Decision

Recognition Decision

Updated 20 April 2026

Applies to England, Scotland and Wales

Case Number: TUR1/1501(2025)

14 April 2026

CENTRAL ARBITRATION COMMITTEE

TRADE UNION AND LABOUR RELATIONS (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1992

SCHEDULE A1 - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING: RECOGNITION

DECLARATION OF RECOGNITION WITHOUT A BALLOT

The Parties:

NEU & NASUWT

and

Inspire Academy Movement Trust

1. Introduction

1)         NEU & NASUWT (the Unions) submitted an application to the CAC on 28 October 2025 that they should be recognised for collective bargaining by Inspire Academy Movement Trust (the Employer) for a bargaining unit comprising “Teaching staff (including ECTs but excluding visiting teachers) employed by Inspire Academy Movement Trust.” The location of the bargaining unit was given as “Seal Church of England Primary School, Zambra Way, Seal, Kent, TN15 0DJ. Maypole Primary School, Franklin Road, Dartford, DA2 7UZ. Four Elms Primary School, Bough Beech Road, Four Elms, Kent, TN8 6NE. Rusthall St Paul’s Church of England Primary School, High St, Royal Tunbridge Wells, Tunbridge Wells TN4 8RZ.” The CAC gave all parties notice of receipt of the application on 28 October 2025. The Employer submitted a response to the CAC dated 6 November 2025 which was copied to the Unions.

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 Professor Alan Bogg, Panel Chair, and, as Members, Mr Mustafa Faruqi and Mr Paul Noon OBE. The Case Manager appointed to support the Panel was Joanne Curtis.

3)         By a decision dated 20 November 2025 the Panel accepted the Unions’ application. Following this decision, the parties reached agreement on the appropriate bargaining unit. The agreed bargaining unit was described as “Teaching staff (including ECTs and headteachers but excluding the Chief Executive Officer, Executive Headteacher and visiting teachers) employed by Inspire Academy Movement Trust.” As the bargaining unit differed to that originally proposed by the Unions in their application the Panel was required to decide whether the Unions’ application was invalid. In a decision dated 1 April 2026 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 unions 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 Unions’ claim to majority membership and submission that they should be recognised without a ballot

6)         In a letter dated 1 April 2026 the Unions were asked by the CAC whether they claimed majority membership within the bargaining unit and, if so, whether they submitted that they should be granted recognition without a ballot. The Unions, in a letter dated 1 April 2026, stated “the Unions do claim that we have majority membership within the bargaining unit and that recognition should therefore be granted without a ballot.”

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

7)         On 2 April 2026 the CAC copied the Unions’ letter of 1 April 2026 to the Employer and invited the Employer to make submissions in relation to the Unions’ claim that they had majority membership within the bargaining unit and in relation to the three qualifying conditions specified in paragraph 22(4) of the Schedule. The Employer did not respond.

5. Considerations

8)         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 Unions. If the Panel is satisfied that a majority of the workers constituting the bargaining unit are members of the Unions, it must declare the Unions 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. 

9)         The membership and support check had shown that the number of union members in the agreed bargaining unit was 43, a membership level of 71.67%. Accordingly, the Panel accepts that the majority of workers in the bargaining unit are members of the Unions.

10)       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)

11)       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)

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

Paragraph 22(4) (c)

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

6. Declaration of recognition

14)       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 Unions. 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 Unions are recognised as entitled to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of the workers constituting the bargaining unit. The CAC accordingly declares that the Unions are recognised by the Employer as entitled to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of the bargaining unit comprising “Teaching staff (including ECTs and headteachers but excluding the Chief Executive Officer, Executive Headteacher and visiting teachers) employed by Inspire Academy Movement Trust.”

Panel

Professor Alan Bogg, Panel Chair

Mr Mustafa Faruqi

Mr Paul Noon OBE

14 April 2026