (particularly Kenyans in
high offices) are beneficiaries of corruption of any kind, they tend to ignore it and assume that all is
well. Will the Salaries and Remuneration Commission seize this constitutional opportunity and right
the wrongs that continue to widen the gap between the rich and the poor or will it subtly maintain the
status quo?
As a way forward consider the following hypothetical scenario of two young Kenyans with job
guarantees as described below:
Kamau and Onyango joined the University of Nairobi the same year, did the same course and
graduated the same year with the same degree classification. Two jobs in the public service (paid for
by the same employer called GoK) are on offer; a secondary school teacher and a trainee manager in
Central Bank with basic salary disparity in the ration 1:5 respectively. If Kamau lands one, Onyango
must get the other and vice versa. Who between Kamau and Onyango should take the trainee
manager job and earn a basic salary 5 times more than the secondary school teacher? What would be
the criteria of reaching this decision? Knowing the depth of corruption in this country, a very
unorthodox formula is likely to be used. The candidate with stronger political connections would likely
land the trainee manager job, while a common Kenya without a god father or mother must content with
the teaching job. But would this be justice when viewed from the spirit of the new constitution of fair
remuneration for all workers?
This scenario largely exemplifies the Kenya’s norm, where offices have been wrongly mystified as a
justification for their holders to earn obscene salaries their mediocre qualifications and wanting
performance not withstanding. This also explains why corruption is rampant in Kenya and the efforts to
bridge the digital divide have remained a mirage. Lobbing and canvassing has made quacks hold high
offices in public service while professionals languish in underemployment and joblessness. This
equally applies to government consultancies. Ultimately Kenya as a nation loses and poverty and its
negative effects continue to ravage us 49 years since independence. As government responds
selectively to ad hoc proposals and strike threats to increase salaries, disparities continue to increase
leading to worker frustrations and hence more strikes. Continued failure of government to solve such
offending disparities from their root cause seems to suggest government’s pleasure in it as a tool for
dividing and ruling the masses.
The one and single most important solution lies in embracing the principle of equity bearing in mind
that not all workers can fit in one place at the same time. The merit of equity also lies in the truism that
just like all body parts are inter-dependent and function along synergistic partnership for the good of
the body, so are all economic sectors for the good of the nation. To uphold such a systems approach
in public service remuneration would inevitably require radical restructuring and harmonisation of
remuneration across the whole public sector. This is the opportunity the “Salaries and
Remuneration Commission” has to restore Kenya into a civilised nation where things are predictable
and rationalised based on acceptable formulae.
There is need to rationalise basic salaries based on qualifications and ability to function as the initial
common denominators. In this way holders of same or similar qualifications though working in different
sectors would in principle earn the same basic salaries, but allowances may vary to reflect the different
responsibilities and status accorded to different offices. Onyango and Kamau in the above example
would thus earn the same basic salaries but different allowances based on the unique responsibilities
of the two offices. Similarly, all University chief executives would need to be full professors and earn
like fellow full professors except that they would take home the full allowances in respect of their
offices for as long as they hold those offices.

2. In the same way, a university professor appointed as a Judge would earn a basic salary like any other
professor, but in addition commensurate allowances that accompany the office of a judge. In the same
spirit, a judge with a Bachelors degree would earn like any civil/public servant with a bachelors degree,
but in addition take home the allowances of a judge. The same approach would be applied to Masters
Degree holders and any other qualifications. A Permanent Secretary with a Bachelors degree would
earn a basic salary for that qualification, in addition to allowances of that office. Such a PS would only
be compensated equally in terms of allowances to another PS who holds a Masters or PhD. Similar
arrangements would apply to all people paid from the same exchequer. This would also include the
President. His or her basic pay would be based on his or her qualifications. The president would
however in addition take home the allowances due the office of the president. Members of parliament
would also be remunerated based on the same criteria. For instance MPs with different qualifications
would differ in basic salaries but take home the same allowances that are associated with the office of
Member of Parliament. A police officer with a PhD would earn a basic pay like any other PhD holder in
government (university, Research institute, Parastatal, Civil service etc.) but differ only in allowances.
Such straightforward rationalisation, which attaches value to a combination of qualifications and
performance, would effectively de-politicise remuneration processes and prevent offending disparities
that often destroy morale and hence productivity and quality in service delivery from various categories
of service providers. Additional benefits of such restructuring would include guaranteed exit once one
reaches retirement age, releasing much money for service delivery and employment creation through
scaling-down of obscene salaries and allowance, improved performance due to maximised worker
morale. Ultimately strikes would die natural deaths as no one would have any convincing reason for
the same.
If this approach has worked in other countries and effectively reduced income inequalities, thus
promoting fair competition and equitable human development, Kenya cannot be the exception. The
societal value of higher education would also be reclaimed and quality assurance enhanced through
reduced cases of brain drain and brains in the drain. Giving to Caesar what belongs to Caesar is the
way to go. But should Creaser fail to deliver, we now have the performance contracts that would be
used to make appropriate changes. At least Caesar would have had a fair chance to prove
him/herself. To enhance equity, the Salaries and Remuneration Commission would need to review
salaries and allowances of all civil and public servants every 5 years and make appropriate adjustment
bearing in mind costs of living, inflation among other factors.
Today, no one can claim to be the only one trained in a particular field so as to imagine that they are
indispensable and can negotiate and fix their own salaries. Kenyans are schooled and are willing to
serve their country within decent compensation packages. Stealing from the tax payers through
obscene pay packages as is common in Kenya is tantamount to corruption. The ball is now with the
Salaries and Remuneration Commission. Kindly seize this golden opportunity and realign Kenya back
to civility, nationalism and professional ethics.