Decision

Recognition Decision

Updated 11 May 2026

Applies to England, Scotland and Wales

Case Number: TUR1/1512(2025)

11 May 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:

National Union of Journalists (NUJ)

and

Politico

1. Introduction

1)         National Union of Journalists (NUJ) (the Union) submitted an application to the CAC dated 17 November 2025 that it should be recognised for collective bargaining purposes by Politico (the Employer) for a bargaining unit comprising “All editorial staff with a UK contract, ultimately reporting to the Editor in Chief and work at St Vincent House 30 Orange Street, London WC2H 7HH. For avoidance of doubt, our proposed bargaining unit excludes UK Policy Editor, UK Deputy Editor, Executive Editor, Head of Audio, Senior Executive Editor, Managing Editor, Europe and Senior Finance Editor. The remaining editorial staff, which we believe to be made up of 34 roles, form our proposed bargaining unit.” The location of the bargaining unit was given as St Vincent House 30 Orange Street, London WC2H 7HH United Kingdom.

2)         The application was received by the CAC on 17 November 2025, and the CAC gave both parties notice of receipt of the application on 18 November 2025. The Employer submitted a response to the CAC dated 24 November 2025 which was copied to the Union.

3)         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 Andrew James, Panel Chair, and, as Members, Mrs Susan Jordan and Mr Nicholas Childs. The Case Manager appointed to support the Panel was Joanne Curtis.

4)          By a decision dated 5 January 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. As no agreement was reached, the parties were invited to supply the Panel with, and to exchange, written submissions relating to the question of the determination of the appropriate bargaining unit. A bargaining unit hearing was arranged for 26 February 2026 but could not go ahead due to one of the parties’ counsel being severely unwell. The hearing was rearranged and was held by virtual means on 20 April 2026.

5)         In a decision dated 27 April 2026 the Panel said that the appropriate bargaining unit was: “All editorial staff with a UK contract, ultimately reporting to the Editor in Chief and work at St Vincent House 30 Orange Street, London WC2H 7HH. For avoidance of doubt, this excludes UK Policy Editor, UK Deputy Editor, UK Executive Editor, Executive Editor and Head of Audio, Senior Executive Editor, Managing Editor, Europe and Senior Finance Editor.” The Panel went on to say that in effect, the bargaining unit consisted of all employees up to and including those in first line manager roles but excluding those in roles above that management level. The Panel further explained that clarification during the application process and hearing had not materially altered the bargaining unit that the union was attempting to define.

6)         The Schedule provides that where 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 three qualifying conditions in paragraph 22(4) applies. Paragraph 22(3) requires the CAC to hold a ballot even where it has found there is a majority of union members in the bargaining unit if any of these conditions is fulfilled. The qualifying conditions are set out in paragraph 22(4). They are:

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

(b) a significant number of the union members within the bargaining unit inform the CAC that they do not want the unions to conduct collective bargaining on their behalf;

(c) 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.

2. Unions’ submissions on the issue of majority membership

7)         On 27 April 2026 the Union was asked whether it claimed that it had majority membership within the bargaining unit and therefore submitted that it should be granted recognition without a ballot. The Union, in a letter dated 28 April 2026, said “we believe we hold majority membership within the bargaining unit and therefore submit that the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) should be granted recognition without a ballot.”

3. Employer’s submissions on the issue of majority membership

8)         On 28 April 2026 the Union’s letter was copied to the Employer and its submissions were invited on the Union’s claim to majority membership and on the paragraph 22 qualifying conditions as set out above. The Employer did not respond.

4. Considerations

9)         The Panel is satisfied that the Union has majority membership in the bargaining unit. The Union has 27 members in a bargaining unit comprising of 38 workers this equates to 71.05% of the bargaining unit. In circumstances where the majority of the workers in the bargaining unit are members of the Union, the Schedule requires the Panel to declare the Union recognised unless it is satisfied that one or more of the qualifying conditions are met. Indeed, it states that the Panel ‘must’ declare the Union to be recognised unless we find that one or more of the qualifying conditions set out in paragraph 6 above are met.

10)       The Panel has given thorough consideration to each of the qualifying conditions in paragraph 22(4).

Condition 22(4)(a)

11)       The Panel is not persuaded that a ballot should be held in the interests of good industrial relations. The Employer has not provided any evidence to show how industrial relations would be impacted were a ballot not to take place.

Condition 22(4)(b)

12)       The Panel is not satisfied that this condition has been met. A significant number of union members within the bargaining unit have not informed the CAC that they do not want the Union to conduct collective bargaining on their behalf.     

Condition 22(4)(c)

13)       No membership evidence as defined in paragraph 22(5) had been produced that could lead the panel to conclude there were doubts whether a significant number of the union members within the bargaining unit wanted the Union to conduct collective bargaining on their behalf. The Panel is satisfied that this condition is not met.

5. Decision

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 Union. The Panel is satisfied that none of the conditions in paragraph 22(4) of the Schedule are 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 “All editorial staff with a UK contract, ultimately reporting to the Editor in Chief and work at St Vincent House 30 Orange Street, London WC2H 7HH. For avoidance of doubt, this excludes UK Policy Editor, UK Deputy Editor, UK Executive Editor, Executive Editor and Head of Audio, Senior Executive Editor, Managing Editor, Europe and Senior Finance Editor.”

Panel

Mr Andrew James, Panel Chair

Mrs Susan Jordan

Mr Nicholas Childs

11 May 2026