Decision

Acceptance Decision

Updated 7 March 2024

Applies to England, Scotland and Wales

Case Number: TUR5/001(2023)

14 December 2023

CENTRAL ARBITRATION COMMITTEE

TRADE UNION AND LABOUR RELATIONS (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1992

SCHEDULE A1 - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING: DERECOGNITION WHERE RECOGNITION AUTOMATIC

DECISION ON WHETHER TO ACCEPT THE APPLICATION

The Parties:

Noble Foods

and

Unite the Union

1. Introduction

1)         Noble Foods (the Employer) submitted an application to the CAC dated 20 November 2023 that a secret ballot be held to determine whether the bargaining arrangements with Unite the Union (the Union) should be ended where recognition without a ballot had previously been declared by the CAC on 21 October 2020. The Union is recognised by the Employer as entitled to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of a bargaining unit comprising “all factory operatives working in Butchery, Hob, EV, Matt Chill, Packing, Tray Wash, Despatch, Line Leaders, Team Leaders, Hygiene and Technical.” The location of the bargaining unit is “Noble Foods Limited, Corringham Road, Gainsborough, Lincolnshire, DN21 1QH.” The application was received by the CAC on 21 November 2023 and the CAC gave both parties notice of receipt of the application by a letter of the same date. The Union submitted a response to the CAC dated 29 November 2023 which was copied to the Employer.

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 case. The Panel consisted of Mr Rohan Pirani, Panel Chair, and, as Members, Mrs Susan Jordan and Mr Paul Noon. The Case Manager appointed to support the Panel was Joanne Curtis.

3)         The CAC Panel has extended the acceptance period in this case. The initial period expired on 5 December 2023. The acceptance period was extended until 31 December 2023 in order to allow time for a membership check to take place, for the parties to comment on the subsequent report, and for the Panel to consider the comments before arriving at a decision.

2. Issues

4)         The Panel is required by paragraph 132 of Schedule A1 to the Act (the Schedule) to decide whether the Employer’s request to the Union to agree to end the bargaining arrangements is valid within the terms of paragraph 127, and whether the Employer’s application is admissible within the terms of paragraphs 129 to 131; and therefore, should be accepted.

3. Summary of the Employer’s application

5)         In its application to the CAC the Employer stated that the CAC had issued a declaration that the Union was recognised as entitled to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of the bargaining unit on 21 October 2020. The Employer attached a copy of this declaration to its application. The Employer said that there was in place a method by which the parties conducted collective bargaining. The Employer attached a copy of the method of collective bargaining to its application.

6)         The Employer said it wrote to the Union dated 23 October 2023 to request derecognition and that copies were also sent by post and received by the Union on 26 October 2023. A copy of the letter dated 23 October 2023 was attached to the Employer’s application. The Employer said it had received no response from the Union.

7)         The Employer said there were 199 workers in the bargaining unit. When asked what evidence existed to establish that fewer than half of the workers constituting the bargaining unit were members of the Union, the Employer said that a ballot of Union members had taken place on 12 May 2023. The Employer went on to say that it had been informed by the Regional Officer for the Union that there were only 36 Union members in the bargaining unit at that time. The Employer said it believed that since the ballot this number had reduced further.

8)         The Employer confirmed that there had not been a previous application under either Part IV or Part V of Schedule A1 in respect of the same bargaining unit.

4. Summary of the Union’s response to the Employer’s application

9)         The Union said that following the CAC’s declaration of recognition there was a method of bargaining put in place and that this method of bargaining was still being pursued. The Union said that it received the Employer’s written request to end the collective bargaining arrangements by  email dated 23 October 2023. The Union said that it did not respond to the request.

10)       The Union said that it did not disagree with the Employer’s statement that fewer than half the workers in the bargaining unit were Union members. When asked if the Union considered that a majority of workers in the bargaining unit would be likely to favour an end to the bargaining arrangements the Union said that it had no “counter position.” The Union went on to say that membership had drifted following the loss of a key activist. The Union said that despite its efforts the wider workforce had not embraced Union membership.

11)       The Union said that it was not aware of any previous application either under Part IV or Part V of Schedule A1 by either the Employer or the workers for an end to the bargaining arrangements. The Union confirmed that it had received a copy of the Employer’s application form to the CAC and the supporting documents on 22 November 2023.

5. The membership and support check

12)       To assist the determination of one of the admissibility criteria specified in the Schedule, namely, whether fewer than half of the workers constituting the bargaining unit are members of the union (paragraph 131(1)), the Panel proposed an independent check of the level of union membership within the bargaining unit. It was agreed with the parties that the Employer would supply to the Case Manager a list of the names, dates of birth and job titles of workers within the bargaining unit, and that the Union would supply to the Case Manager a list of its paid-up members within that unit including their full names, dates of birth and job roles (where available). It was explicitly agreed with both parties that, to preserve confidentiality, the respective lists would not be copied to the other party. These arrangements were confirmed in a letter dated 4 December 2023 from the Case Manager to both parties.

13)       The information requested from the Union was received by the CAC on 5 December 2023 and from the Employer on 4 December 2023. The Panel is satisfied that the checks were conducted properly and impartially and in accordance with the agreement reached with the parties.

14)       The list supplied by the Employer indicated that there were 206 workers in the Union’s proposed bargaining unit.

15)       The list of members supplied by the Union contained 28 names. According to the Case Manager’s report, the number of Union members in the proposed bargaining unit was 25, a membership level of 12.14%.

16)       A report of the result of the membership and support check was circulated to the Panel and the parties on 5 December 2023 and the parties were invited to comment on the results of that check by noon on 11 December 2023. Neither the Employer nor the Union submitted any comments.

6. Considerations

17)       In determining whether to accept the application the Panel must decide whether the admissibility and validity provisions referred to in paragraph 4 above are satisfied.  The Panel has considered carefully the submissions of both parties and all the evidence in reaching its decision. 

18)       The Panel is satisfied that the Employer made a valid request to the Union within the terms of paragraph 127 of the Schedule.

19)       The Panel is further satisfied that the application is not rendered inadmissible by any of the provisions in paragraphs 129-130 of the Schedule. The remaining issue for the Panel to decide is whether the admissibility criteria contained in paragraph 131 is met.

Paragraph 131

20)       Under paragraph 131 of the Schedule an application is not admissible unless the Panel is satisfied that fewer than half of the workers constituting the bargaining unit are members of the union.

21)    The membership check conducted by the Case Manager (described in paragraphs 12 to 16 above) showed that 12.14% of the workers in the bargaining unit were members of the Union. As stated in paragraph 13 above, the Panel is satisfied that this check was conducted properly and impartially and in accordance with the agreement reached with the parties.

22)       For the reasons set out in paragraph 15 above the Panel has decided that fewer than half the workers constituting the bargaining unit are members of the union as required by paragraph 31 of the Schedule.

7. Decision

23)       For the reasons given in paragraphs 17-22 above, the Panel’s decision is that the application is accepted by the CAC.

Panel

Mr Rohan Pirani, Panel Chair

Mrs Susan Jordan

Mr Paul Noon.

14 December 2023