More than 1,200 teachers from Murang’a South and Gatanga Sub-counties have voiced strong opposition to the government’s plan to remove their areas from Kenya’s official list of designated hardship zones. The teachers have warned that eliminating hardship allowances would worsen their living and working conditions and negatively affect learners in these regions.
During a meeting held in Kenol Town, the teachers — drawn from both primary and secondary schools — described the move as unconstitutional, discriminatory, and detached from ground realities. They emphasized that despite being in central Kenya, many parts of Murang’a still experience economic marginalization and infrastructural underdevelopment.
“We Still Lack Basic Services,” Teachers Say
Led by Ndungu Wangenye, Secretary of the Kenya Teachers in Hardship and Arid Areas Welfare Association (KETHAWA), the educators said that the region still struggles with inadequate infrastructure, unreliable access to clean water, and poor road networks.
“Access to clean water and other essential services remains a big problem here. Scrapping our hardship allowance would be unjust,” said Mr. Wangenye.
He urged the government to increase hardship allowances instead of cutting them, suggesting that the allowance should equal 50% of a teacher’s basic salary. According to him, this would accurately reflect the challenges teachers face in marginalized and semi-arid areas.
“Cutting Allowances Will Hurt Education Access”
Mr. Wangenye warned that the move could demotivate teachers, reduce service delivery quality, and eventually hurt education outcomes in hard-to-staff areas.
“This policy would further marginalize already disadvantaged communities,” he added.
He further accused the government of bypassing proper public participation, a constitutional requirement before such policy changes are implemented.
Government Proposal Sparks Outrage
According to a report by the Inter-Agency Technical Committee on Hardship Areas, the government plans to reduce hardship allowances and de-gazette over 50 hardship zones nationwide. The justification for this proposal is to save approximately Ksh 6 billion annually.
However, teachers have strongly rejected this reasoning, arguing that corruption and wasteful expenditure — not teacher allowances — are the real causes of financial strain on the exchequer.
“Instead of cutting teachers’ allowances, the government should recover billions lost through corruption,” said Mburu Gitau, a teacher from Gatanga.
Below is a breakdown of the proposed hardship allowance adjustments that triggered protests among teachers:
| Category | Current Hardship Allowance | Proposed New Rate | Reduction (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Job Group C1 | Ksh 8,200 | Ksh 4,000 | 51% |
| Job Group C2 | Ksh 10,900 | Ksh 5,500 | 49% |
| Job Group C3 | Ksh 12,300 | Ksh 6,100 | 50% |
| Job Group C4 | Ksh 14,650 | Ksh 7,000 | 52% |
Teachers say such drastic cuts would render life unbearable in regions that still face climatic, economic, and infrastructural challenges.
Court Blocks Implementation of New Policy
On September 5, 2025, the Employment and Labour Relations Court issued an injunction halting the Salaries and Remuneration Commission (SRC), Teachers Service Commission (TSC), Public Service Commission (PSC), and the Office of the Prime Cabinet Secretary from implementing the proposed policy.
The KETHAWA association, which filed the case, argues that scrapping hardship allowances violates teachers’ socio-economic and labour rights protected under Articles 41, 43, and 47 of the Constitution of Kenya.
The group also cited the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, arguing that removing these allowances would subject teachers to inhumane living and working conditions, contrary to Kenya’s international obligations.
| Legal Reference | Description |
|---|---|
| Article 41 | Guarantees fair labour practices |
| Article 43 | Protects socio-economic rights |
| Article 47 | Ensures fair administrative action |
| African Charter, Article 15 | Protects workers’ right to fair remuneration |
Call to Reinstate and Expand Hardship Areas
KETHAWA is now demanding that the government reinstates hardship allowances for all affected regions and even expands the list to include cold and high-altitude areas. According to the association, teachers in such regions face frequent illnesses and incur high medical costs due to harsh climatic conditions.
They insist that the government should focus on supporting teachers serving under difficult environments rather than withdrawing incentives that keep them motivated and productive.
The Bigger Picture: Teachers vs Government
The ongoing dispute reflects a deeper struggle between the government’s austerity goals and teachers’ welfare needs. The proposed cuts are part of a broader public sector allowances review, targeting to reduce Kenya’s recurrent expenditure.
However, teachers’ unions, including KNUT and KUPPET, have consistently urged the government to protect teachers’ financial stability, especially in light of the rising cost of living and high taxation.
This debate also comes shortly after other key developments in the education sector:
- The collapse of SHA talks between the TSC and unions over healthcare reforms (read here).
- The KNUT Secretary-General Collins Oyuu warning the government against interfering with the Minet Medical Cover (full article here).
- The introduction of new AI tools for Mathematics teachers to improve efficiency and classroom delivery (see details).
By interlinking these issues, it’s clear that teachers’ welfare remains under immense pressure in 2025, from healthcare to salaries and allowances.
Why This Matters
The outcome of this case could redefine how Kenya classifies hardship areas. If the government’s proposal passes, many teachers in areas like Murang’a, Nyeri, and Kericho could lose financial benefits they have depended on for years.
On the other hand, a victory for KETHAWA would set a precedent, compelling the government to conduct wider stakeholder consultations and protect teachers working in less developed regions.
Teachers are now calling on their unions, lawmakers, and education stakeholders to stand firm against the policy, arguing that the quality of education in hardship zones depends heavily on the morale and welfare of teachers.
Conclusion
The government’s attempt to scrap hardship allowances in Murang’a has reignited a national debate on equity, justice, and teacher welfare. As the court battle unfolds, teachers remain hopeful that their concerns will be heard, and the allowances reinstated.
Ultimately, this case isn’t just about money — it’s about respect, fairness, and recognition for teachers who continue to serve under challenging conditions across the country.
