Decision

Recognition Decision

Updated 22 March 2024

Applies to England, Scotland and Wales

Case Number: TUR1/1374(2023)

 21 March 2024

CENTRAL ARBITRATION COMMITTEE

TRADE UNION AND LABOUR RELATIONS (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1992

SCHEDULE A1 - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING: RECOGNITION

DECLARATION OF RECOGNITION WITHOUT A BALLOT

The Parties: 

Prospect

and

Gloucestershire Airport Limited

1. Introduction

1)         Prospect (the Union) submitted an application to the CAC dated 27 October 2023 that it should be recognised for collective bargaining purposes by Gloucestershire Airport Limited (the Employer) in respect of a bargaining unit comprising “Employees in the airport’s Air Traffic Control (ATC) unit.” The location of the bargaining unit was given as “Gloucestershire Airport.” The application was received by the CAC on 27 October 2023 and the CAC gave both parties notice of receipt of the application by a letter of the same date. The Employer submitted a response to the CAC dated 2 November 2023 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 Chairman established a Panel to deal with the case. The Panel consisted of Mr Stuart Robertson, Panel Chair, and, as Members, Mr Mustafa Faruqi and Mr Steve Gillan. The Case Manager appointed to support the Panel was Joanne Curtis.

3)         By its written decision dated 27 November 2023 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. On 1 March 2024 the parties notified the CAC that they had reached an agreement as to the appropriate bargaining unit and this was “Air Traffic Control Assistant (ATCA), Air Traffic Control Officer (ATCO), Air Traffic Controller (ATC), Air Traffic Services Assistant (ATSA), Air Traffic Engineer (ATE) and Deputy Head of Air Traffic Control (DHAT)”. As the bargaining unit differed to that originally proposed by the Union in its application the Panel was required to decide whether the Union’s application was invalid. In a decision dated 13 March 2024 the Panel decided that the application was not invalid.

2. Issues

4)         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 unions, 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.

5)   Paragraph 22(5) provides that “membership evidence” for these purposes 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.

3. The Union’s claim to majority membership and submission that it should be recognised without a ballot

6)         In a letter dated 13 March 2024 the Union was asked by the CAC whether it claimed majority membership within the bargaining unit and, if so, whether it submitted that it should be granted recognition without a ballot. The Union, in a letter dated 13 March 2024, stated “the Union claims that it has majority membership within the bargaining unit – as evidenced by the recent CAC membership check. We ask the CAC to declare that the Union is recognised without a ballot.” In respect of the conditions requiring a ballot, the Union further submitted:

“a) If the CAC is satisfied that a ballot should be held in the interests of good industrial relations, we will respond to any evidence that the Employer submits on this point.

b) If the CAC has evidence, which it considers credible, from a significant number of union members in the bargaining unit that they do not want the union to conduct collective bargaining on their behalf, we note that the Employer believes it is likely that a majority of the workers in the bargaining unit favour recognition – as evidenced in its response recorded in paragraph 11 (c) of the Panel’s decision on the bargaining unit: ‘Unknown but as most are in the Union this would be a presumption.’

c) Membership evidence regarding the circumstances in which workers joined the union or length of membership leads to doubts whether a significant number of union members in the bargaining unit want the union to conduct collective bargaining on their behalf, as reported in paragraph 9 (c) of the Panel’s decision on the bargaining unit: the Union’s original Application was submitted at the request of the Union’s members, and they have been kept informed of progress. At the time of the Application – 27 October 2023 – our membership was seven. It is submitted that the subsequent growth is evidence of the favourable view towards recognition of the majority of the workers in the bargaining unit. I can provide further information on this point should it be required.”

4. Summary of the Employer’s response to the Union’s claim that it should be recognised without a ballot

7)         On 14 March 2024 the CAC copied the Union’s letter of 13 March 2024 to the Employer and invited the Employer to make submissions in relation to the Union’s claim that it had majority membership within the bargaining unit and in relation to the three qualifying conditions specified in paragraph 22(4) of the Schedule.

8)         In its response dated 14 March 2024 the Employer stated, “We have no further comment to make at this juncture, we are still of the belief as previously stated that the majority of the proposed bargaining unit are union members and of course welcome the CAC decision as to what they deem are the next steps regarding this process ballot or not.”

5. Considerations

9)         The Schedule requires the Panel to consider whether it is satisfied that a majority of the workers constituting the bargaining unit are members of the Union.  If the Panel is satisfied that a majority of the workers constituting the bargaining unit are members of the Union, it must declare the Union to be recognised as entitled to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of the workers constituting the bargaining unit unless it decides that any of the three qualifying conditions set out in paragraph 22(4) is fulfilled.  If the Panel considers that any of those specific conditions is fulfilled, it must give notice to the parties that it intends to arrange for the holding of a secret ballot. 

10)       The most recent membership and support check conducted on 11 March 2024 had shown the Employer listing a total of 13 workers in the bargaining unit. As stated in the validity decision dated 13 March 2024, the Union had provided a list of 9 union members. The number of union members in the proposed bargaining unit was 9, a membership level of 69.23%.  Accordingly, the Panel accepts that the majority of workers in the bargaining unit are members of the Union.

11)       The Panel has carefully considered the submissions of both parties and all the evidence in reaching its decision as to whether any of the qualifying conditions laid down in paragraph 22(4) of the Schedule is fulfilled.

Paragraph 22(4) (a)

12)       The first condition is that the Panel is satisfied that a ballot should be held in the interests of good industrial relations. In this case neither party has submitted evidence that holding a secret ballot would be in the interests of good industrial relations.  The Panel is therefore satisfied that this condition does not apply.

Paragraph 22(4) (b)

13)       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 Union to conduct collective bargaining on their behalf. The CAC has no such evidence, and this condition does not apply.

Paragraph 22(4) (c)

14)       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 Union to conduct collective bargaining on their behalf.  No such evidence has been produced, and this condition does not apply.

6. Declaration of recognition

15)       The Panel is satisfied in accordance with paragraph 22(1)(b) of the Schedule that a 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 met. 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 “Air Traffic Control Assistant (ATCA), Air Traffic Control Officer (ATCO), Air Traffic Controller (ATC), Air Traffic Services Assistant (ATSA), Air Traffic Engineer (ATE) and Deputy Head of Air Traffic Control (DHAT).”

Panel

Mr Stuart Robertson, Panel Chair

Mr Mustafa Faruqi

Mr Steve Gillan.

21 March 2024