Acceptance Decision
Updated 16 October 2026
Applies to England, Scotland and Wales
© Crown copyright 2026
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cac-outcome-neu-nasuwt-liverpool-college/application-progress
Case Number: TUR1/1579(2026)
24 August 2026
CENTRAL ARBITRATION COMMITTEE
TRADE UNION AND LABOUR RELATIONS (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1992
SCHEDULE A1 - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING: RECOGNITION
DECISION ON WHETHER TO ACCEPT THE APPLICATION
The Parties:
NEU & NASUWT
and
Liverpool College
1. Introduction
1) NEU & NASUWT (the Union) submitted an application to the CAC on 1 June 2026 that it should be recognised for collective bargaining by Liverpool College (the Employer) for a bargaining unit comprising the “Teaching Staff at Liverpool College” The location of the bargaining unit was given as “Teaching Staff at Liverpool College.” The CAC gave both parties notice of receipt of the application on 1 June 2026. The Employer submitted a response to the CAC dated 8 June 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 Mr Benjimin Burgher, Panel Chair, and, as Members, Mr Alastair Kelly and Mr Morris Stemp. The Case Manager appointed to support the Panel was Medina Mia.
3) The CAC Panel has extended the acceptance period in this case. The initial period expired on 15 June 2026. The acceptance period was extended to 21 July 2026 and then again to 24 August 2026 in order to allow time for the parties to comment on the results of a membership check and for the Panel to consider those comments before arriving at a decision.
2. Issues
4) The Panel is required by paragraph 15 of Schedule A1 to the Act (the Schedule) to decide whether the Union’s application to the CAC is valid within the terms of paragraphs 5 to 9; is made in accordance with paragraphs 11 or 12; is admissible within the terms of paragraphs 33 to 42; and therefore, should be accepted.
3. The Union’s application
5) In its application the Union said that it had sent its request for recognition to the Employer on 1 May 2026. A copy of the Union’s request letter was attached to the Union’s application.
6) When asked whether the Union had made a previous application under the Schedule for statutory recognition for workers in the proposed bargaining unit or a similar unit the Union answered “No”. The Union stated that, following receipt of the request for recognition, the Employer had not proposed that Acas should be requested to assist the parties.
7) The Union stated that the total number of workers employed by the Employer was ‘Approx 185’. The Union stated that there were ‘Approx 85’ workers in the proposed bargaining unit, of whom ‘NEU – 64 members’ and ‘NASUWT – 18 members’, a total of ’82 combined’ were members of the Union.
8) In answer to the question whether the bargaining unit had been agreed with the Employer, the Union said “No”. The Union said that there was no existing recognition agreement of which it was aware which covered any workers in the bargaining unit.
9) The Union confirmed that it held a current certificate of independence. Finally, the Union stated that it had copied its application and supporting documents to the Employer on 1 June 2026. The Union said it consented to its contact details being forwarded to Acas.
4. The Employer’s response to the Union’s application
10) The Employer stated that it had received the Union’s written request for recognition on 1 May 2026. The Employer said that ‘On receipt of the letter dated 1 May 2026 the Clerk to the Governing body responded to note that the matter would be addressed to the Strategy Committee of the Governing Board. This matter was discussed and, in line with the Board’s Governing processes, is on the agenda for the next full Governors’ Meeting which will take place on the 29th June 2026.’
11) The Employer confirmed that it had not received a copy of the application form and supporting documents from the Union. The Employer stated that it had not agreed the bargaining unit with the Union. The Employer stated that it had not proposed that Acas should be requested to assist.
12) The Employer said that the total number of workers it employed was 272. The Employer said that there were 102 workers in the bargaining unit as defined in the Union’s application. The Employer said that there was no existing agreement for recognition in force covering workers in the proposed bargaining unit.
13) When asked whether it agreed with the Union’s estimate of membership in the bargaining unit the Employer answered “No”.
14) The Employer answered “No” when asked whether it was aware of any previous application under the Schedule by the Union in respect of this or a similar bargaining unit, and whether had it received any other applications in respect of any workers in the proposed bargaining unit. The Employer said that it consented to its contact details being forwarded to Acas.
5. Additional comments from the parties
15) On the 18 June 2026, the CAC invited the Union’s comments on the Employer’s response.
16) On 22 June 2026, the Union provided a response to the Employer’s comments. It disputed that the Employer’s assertion that it had not received the recognition application, stating that the application had been received. In support of this, the Union attached a copy of an email dated 1 June 2026, which it stated had been sent to the Employer.
17) The Union also disputed the Employer’s statement that it had not previously received any applications for recognition, noting that information concerning previous applications had been included in the Union’s original application email.
18) In relation to the membership figures, the Union explained that its figures for the number of teachers within the proposed bargaining unit had been taken from the ‘2024/2025 Workforce Survey’. While it acknowledged that there may be a difference between the parties’ figures and indicated that it was willing to consider this further, it maintained that the joint unions have 85 members in total.
19) Finally, the Union stated that it had not received a substantive response from the Employer regarding the recognition application. It said that, following an initial holding email from the Employer, it had not been contacted further and was therefore unaware that the application was due to be discussed at the most recent Governors’ meeting or of the Employer’s current position on the matter.
6. The membership check
20) To assist in the determination of one of the admissibility criteria specified in the Schedule, namely, whether members of the union constitute at least the required percentage (currently 10%) of the workers in the proposed bargaining unit (paragraph 36(1)), the Panel proposed an independent check of the level of union membership within the proposed 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 proposed bargaining unit, and that the Union would supply to the Case Manager a list of its paid up members within that unit (including their dates of birth). 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 dated 7 July 2026 from the Case Manager to both parties.
21) The information requested from the Employer was received by the CAC on 9 July 2026 and from the Union for NASUWT members on 8 July 2026 and for NEU members on 9 July 2026. The Panel is satisfied that this check was conducted properly and impartially and in accordance with the agreement reached with the parties.
22) The list supplied by the Employer indicated that there were 101 workers in the Union’s proposed bargaining unit. The list of members supplied by the Union contained 84 names. The number of Union members not appearing on the Employer’s list were 24. According to the Case Manager’s report, the number of Union members in the proposed bargaining unit was 60, a membership level of 59.40%.
23) A report of the result of the membership check was circulated to the Panel and the parties on 15 July 2026, and the parties were invited to comment on the results of that check by close of business on 20 July 2026.
7. Summary of the parties’ comments following the membership check
24) The Union did not comment on the membership check report.
25) The Employer did not comment on the membership check report.
8. Considerations
26) In determining whether to accept the application the Panel must decide whether the admissibility and validity provisions referred to in paragraph 4 of this decision are satisfied. The Panel has considered all the evidence submitted by the parties in reaching its decision.
27) The Panel is satisfied that the application is not rendered inadmissible by any of the provisions in paragraphs 33 to 35 and paragraphs 37 to 42 and that it was made in accordance with paragraph 11 of the Schedule. The remaining issue for the Panel to address is whether the admissibility criterion set out in paragraph 36 of the Schedule is met.
Paragraph 36
28) Under paragraph 36(1) of the Schedule an application is not admissible unless the Panel decides that members of the union constitute at least the required percentage of the workers in the proposed bargaining unit. Paragraph 171B states that “the required percentage” currently means 10%.
29) The membership check conducted by the Case Manager (described in paragraphs 20-23 above) showed that 59.40% of the workers in the proposed bargaining unit (60 out of 101 workers) were members of the Union. As stated in paragraph 21 above, the Panel is satisfied that this check was conducted properly and impartially and in accordance with the agreement reached with the parties. The Panel has therefore decided that members of the union constitute at least the required percentage of the workers in the proposed bargaining unit as required by paragraph 36(1) of the Schedule.
9. Decision
30) For the reasons given above, the Panel’s decision is that the application is accepted by the CAC.
Panel
Mr Benjimin Burgher, Panel Chair
Mr Alastair Kelly
Mr Morris Stemp
24 August 2026