They say the move has not only undermined unity within the sector but also raised questions about representation and decision-making in negotiations with government officials and other relevant authorities.
In a strongly worded position statement, the group maintained that any resolution affecting the transport industry must be reached collectively, with full participation of all stakeholders, to ensure legitimacy and fairness in the outcomes.
According to the stakeholders, excluding key players from such a significant decision risks weakening the collective bargaining power of the sector, especially at a time when transport operators are grappling with rising fuel costs and other operational challenges.
They further claimed that the decision to call off the strike was communicated without prior consultation, leaving many operators surprised and dissatisfied with the outcome of the discussions.
The group insisted that such actions create mistrust within the industry and could affect future attempts to present a unified front when engaging with government institutions on matters affecting transport operations.
They reiterated that the strike was initially intended to push for broader reforms in fuel pricing and related policies affecting both matatu operators and other transport service providers, including taxi and logistics operators.
However, they now argue that the unilateral decision to withdraw from the planned action weakens the collective voice of the sector and ignores the concerns that had been raised by a wider group of stakeholders.
The stakeholders are now calling for a fresh round of consultations involving all relevant parties, with clear communication structures and agreed decision-making frameworks to prevent similar disagreements in future engagements.
They also emphasised the need for transparency in negotiations, stating that all agreements reached with government officials or regulatory bodies should be shared with the entire membership before any public announcements are made.