Skip to main content
Decision

Form of Ballot Decision

Updated 29 September 2026

Applies to England, Scotland and Wales

Case Number: TUR1/1566(2026)

24 September 2026

CENTRAL ARBITRATION COMMITTEE

TRADE UNION AND LABOUR RELATIONS (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1992

SCHEDULE A1 - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING: RECOGNITION

DECISION ON FORM OF BALLOT

The Parties:

GMB

and

Astley Signs

1. Introduction

1)         GMB (the Union) submitted an application to the CAC on 1 May 2026 that it should be recognised for collective bargaining by Astley Signs Ltd (the Employer) for a bargaining unit comprising of “ Production operators, Assembly workers, Metal workers, Welders, Vinylist, Fixers, Painters, CNC operators, Printers, Drivers, Dispatchers & Labourers at Astley Signs, Redforrest House, Queen Court North, Earlsway Team Valley, NE11 0BP ”. The CAC gave both parties notice of receipt of the application on 1 May  2026. The Employer submitted a response to the CAC dated 8 May 2026 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 of Ms Naeema Choudry, Panel Chair, and, as Members, Mr Joe Corcos and Mr Christopher Burrows. The Case Manager appointed to support the Panel was Lauren Hyatt.

3)         By a decision dated 25 June 2026 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. No agreement was reached on the appropriate bargaining unit and a hearing to assist the Panel to determine the issue was held on 6 August 2026. Following the hearing the Panel decided that the appropriate bargaining unit was that proposed by the Union.

2. Issues

4)         On 2 September 2026, the Panel, satisfied that a majority of the workers constituting the bargaining unit were not 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 in which the workers constituting the bargaining unit would be asked whether they wanted the Union to conduct collective bargaining on their behalf. 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), before arranging a secret ballot.

5)         The notification period under paragraph 24(5) of the Schedule ended on 16 September 2026. The CAC was not notified by both the parties that they did not want the ballot to be held, as per paragraph 24(2). The parties were also asked for their views on the form the ballot should take.

3. Employer’s submissions on the form of ballot

6)         By an email to the Case Manager dated 8 September 2026 the Employer submitted that a postal ballot would be appropriate. It stated that its employees are a combination of site-based and remote workers, and due to this it may be difficult to ensure that all those eligible have an equal and convenient opportunity to participate in a workplace ballot. It also stated that a postal ballot would provide a practical and accessible method for employees to participate, regardless of whether they are working on site or remotely, or away from their usual place of work.  

4. Union’s submissions on the form of ballot

7)         By an e-mail to the Case Manager dated 9 September 2026 the Union submitted that a combination ballot would be appropriate. It stated that there are remote workers withing the agreed bargaining unit and they would not have access to a workplace balloting process. It also stated that individuals who are taking annual leave or are on sickness absence would require a postal vote. It also suggested that a further option, for those individuals who are working remotely and possibly on holiday or sick leave, to have the opportunity of a vote to accept or reject via a phone process; if the Company agreed to allow the CAC the authority to contact these individuals only.

5. Considerations

8)         When determining the form of the ballot (workplace, postal or a combination of the two methods), the CAC must take into account the following considerations specified in paragraphs 25(5) and (6) of the Schedule:

(a) the likelihood of the ballot being affected by unfairness or malpractice if it were conducted at a workplace;

(b) costs and practicality;

(c) such other matters as the CAC considers appropriate.

9)         The parties have put forward two different types of ballots for the Panel to consider. The Employer has argued for a postal ballot whereas the Union has submitted that the ballot should be a combination ballot or a third proposal by telephone in relation to remote workers or those who are sick or on holiday.

10)       The Panel, having carefully considered the parties’ submissions, has determined that, on grounds of cost and practicality, the appropriate form of ballot in the circumstances is a postal ballot. The Panel is of the view that a postal ballot would be less expensive and administratively simpler to arrange as there are workers in the agreed bargaining unit that work remotely, or may be away from their usual place of work whether through sickness, holiday or otherwise.

6. Decision

11)       The decision of the Panel is that the ballot be a postal ballot.

12)       The name of the Qualified Independent Person appointed to conduct the ballot will be notified to the parties as will the period within which the ballot is to be held.

Panel

Ms Naeema Choudry, Panel Chair

Mr Joe Corcos

Mr Christopher Burrows

24 September 2026