INTRODUCTION:

Labour law or Employment law deals with industrial relations, that is, the
relationship between workers/employees and employers at the work place.
Labour law arose out of the demands of workers for better conditions, the right to
organize, and the simultaneous demands of employers to restrict the powers of
workers organizations and to keep the labour costs low. Employers costs can
increase due to workers organizing to win higher wages, or by laws imposing
costly requirements, such as health and safety or equal opportunity conditions.
Workers organizations, such as trade Unions can also transcend purely industrial
disputes, and gain political power- which some employers may oppose. The state
of labour law at any one time is therefore both the product of, and component of
struggles between different interests in society particularly, the social-political
power between workers/labour on the one hand and employers/ capital on the other
superintended by the state. Labour rights have been integral to social and economic
development since the period of the industrial revolution.

There are two categories of Labour law:

1. Collective labour law which relates to the tripartite relationship between
employee, employer and the Union. Trade Unions or labour Unions are workers
organizations and are defined as any organization of employees created by
employees for the purpose of representing the rights and interest of employees.
2. Individual labour law: this concerns individual employees’ rights at work
which may be provided for in the contract of employment, statute, common law
etc. Where before unions would be major custodians of workplace welfare,
there has been a steady shift to give individuals more legal rights that they can
enforced directly. E.g. on minimum wages, rights to fair treatment, hours of
labour and holidays, health and safety etc.

Apart from its historical origin, labour law is also influenced or affected by other
factors which include the following:
a) Parliamentary or legislative intervention because of the nature of industrial
relations
b) Specific political developments and therefore the nature and character of
specific regimes and the state generally.
c) Globalization and particularly the neo-liberal economic policy framework
Functions of labour law

1
 1. Providing equal opportunity
The employment Act, 2006 protects the employees’ rights with equal opportunities
as to access to employment and fair treatment in the workplace. These laws
prohibit discrimination and disparate treatment based on factors that aren’t related
to job requirements. The laws also function as a mandate for employers to give
consideration and equal employment opportunities to workers regardless of their
age, color, race, sex, disability, religion, national origin
2. Ensuring pay equity
The labour laws prohibit the employers from establishing different pay scales or
using different compensation practices based on employees gender, provided the
employees are performing job duties that require the same responsibilities, duties
and effort
3. Providing a friendly work place
The employment Act, 2006 prohibits acts of sexual harassment acts against
employees by both the employers and the workmates
4. Providing Workplace safety provisions
Employers can have an obligation to provide a safe working environment with
particular emphasis on workplace, safety where employees are exposed to
hazardous fines and penalties for employers who ignore their obligations under
workplace safety principles under The Occupational Safety and Health Act, 2006
for example an Act to consolidate, harmonize and update the law relating to
occupational safety and health.
5. Providing a remedies for workers in case of unfair termination or
dismissal
These are provided under the Employment Act of 2006 especially when an
employee is not terminated or dismissed according to the laws
6. Provide a regulation for the labour unions
The Labour Unions Act, 2006 provides for the regulation and management of the
unions which literally advocate for the rights of the employees
7. Providing for the medium through which the employees’ rights can be
enforced especially under Labour Disputes (Arbitration and Settlement) Act,
2006
Objectives of labour law
 To safeguard the workers’ rights
 To promote trade unions activities
 To provide safe working environment for the workers

2
  To make employment more secure for the employees
 To maintain the relationship between employers and employees by defining
their rights, duties and regulating their conducts
 To make sure that there is compliance with the relevant labour laws
 To promote equity in working place
 To provide medium for resolution of labour disputes
 To provide liability regarding injuries sustained by the workers
 To provide equal opportunities
SOURCES OF LABOUR LAW
- Constitution of Uganda especially Article 29 (1) (a) that gives workers the
freedom to form or join Labour unions, Article 40 that gives economic right of
equal payment for equal work with our discrimination, a right to practice one’
profession and right to be accorded protection during and after pregnancy for the
sake of the female employees.
- The constitution further bestows upon the parliament to legislate for all laws and
subsidiary laws under Article 79(1). This gives legality to other subsidiary
legislations.
- Statutory law such as Acts of Parliament like the employment Act, No 6 of 2006,
labour unions Act, 2006
- Under the Employment Act No. 6/2006, it consolidates the laws governing
individual employment relationships (employer/employee). Section 2 fights against
forced labour, section 6 fights against discrimination on all fronts and section 7
fights against sexual harassments. etc
- The labour Unions Act No 7/2006 and regulations SI 36/2006. Concerns with the
establishment, registration and management of labour unions. Section 4 provides
for right of association of employees. Section 5 spells out offences that contravene
the rights provided.
- Minimum Wages (advisory Boards and Councils) Act, Cap 221. Provides for the
minimum wages advisory boards and wage councils. It further regulates
remuneration and conditions of employment to employees. Section 14 lays down
penalty for failing to pay minimum wage or comply with employment conditions
-Contracts Act 2010 regulates the capacities to enter in to a contract.
- Common law is applied through mostly case law
- Decisions of courts of record/Employment tribunals
- International instruments on labour and Human rights that have been ratified such
as the International labour organization (ILO) where Article 1(1) is to the effect
that all nations that have ratified the convention should undertake to suppress the
use of forced labour. Uganda ratified this convention and thus is bound to it.

3
- African Charter on human and people’s rights 1981, Articles 2,3,4,10,11,15
and18
- Organization on African union labour and social commission (Arusha April
1997)
- East African Common Markets Protocol Article 10 (1)
1944 Philadelphia Declaration

APPLICABILITY OF THE EMPLOYMENT ACT

Pursuant to Section 3 (1) of the Employment Act, the act applies to all employees
employed by an employer under a contract of service.
Under Section 3 (2) of the Employment Act does not apply to
a) Employers and their dependent relatives when dependent relatives are the only
employees in a family undertaking as long as the total number of dependent
relatives does not exceed five
Section 2 of the Employment Act defines a dependent relative means a member
of an employee’s family who substantially depends on that employee for his or her
livelihood.
b) The Uganda peoples defense forces other than their civilian employees.

NATURE OF THE CONTRACT;

A contract of employment is a contract of service as opposed to a contract for
services. S. 3(1) of the Employment Act 2006, provides that the Act applies to all
employees employed by an employer under a contract of service.

The law imposes considerable burdens upon employers both in relation to torts
committed by their employees, and in respect to duties owed by employers to their
employees. Employer’s liability constitutes any instance of liability in which an
employee may legally seek for compensation from an employer through a law suit.
This involves a specific claim in negligence where the employee is suing his or her
employer.
Such liability only arises if there is a “valid employment” created by either a
“Contract of employment” or “Contract of service”.

The term “employment” was defined by Hon. Justice Lillian Tibatemwa in the
case of
Uganda Revenue Authority v. Siraje Hassan Kajura Civil Appeal No. 09 of 2015
, where the learned Justice while relying on Section 2(2) of the Income Tax Act
stated that, “ Employment is the position of an individual in the employment of
another person, directorship of a company, a position entitling the holder to a
fixed or ascertainable remuneration or the holding or acting in the public office.”

4
A contract of employment is often called a service agreement or a contract of
service. Therefore, the general contractual principles covered in contract law are
applicable in the law of employment. Issues of offer and acceptance, consideration
and illegality also underlie employment law. The equivalent of offer and
acceptance in contract law is the hiring of the employee and the law on dismissal is
based on breach of contract.
The contract of employment is, however, a specialized form of contract. Rights
and duties have been superimposed on those contractual arrangements classified as
employment ones and employers cannot derogate from these rights or duties even
by contract. For instance, rights have been given to workers to claim in respect of
discrimination and sexual harassment

Contract of employment: In the case of Gidudu Micheal v. Terra Firma

Construction
(U) Ltd and Anor Civil Suit No. 04 of 2002, Hon. Justice Remmy Kasule at page 3
stated that, “A Contract of employment is an agreement between the employer and
employee giving rise to obligations between the employer and the employee which
are enforceable or recognizable by the law.”

Section 2 of the Employment Act, Act 6 of 2006, defined contract of service to

mean any contract whether oral or in writing, whether expressed or implied, to
employ or to serve as an employee for any period of time and includes any contract
of apprenticeship.

Contract for service is where the employer employs an independent contract under
a separate contract

Employer
S. 2 of the Employment Act defines an employer as any person or group of
persons, including a company or corporation, a public, regional or local authority,
a governing body of an unincorporated association, a partnership, parastatal
organization or other institution or organization whatsoever, for whom an
employee works or has worked, or normally worked or sought to work, under a
contract of service.
Under Section 2 of the Worker’s Compensation Act4, an employer is defined as
“any person incorporated or unincorporated, association or partnership, which
directly engages a worker or hires out the workers services.”

5
In the case of Prof. Syed Huq v. Islamic University in Uganda5, Wambuzi C.J
said,“Employer means any person, company, firm, or corporation, that has entered
into a contract of service to employ any other person, agent, foreman, manager or
factor of such employer or entered into a contract of service with the
government…”

Employee
S.2 of the Employment Act 2006 defines an “employee” as any person who has
entered into a contract of service or an apprenticeship contract, including, without
limitation, any person who is employed by or for the Government of Uganda,
including the Uganda Public Service, a local authority or a parastatal organisation
but excludes a member of the Uganda Peoples’ Defence Forces

Dismissal from employment is defined as the discharge of an employee from

employment at the initiative of his/her employer when the said employee has
committed verifiable misconduct.

Termination of employment means the discharge of an employee from an

employment at the initiative of the employer for justifiable reasons other than
misconduct, such as expiry of contract, attainment of retirement age. Etc.

Wages means remuneration or earnings however designated or calculated, capable

of being expressed in terms of money and fixed by mutual agreement or by
national laws or regulations which are payable under an oral or written contract of
service for work done or to be done or for services rendered or to be rendered but
excluding any contributions made or to be made by the employer in respect of his/her
employees insurance, medical care, welfare ,education, training ,invalidity, retirement pension,
post service gratuity or severance allowance.

It is important to differentiate between contract of service and contract for service

The distinction is important because an independent contractor and employee have
separate and distinct causes of action under contracts with the employer. The
distinction is also important for purposes of determining liability arising from the
actions of employees in the course of employment. Relatedly the distinction is also
important for other benefits eg trade union membership, social security and
protection, worker’s protection, tax liability, health and safety issue

How to distinguish an employee from an independent contractor

For there to subsist an employer-employee relationship, there must exist a contract of service as
between the parties.
6
There are several tests to be applied in determining whether the contract if of
service or for service

A. CONTROL TEST

The most common test for whether there subsists a contract of service is the
control test
The traditional criterion for distinguishing an employee from an independent
contractor is the degree and right of control. In a number of cases, a servant has
been regarded as anyone who is subject to the command of the employer as to the
manner in which he/she shall do work under the contract, expressly or impliedly. If
the contract gives the employer extensive control over the work to be done or
spells out in detail the manner of execution of the work, it is a contract of
employment.

If the employer only determines what is to be done rather than how it is to be done,
then the person working for him would be an independent contractor. In Honey
Will & Stain Ltd V Lakin Brothers Ltd [1934] 1 KB 19, it was said, “the
determination whether the actual wrong doer is a servant or agent on the one hand
or an independent contractor on the other depends on whether or not the employer
only determines what is to be done but retains the control of the actual
performance in which case the doer is a servant or agent. But if the employer while
prescribing the work to be done leaves the manner of doing it to the control of the
doer, the latter is an independent contractor.”
Ready Mixed Concrete Ltd v Minister of Pensions [1968] 2 QB 497
Facts: A driver contracted with a mixed concrete company for the delivery of
concrete. The contract declared him an “independent contractor” and set out
wages and expenses. The driver was to purchase his own vehicle, yet with a
requirement that the vehicle be painted in company colours. He was to drive the
vehicle himself but under compliance with certain company’s rules including, for
example, the manner of vehicle repairs and payments.

Issue: The question arose as to whether the driver was an “employed person”
under a contract of service with the company for the purposes of the National
Insurance Act 1965.

7
Held Firstly, the Court held that whether a contract creates a ‘master and servant’
relationship between an employer and employee is determined on the basis of
contractual rights and duties, and that the nomenclature used in the contract is
irrelevant. Thus, the fact that the contract termed the driver to be an “independent
contractor” is not material. Secondly, the Court held that employment under a
contract of service exists when:

(1) A person agrees to a perform a service for a company in exchange for

remuneration; and

(2) a person agrees, expressly or impliedly, to subject himself to the control of the
company to a sufficient degree to render the company his “master,” including
control over the task’s performance, means, time; and

(3) The contractual provisions are consistent with ordinary contracts of service. On
the facts, the Court held that the driver had sufficient freedom in the performance
of his contractual obligations as he was free to decide the vehicle, his own labour,
fuel, and other requirements in the performance of the task. In lieu of these
freedoms, he was an independent contractor and not an employee of the company.

In GARRAD V SOUTHEY AND CO. AND ANOR V DAVEY ESTATES

LTD(1952) 1 ALL ER 597, court stated that to establish the degree of control
requisite to fasten responsibility upon him(the hirer), the hirer must in some
reasonable sense be shown to have authority to control the manner in which the
workman does his work.
In FUKASI KABUGO V ATTORNEY GENERAL (1975) HCB 338, stated that
the key features which would show control are:
1. The master’s power of selection of his servants
2. Payment of wages
3. Masters right to control the method of doing the work
4. Masters right to suspend or dismiss

CRITICISM FOR THE CONTROL TEST

There are difficulties when it comes to skilled employees where the unskilled
employer is less likely to control their work. Lord Parker in MORREN V
SURINTON AND PENDLEBURY BOROUGH COUNCIL (1965)2 ALL ER
349, he stated that the factor of superintendence and control is of little use as a test
whether a contract is or is not a contract of service where the person concerned is a
professional man, engaged for his skill and experience. In such cases there can be
no question of the employer telling him/her how to do work.

8
 B. INTEGRATION TEST
The difficulties associated with the control test led judges to propose a more
impressionistic approach called the integration test.
One is to be regarded as an employee if the work that he does is an integral part of
the business. Lord Denning in Stevenson Jordan and Harrison Ltd v McDonald
and Evans [1969] 1 TLR 101 established this test. The basis of the test is that
someone will be an employee whose work is fully integrated into the business,
whereas if a person’s work is only accessory to the business then that person is not
an employee.
Lord Denning proposed that 'It is often easy to recognise a contract of service
when you see it, but difficult to say wherein the difference lies. A ship's master, a
chauffeur, and a reporter on the staff of a newspaper are all employed under a
contract of service; but a ship's pilot, a taxi-man, and a newspaper contributor are
employed under a contract for services. One feature which seems to run through
the instances is that, under a contract of service, a man is employed as part of the
business and his work is done as an integral part of the business whereas, under a
contract for services, his work, although done for the business, is not integrated
into it but is only accessory to it.

C. ENTREPRENEUR/ BUSINESS TEST,

“Is the person who has engaged himself to perform these services performing them
as a person in business on his own account?” Put another way: “are the engaged
persons small business men?” In Market investigations Ltd, Cooke J, held, “the
fundamental test to be applied is this: “is the person who has engaged himself to
perform these services performing them as a person in business on his own
account?” If the answer to that question is “yes”, then the contract is a contract for
services. If the answer is “no”, then the contract a contract of service……………
that factors, which may be of importance, are such matters as whether the man
performing the services provides his own equipment, whether he hires his own
helpers, what degree of financial risk he takes, what degree of responsibility for
investment and management he has, and whether and how far he has an
opportunity of profiting from sound management in the performance of his task.”
If the engaged person’s performance of the task requires significant capital
investment on his part, and especially if he is on risk, in the sense of standing to
make a sizeable profit or incur a substantial loss, depending on how efficiently he
does the job, he will be regarded as an independent contractor. Where this
entrepreneur element is present, as a rule, it points to a contract for services,
regardless of how much control or how much integration there might be.
9
 D. MULTIPLE TEST/ ECONOMIC REALITY TEST
The courts nowadays look at all the surrounding features thus applying what is in
fact a multiple test. Certainly, the power of selection, the payment of wages,
income tax, holiday money and pensions and the power to suspend or dismiss are
all relevant features which need to be taken into account. In Ready Mixed
Concrete Ltd V Minister of Pensions & National Insurance, Mackena J, held
that there were 3 conditions necessary to establish that a contract of services
existed:
i) the servant agrees that in consideration of a wage or other
remuneration he will provide his own skill in the performance of some
service for his master
ii) he agrees, expressly or impliedly that in the performance of that
service he will be subject to the others control in a sufficient degree to
make that other master
iii) the other provisions of the contract are consistent with its being a
contract of service.
In that case, the fact that the driver could and did employ a substitute was clearly
crucial in deciding that they were self employed contractors. As a general principle
it can be said that if a person is not contractually bound to perform the contract
personally but may delegate to others if he chooses, he is not an employee.
Note: In a contract of service, the principle obligation undertaken by the employee
is to provide himself to serve whereas in a contract for services, the principle
obligation is not to provide himself to serve the employer but offer his services for
the use of the employer.
E. PARTIES OWN CHARACTERISATION/ SELF CLASSIFICATION
The parties, in their contract, may characterize their contractual relationship by
saying the person employed is an employee or is to be regarded as self- employed.
It would seem that this might be enough to decide the matter. However, this is only
a factor to be taken into consideration and therefore may not be conclusive of the
matter.
The law is that if the true relationship of the parties is that of master and servant,
under a contract of service, the parties cannot alter the truth of that relationship by
putting a different label upon it. The court must look at the realities of the situation
in order to determine whether the relationship of employer-employee in fact exists
regardless of how the parties describe themselves. In Young & Woods Ltd V west
[1980] IRLR 201, the respondent, a skilled metal worker had clearly opted in
favour of being described as self-employed, since this gave him a legitimate tax
advantage. However, since he was paid on an hourly rate, had normal working
10
hours and had use of their equipment, he was held to be an employee and thus
eligible to claim unfair dismissal.
Though courts will be inclined to attain the true meaning to a transaction entered
by parties’ whatever nature they call, courts are also hesitant to deviate from the
express stipulations of the parties. In NSSF V MTN (U) LTD AND ANOR
H.C.CS no.94 of 2009, where the question to be answered was who was the
employer of the UNISIS temporary contract employees who worked for MTN
under the control of MTN. justice Hellen Oburu rejected the control test suggested
by the Ply’s advocate and held that the intention of the parties insofar as who the
employer was clearly stated in the contract which named UNISIS as the employer
and not MTN.

Why and Importance of the Distinction between Independent Contractors and

Employees
The distinction between employees and independent contractors is of fundamental
importance to employment law but that distinction is not clear-cut. It is in respect
of the many statutory rights and duties that the distinction between the two
categories is significant because most of the modern protection legislation applies
only to the employer-employee relationship and not independent contractors
Smith and Wood, in their book titled Industrial law, on page 9, stated that ….the
independent contractor may be in a better monetary position while working, but at
a grave disadvantage if he falls off a ladder or is sacked.
WHY THE DISTINCTION IS IMPORTANT?
1. Vicarious liability. Employers are liable for the torts of their employees
committed in the course of employment. The employer except in certain special
circumstances is not vicariously liable for the tots of an independent contractors
committed during the execution of their work.
2. COMPENSATION FOR INJURY.
Under the Workers Compensation Act cap 225, employees are generally entitled
to compensation for injuries sustained in the course of employment. In an
employer-independent contractor relationship, the employer has no obligation to
compensate the independent contractor for injuries sustained during work.
3. MANDATORY CONTRIBUTION.
Employers are by law mandate to remit certain contributions on behalf of
employees for example PAYE, NSSF contributions under section 11and 12 of the
NSSF act. These deductions are permitted under S.46 of the employment act.
4. EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS.

11
Employment benefits such as sick leave among others are stipulated under the
employment act only accrue to employees and not independent contractors

Importance of the above distinction

 By virtue of the doctrine of vicarious liability, employers are liable for the
torts of their employees committed in the course of employment, but not
generally for torts of independent contractors except for non derogable
duties.
 Under the workers compensation Act, it is employees generally that are
eligible to be compensated for injuries sustained in the course of
employment.
 Under the NSSF Act, it is only mandatory for employees to make
contributions to the fund as well as their employers.
Under the Income Tax Act, PAYE is only deducted from an employee’s salary.
Also, the newly introduced local service tax is only deducted from employees’
salaries
 Independent contractors may have to register for VAT (Value Added Tax)
employees do not.
 Employment legislation such as the Employment Act, 2006, Labour Unions
Act, 2006, Occupational Safety & Health Act, 2006 etc, only apply to
employers and employees and not employers and independent contractors.
Thus benefits such as sick pay, maternity & paternity leave apply only to
employees.
 Sec. 48 of the Employment Act makes employees preferential creditors with
regard to arrears of wages in case of bankruptcy or winding up of the
employers business.
 Employers must adopt higher standards of care towards their employees than
towards independent contractors who work for them.

CHARACTERISTICS OF A CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT

i. Control; manifests in how the work is to be done, at what time, exhibiting a
certain form of character including the dress code, salary scale etc

ii. Right to terminate; generally an employer has a right to terminate. Previously

there was no obligation to give reasons for termination, but now the law
emphasizes procedural fairness.

12
iii. Notice; generally in a contract of employment, termination is preceded by a
notice. Notice arises as a result of contract or as a result of law.
iv. Summary termination and summary dismissal; in summary dismissal, you
are very disgraceful person and affects entitlement under Pensions Act. Before you
summarily dismiss, you must be sure about the justification of the dismissal.

EMPLOYMENT CONTRACTS
These are regulated by the Contract Act 2010 and the Employment Act 2006.
Section 25 of the Employment Act provides that no person shall be employed
under a contract of service except in accordance with the act. Further Section 27(1)
of the Employment Act bars the exclusion of any provision of the employment act
in any contract of service and states that such agreement is null and void.
However, in sub-section 2, the act allows for the parties to vary the provisions of
the act in favor of terms and conditions which are more favorable to the employee
than those stipulated in the act.

S. 25 of the Employment Act provides that a contract of service, other than a

contract which is required by this or any other Act to be in writing, may be made
orally, and except as otherwise provided by this Act, shall apply equally to oral and
written contracts.
S. 10(5) of the Contracts Act provides that a contract the subject matter of which
exceeds twenty five currency points shall be in writing
Section 26 makes a mandate for a contract of employment to be attested where the
employee is unable to read or understand the language in which the contract is
written. Attestation is before a magistrate or a labor officer

As noted earlier, these are governed by the contracts act 2010 and the employment
act 2006, with each creating various requirements.
Under Section10 of the Contracts Act 2010, the requirements are that there is
a) An offer and acceptance
b) Consideration
c) Lawful subject matter
d) Capacity to contract
e) Intention to be legally bound

OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE.

Usually, the offer is made during the interviews or through a letter of appointment
after the interviews. Negotiations if any are made and concluded during this period
usually relating to the salary, other employment benefits and the starting date.

13
The offer must contain the terms of service or indicate where they may be found.
Parties will usually enter a contract after the stages of advertisement, interview,
offer and acceptance. The offer may be made and accepted at the interview, or may
be made later by a letter of appointment. While a limited amount of negotiation
may be possible perhaps over the starting date or salary, most prospective
employees need the position more than the employer needs their services. This
doesn’t mean that it is totally one sided. The contract may be oral or in writing,
express or implied as per the Employment Act. However, a probationary contract
has to be in writing, as well as any other contract required by any other law to be in
writing. See S. 25

CONSIDERATION
The consideration is the employers promise to pay the agreed wages in return for
the employee performing a particular task. The consideration in employment
contracts is the employers promise to pay the agreed wages in return for the
employee performing a particular task. In DELANEY V STAPLES (1992) IRIR
191, Lord Browne Wilkinson was of the view that the essential characteristic of
wages is that they are contributions for work done or to be done under a contract of
employment. If payment is not referable to an obligation on the employee under a
subsisting contract of employment to render his services, it does not fall within the
ordinary meaning of the word wages.
Section 41 (1) of the Employment Act provides that wages have to be paid in
legal tender.
Although the section also allows the employer to pay by cheque, postal order,
money order or by direct payment to employee’s bank account having sought the
consent of the employee to do so

CAPACITY AND LEGALITY

As with other contracts, the contract of service must not be tainted with illegality.
Contracts tainted with illegality cannot be enforced by courts or tribunals. Such
agreements may be contrary to public policy at common law or expressly or
impliedly prohibited by law. The fact that the plaintiff or the applicant does not
know of the illegality is irrelevant.
Part IV of the Employment Act of 2006 generally governs the employment
relationship between the employer and employee.
Section 11(1) of the Contracts Act provides that a person has capacity to contract
where such a person is of 18 years and above, of sound mind and not disqualified
from contracting by any law to which he or she is subject.

14
Section 11(2) of the Contracts Act goes further to stipulate that a person of 16
years plus has the capacity to enter into a contract of employment as provided
under Article 34(4) and (5) of the 1995 constitution of the Republic of Uganda.
Subsection thereof provides that (2) Notwithstanding this section, a person of
sixteen years or above has the capacity to contract as provided under article 34 (4)
and (5) of the Constitution. Under this article a child of 16 years can be employed
However the Employment Act under S. 32 prohibits employment of a child under
the age of twelve (12) years in any business, undertaking or work place. However,
a child of 14 years can be employed for light work carried out under the
supervision of an adult and which does not affect the child’s education. A child
shall not be employed in any work which is injurious to his or her health,
dangerous or hazardous and neither shall a child be employed between the hours of
7 pm and 7 am.
Regulation 3 of the Employment (Employment of Children) Regulations 2012
A child under the age of fourteen years shall not be employed in any business
undertaking or workplace, except—(a) for light work carried out under the
supervision of an adult; and (b) where the work does not exceed fourteen hours per
week

Attestation
Section 26 of the Employment Act requires an employment contract made with an
employee unable to read and understand the language in which the contract is
written to be attested to by a labour officer or a magistrate. The Act allows
enforcement of an unattested contract (where attestation was required), however,
such a contract can only be enforced by the employee.

15