The proposed Teachers Service Commission (Amendment) Bill, 2026 includes a new provision that would make engaging in other gainful employment a disciplinary offence. This TSC moonlighting ban has raised strong objections from teachers who rely on side income for household needs, while supporters say it protects classroom time and professional integrity.
Key Takeaways
- TSC moonlighting ban would list outside paid work as a disciplinary offence under the replacement Third Schedule.
- The Bill is vague about what counts as gainful employment, who decides, and what penalties apply.
- Teachers propose targeted fixes: define terms, add exemptions, link sanctions to harm, and include clear procedures.
- Public participation is open — teachers can submit memoranda or attend hearings to propose specific amendments.
TSC moonlighting ban: what the Bill says
The Bill refers to “gainful employment” using the Leadership and Integrity Act but does not define how that applies to common teacher activities. It places the new offence alongside accepted offences such as chronic absenteeism, forged documents and sexual misconduct. Sanctions range from a warning to suspension, removal from the register, or dismissal. An accused teacher may be interdicted and receive half basic salary during the process.
Why many teachers object
Teachers raise five main concerns about the TSC moonlighting ban:
- Vagueness: The Bill does not clarify whether rental income, farming, tutoring, exam marking or online work count as prohibited activities.
- Pay realities: Many teachers run small businesses or farm plots to meet household bills and loan repayments.
- Overbroad reach: Existing offences already cover absenteeism and negligence. Teachers argue the law should target harmful conduct, not lawful outside income.
- Harsh penalties with weak safeguards: Heavy sanctions and unclear interdiction procedures risk damaging livelihoods before a fair finding.
- Compliance overload: The clause arrives alongside mandatory CPD, a new appraisal system and other obligations, increasing pressure on teachers.
How the clause could be narrowed
Teachers and unions can push for practical amendments that keep discipline for harmful conduct while protecting lawful side income:
- Define the term: State plainly what counts as gainful employment and exclude common passive or family activities.
- Express exemptions: Carve out rental income, small-scale farming, investments, and education-related work such as examination marking or authorship.
- Link the offence to harm: Make the test whether an outside activity interferes with duties, uses school resources, or creates a conflict of interest.
- Introduce a permission route: Allow teachers to declare a side activity and seek approval instead of automatic punishment.
- Set graduated penalties: Match sanctions to the severity and context of the breach, distinguishing first-time administrative lapses from serious misconduct.
- Put key procedures into the Bill: Clarify interdiction pay, review fees, and the relationship between internal review decisions and court access.
Procedural safeguards teachers should demand
Even if the offence remains, procedural protections will reduce unfair outcomes. Teachers can ask Parliament to:
- Require a clear investigation timeline and timely hearings.
- Guarantee full pay during investigations except in narrowly defined cases.
- Ensure the Teachers Service Review Committee decisions are reviewable in court without restrictive fees.
- Publish regulations before the clause takes effect so employers and staff know the rules.
How to participate in public hearings
The Bill is still at the public participation stage. Teachers who want to influence change should:
- Read the replacement Third Schedule and clauses 28, 30–31 and 38–41 to identify exact wording to amend.
- Send written memoranda to the National Assembly departmental committee with focused recommendations and suggested replacement text.
- Work with unions such as KNUT or KUPPET to present joint submissions.
- Attend public hearings and present short, specific proposals that clarify definitions and procedures.
Practical guidance and resources
While the debate continues, teachers can prepare by documenting any outside activities and how these do not interfere with teaching duties. Those involved in curriculum delivery and lesson planning may find the CBC exam resources and CBC curriculum designs useful to show professional focus and compliance. For teachers also preparing senior students, the KCSE revision exams provide materials that demonstrate active classroom engagement.
Bottom line
The aim of high professional standards is uncontroversial, but the proposed TSC moonlighting ban as drafted risks punishing lawful and necessary side income because of vague language and wide penalties. Public participation offers a realistic opportunity to narrow the clause, add sensible exemptions, and build clear procedures so discipline targets real harm rather than lawful effort to support a teacher’s household.
