The Teacher Service Commission (TSC) has recently published its list of 25,252 teachers who achieved promotions, highlighting differences among counties that have attracted attention from lawmakers and education advocates.
Machakos County led the list with 690 promotions, sharply contrasting with Garissa’s 303, the smallest number among all counties.
The information was presented to the National Assembly Committee on Education after lawmakers requested an examination of the promotions.
Nevertheless, the figures have sparked a backlash, raising concerns regarding the criteria used to select which teachers were promoted and how the positions were allocated nationwide. Lawmakers, led by Tinderet MP Julius Melly, strongly criticized the apparent uniformity in promotion distributions, indicating deviations from past practices and neglecting demographic realities.
Melly, who is the chair of the education committee, criticized the Commission for promoting certain teachers multiple times while others have remained in the same job group for over a decade.
“How can you promote someone three times consecutively while others have been stuck in one job group for over ten years? ” he inquired.
“This isn’t the first instance we have received such grievances from teachers. The manner in which this list was created shows a lack of consideration for equity. We need to comprehend how the TSC made these determinations. ”
The National Assembly Committee on Education later dismissed the list and insisted that TSC provide a detailed explanation of its promotion criteria. The commission has until Thursday to address the issues raised by the committee.
While appearing before the MPs, TSC Chief Executive Officer Nancy Macharia defended the commission’s methods, stating that the promotions were aligned with regulatory frameworks that ensure fairness and consistency.
She referenced the applicable policies, including Regulation 73 of the Code of Regulations for Teachers, the Career Progression Guidelines, and the Policy on Selection and Appointment of Institutional Administrators.
“By aligning promotion policies with legal and regulatory frameworks, the process strictly complies with Regulation 73 of the Code of Regulations for Teachers, the Career Progression Guidelines, and the Policy on Selection and Appointment of Institutional Administrators,” Macharia stated.
Despite her defense, the process has faced criticism from the Kenya Union of Post-Primary Education Teachers (Kuppet), which claimed the promotions disproportionately favored areas with fewer teachers to the detriment of more densely populated counties.
Moses Nthurima, the Acting Secretary-General of Kuppet, asserted that the distribution failed to consider teacher population density and longstanding issues of stagnation.
He mentioned that numerous teachers who had worked in acting roles for several years were overlooked while some newly hired educators received promotions in rapid succession.
“Some regions have been unfairly treated. If the 25,000 positions were not allocated proportionally, based on the number of teachers per county, it implies that counties with larger teacher populations are suffering. Those who have remained stagnant in a job group for years have been excluded,” Nthurima remarked.
According to TSC, a total of 5,291 teachers were promoted under affirmative action for the 2024/25 financial year. The affirmative action group included Isiolo, Lamu, and Mandera counties, which received 282, 280, and 270 promotions, respectively.
On the opposite end of the scale, Kiambu had only 46 promotions, while both Nairobi and Murang’a had 63. The promotions encompassed job groups from C2 to D5. Grade C4 recorded the most promotions at 8,508, closely followed by C5 at 5,425 and C3 at 4,971.
Other grades included D1 with 2,519 promotions, C2 with 1,445, and D3 with 1,410. At the higher levels, D2 had 799 promotions, D4 had 128, whereas only 47 teachers received promotions to D5. Nthurima asserted that the process lacked equity and stated that factors such as tenure, performance, and experience were not uniformly considered.
“The commission now claims it took age into account as well, but age has never been a major factor. The essential factors are years of service, responsibilities executed, and achievements in both curricular and co-curricular activities,” he remarked.
He raised concerns about why teachers who had occupied acting positions for extended periods were consistently overlooked. “Some teachers have acted as deputies or principals for six or seven years and are still being left in acting roles, while others in less populated regions are receiving promotions,” Nthurima expressed.
The union representative also criticized the Commission’s failure to consult, indicating that Kuppet had not been involved during the planning or execution of the promotions.
“We aim to comprehend what led to such promotions. Unless there are undisclosed considerations, it is evident that many qualified teachers have been ignored. We communicated with the commission, but it has never replied. It seems the commission does not interact with unions. TSC perceives unions as inconsequential,” he stated.
Legislators and union representatives now urge that future promotional procedures adopt a more consultative method, guarantee accountability, and take into consideration both population diversity and career stagnation issues throughout different areas.
