Recognition Decision
Updated 18 June 2019
Case Number: TUR1/1068(2018)
18 June 2019
CENTRAL ARBITRATION COMMITTEE
TRADE UNION AND LABOUR RELATIONS (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1992
SCHEDULE A1 - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING: RECOGNITION
DECLARATION THAT THE UNION IS NOT ENTITLED TO BE RECOGNISED
The Parties:
BECTU a sector of Prospect
and
The Corporation of the Hall of Arts and Sciences
1. Introduction
1) BECTU, a sector of Prospect (the Union), submitted an application to the CAC on 4 September 2018 that it should be recognised for collective bargaining by The Corporation of the Hall of Arts and Sciences (the Employer) in respect of a proposed bargaining unit comprising the “All staff employed by the Corporation of the Hall of Arts and Sciences (commonly known as the Royal Albert Hall) at the Royal Albert Hall below Heads of Department and senior executive grades in the following areas: Box Office, Facilities and Building Services, Front of House, Security, Show: Technical Planning (excluding Venue and Event Planning) and Tours”. The CAC gave both parties notice of receipt of the application on 5 September 2018. The Employer submitted a response to the CAC dated 25 September 2018 which was copied to the Union.
2) In accordance with section 263 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (the Act), the CAC Chair established a Panel to deal with the application. The Panel consisted of Mr. Charles Wynn-Evans, Panel Chair, and, as Members, Mr. Mike Cann and Mr. Michael Leahy OBE. Following Mr Leahy’s retirement from the CAC, Mr Gerry Veart was appointed to sit in his stead. The Case Manager appointed to support the Panel was Nigel Cookson.
3) By a decision dated 12 December 2018 the Panel accepted the Union’s application. The Parties then entered a period of negotiation in an attempt to reach agreement on the appropriate bargaining unit. The appropriate period was initially due to end on 14 January 2019 but this period was extended, at the request of the Employer and with the agreement of the Union, to enable discussions with assistance from Acas to take place. The period was further extended to 15 February 2019 to allow the parties to conclude their agreement as to the appropriate bargaining unit. In a letter to the Case Manager dated 14 February 2019 the Employer stated that the parties had reached agreement that the appropriate bargaining unit was as follows:
“All staff employed by the Corporation of the Hall of Arts and Sciences (commonly known as the Royal Albert Hall) at the Royal Albert Hall below Heads of Department and senior executive grades in the following areas: Box Office, Facilities and Building Services, Front of House, Security, Tours and Production and Technical”.
4) The difference between the proposed bargaining unit and the agreed bargaining unit was the inclusion of Event Managers and Casual Event Managers who, at the date of the agreement, totalled 13 employees. In a letter to the CAC dated 15 February 2019 the Union confirmed that agreement had been reached and that the agreed bargaining unit was that as set out above.
5) As the agreed bargaining unit differed from that proposed by the Union in its application, the Panel was required by paragraph 20 of Schedule A1 to the Act (the Schedule) to decide whether the Union’s application was valid or invalid within the terms of paragraphs 43 to 50 of the Schedule. By a decision dated 4 March 2019 the Panel determined that the application was valid for the purposes of paragraph 20 and that the CAC would therefore proceed with the application.
6) On 4 March 2019 the Panel, not being satisfied that a majority of the workers constituting the agreed bargaining unit were members of the Union, gave notice in accordance with paragraph 23(2) of the Schedule that it intended to arrange for the holding of a secret ballot. The Panel also advised the parties that it would wait until the end of the notification period of ten working days, as specified in paragraph 24(5) and 24(6), before arranging a secret ballot. The parties were also asked for their views on the form the ballot should take.
7) The notification period under paragraph 24(5) and 24(6) of the Schedule ended on 17 March 2019. The CAC was not notified by the Union or by both parties jointly that they did not want the ballot to be held, as per paragraph 24(2). The Panel, having considered the parties’ views decided that a postal ballot should take place. This decision was made in accordance with paragraph 25(4) of the Schedule and the parties were informed accordingly.
2. The Ballot
8) Kanto Elect was appointed as QIP on 13 May 2019 to conduct the ballot and the parties were notified accordingly. The postal ballot papers were despatched on 28 May 2019 to be returned by no later than noon on 11 June 2019, the day that the ballot closed.
9) The QIP reported to the CAC on 11 June 2019 that, of 448 workers eligible to vote, 242 ballot papers had been returned and one ballot paper was found to be invalid. One hundred and eight (108) workers, that is 44.8% of those voting, voted to support the proposal that the Union be recognised for the purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer. One hundred and thirty-three (133) workers, that is 55.2% of those voting, voted to reject the proposal. The number of votes supporting the proposal as a percentage of the bargaining unit was 24.1%.
10) The CAC informed the Employer and the Union on 13 June 2019 of the result of the ballot in accordance with paragraph 29(2) of the Schedule.
3. Declaration that the Union is not entitled to be recognised
11) The ballot establishes that recognition of the Union is not supported by a majority of the workers voting and so, in accordance with paragraph 29(4) of the Schedule, the CAC declares that the Union is not recognised as entitled to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of the bargaining unit.
Panel
Mr Charles Wynn-Evans, Panel Chair
Mr Mike Cann
Mr Gerry Veart
18 June 2019