Decision

Recognition Decision

Updated 17 November 2020

Case Number: TUR1/1156(2020)

17 November 2020

CENTRAL ARBITRATION COMMITTEE

TRADE UNION AND LABOUR RELATIONS (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1992

SCHEDULE A1 - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING: RECOGNITION DECLARATION OF RECOGNITION WITHOUT A BALLOT

The Parties:

National Union of Journalists

and

Newsquest Media Group Limited

1. Introduction

1) The National Union of Journalists (the Union) submitted an application to the CAC on 4 February 2020 that it should be recognised for collective bargaining by Newsquest Media Group Limited (the Employer) for a bargaining unit comprising “all Local Democracy Reporters currently working for Newsquest Media Group Limited under the BBC-funded Local Democracy Reporting Service”. The location of the bargaining Unit was given as “Multiple locations within the UK”. The CAC gave both parties notice of receipt of the application on 5 February 2020. The Employer submitted a response to the CAC dated 11 February 2020 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 case. The Panel consisted Mr Rohan Pirani, Panel Chair, and, as Members, Mr Mike Cann and Mr Paul Noon OBE. Mr Cann was subsequently replaced by Mr Rob Lummis. The Case Manager appointed to support the Panel was Nigel Cookson.

3) By a decision dated 29 June 2020 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. As no agreement had been reached, the parties were informed on 28 July 2020 that, in the absence of an application to extend the negotiation period, or agreement as to the appropriate bargaining unit, the Panel was required to determine whether the Union’s proposed bargaining unit was appropriate and, if it decided that it was not appropriate, to decide a bargaining unit which was appropriate. The parties were notified that ordinarily (but not universally) a public hearing was held to assist the Panel to determine the matter. However at present, owing to the Covid-19 pandemic, the CAC was not conducting hearings face to face but would, wherever possible, reach its decision based on the parties’ written submissions. Additional written submissions may be sought by the Panel as part of the Panel’s decision-making process. If the Panel concluded that it could not reach its decision fairly without some form of hearing, virtual or otherwise, the parties would be informed accordingly. At that stage the parties would be asked for submissions about the form any such hearing would take.

4) The parties’ submissions on the appropriate bargaining unit were received and cross copied with the parties being given the opportunity of lodging submissions in reply. The Employer then sought an extension of time in which to lodge its submissions in reply which was granted by the Panel.

5) Following receipt of the Employer’s further submissions, the Union confirming that it had nothing further to add to its earlier statement of case, the Panel met by remote means to consider the papers received. The Panel then decided that, subject to the parties’ views to the contrary, it proposed to hold a video hearing to assist it with the determination of the appropriate bargaining unit in this matter. The parties were informed that hearing would afford them the opportunity of expanding on their written submissions as well as commenting on those of the other party and it will also allow the Panel to put any questions it may have to the parties.

6) On 18 September 2002 the parties were notified that a virtual hearing would take place on 20 October 2020. On the morning of 20 October 2020, prior to the hearing starting, the Employer emailed the CAC stating that it was now in a position to agree the bargaining unit proposed by the Union, namely, “All Local Democracy Reporters currently working for the Newsquest Media Group Limited under the BBC-funded Local Democracy Reporting Service.”

7) Once the bargaining unit has been agreed the next stage of the procedure requires the Panel to decide whether a majority of the workers in the bargaining unit are members of the Union. Paragraph 22 of Schedule A1 to the Act (the Schedule) provides that if the CAC is satisfied that a majority of the workers constituting the bargaining unit are members of the union, it must issue a declaration of recognition under paragraph 22(2) unless any of the three qualifying conditions specified in paragraph 22(4) applies. Paragraph 22(3) requires the CAC to hold a ballot even where it has found that a majority of workers constituting the bargaining unit are members of the union if any of these qualifying conditions is fulfilled. The three qualifying conditions are:

(i) the CAC is satisfied that a ballot should be held in the interests of good industrial relations;

(ii) the CAC has evidence, which it considers to be credible, from a significant number of the union members within the bargaining unit that they do not want the union (or unions) to conduct collective bargaining on their behalf;

(iii) membership evidence is produced which leads the CAC to conclude that there are doubts whether a significant number of the union members within the bargaining unit want the union (or unions) to conduct collective bargaining on their behalf. Paragraph 22(5) states that “membership evidence” is (a) evidence about the circumstances in which union members became members, or (b) evidence about the length of time for which union members have been members, in a case where the CAC is satisfied that such evidence should be taken into account.

8) A short meeting by virtual means was held in place of the hearing to determine the appropriate bargaining unit in which the Union was asked whether it was claiming majority membership within the now agreed bargaining unit and on that basis, whether it was seeking recognition without the need for a secret ballot. The Union stated its belief that the majority of workers in the proposed bargaining unit were in membership. It was agreed that the next course of action would be that the CAC would write to the Employer inviting any submissions it wished to make on the Union’s claim to majority membership.

9) On 27 October 2020 the Employer emailed stating that it did not concede the Union’s claim to majority membership having considered that the position may well have changed since it was last considered in February 2020. This was a matter for the CAC Panel to determine and the Employer requested that the CAC considered this matter like it did in February 2020 by conducting a further membership check of the Local Democracy Reporters in the bargaining unit to decide whether a majority of the workers in the bargaining unit were members of the Union.

2. The membership check

10) To assist in deciding whether to arrange for a secret ballot under the Schedule, the Panel proposed an independent check of the level of union membership in the bargaining unit. The information from the Union was received by the CAC on 28 October 2020 and from the Employer on 27 October 2020. It was explicitly agreed with both parties that, to preserve confidentiality, the respective lists would not be copied to the other party and that agreement was confirmed in a letter from the Case Manager to both parties dated 27 October 2020.

11) A check was undertaken by comparing the names on the Union’s membership list with the list of workers in the bargaining unit supplied by the Employer. According to the Case Manager’s report, the number of union members in the bargaining unit was 20, a membership level of 51.28%. A report of the result of the membership check was circulated to the Panel and the parties on 28 October 2020 and the Employer’s submissions on the qualifying conditions set out in paragraph 22(4) of the Schedule were invited. The Panel is satisfied that this check was conducted properly and impartially and in accordance with the agreement reached with the parties.

12) In an email dated 3 November 2020 the Employer stated that it had no further submissions to make on the qualifying conditions.

3. Considerations

13) The Act requires the Panel to consider whether it is satisfied that the majority of the workers constituting the bargaining unit are members of the Union. If the Panel is satisfied that the majority of the workers constituting the bargaining unit are members of the Union, it must then decide if any of the three conditions in paragraph 22(4) is fulfilled. If the Panel considers that any of them is fulfilled it must give notice to the parties that it intends to arrange for the holding of a secret ballot.

14) The membership check issued by the Case Manager on 14 August 2020, described above, showed that 20 (51.28%) of the 39 workers in the bargaining unit were members of the Union. In the absence of evidence to the contrary the Panel is satisfied that the majority of workers in the bargaining unit are members of the Union.

15) The Panel has considered carefully whether any of the qualifying conditions set out in paragraph 22(4) of the Schedule is fulfilled.

16) The first condition is that the Panel is satisfied that a ballot should be held in the interests of good industrial relations. The Panel has not received any evidence that a ballot should be held in the interests of good industrial relations and is not satisfied that this condition is fulfilled.

17) The second condition is that the CAC has evidence, which it considers to be credible, from a significant number of the union members within the bargaining unit that they do not want the unions to conduct collective bargaining on their behalf. The Panel has no such evidence and the Panel has therefore concluded that this condition does not apply.

18) The third condition is that membership evidence is produced which leads the CAC to conclude that there are doubts whether a significant number of the union members within the bargaining unit want the unions to conduct collective bargaining on their behalf. No such evidence has been produced, and the Panel has therefore concluded that this condition does not apply.

4. Declaration of recognition

19) The Panel is satisfied in accordance with paragraph 22(1)(b) of the Schedule that the majority of the workers constituting the bargaining unit are members of the Union. The Panel is satisfied that none of the conditions in paragraph 22(4) of the Schedule is fulfilled. Pursuant to paragraph 22(2) of the Schedule, the CAC must therefore issue a declaration that the Union is recognised as entitled to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of the workers constituting the bargaining unit. The CAC accordingly declares that the Union is recognised by the Employer as entitled to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of the bargaining unit comprising “All Local Democracy Reporters currently working for the Newsquest Media Group Limited under the BBC-funded Local Democracy Reporting Service”.

Panel

Mr Rohan Pirani, Panel Chair

Mr Rob Lummis

Mr Paul Noon OBE

17 November 2020