Decision

Recognition Decision

Updated 17 April 2026

Applies to England, Scotland and Wales

Case Number: TUR1/1517(2025)

17 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: 

Unite the Union

and

Culina Logistics Limited

1. Introduction

1)         Unite the Union (the Union) submitted an application to the CAC on 10 December 2025 that it should be recognised for collective bargaining by Culina Logistics Limited (the Employer) for a bargaining unit comprising of “Transport operatives (currently referred to as HGV Drivers, Transport Co-Ordinator’s, Shunters Transport Debriefers and Team Leaders)  working at the Culina Logistics Warehouse at the Port of Tilbury (Culina Logistics Limited, Berth 45, Port of Tilbury, Tilbury, Essex RM18 7EH)”. The CAC gave both parties notice of receipt of the application on 10 December 2025. The Employer submitted a response to the CAC dated 17 December 2025 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 Professor Alan Bogg, Panel Chair, and, as Members, Mr Rob Lummis and Mr Paul Noon OBE. The Case Manager appointed to support the Panel was Kaniza Bibi.

3)         By a decision dated 14 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. On 3 March 2026 the parties notified the CAC that they had reached an agreement as to the appropriate bargaining unit and this was “Debriefers, HGV Drivers and Shunters, working at the Culina Logistics Warehouse at the Port of Tilbury (Culina Logistics Limited, Berth 45, Port of Tilbury, Tilbury, Essex RM18 7EH”.

4)         As the agreed bargaining unit differed from that proposed by the Union in its application, the Panel was required by paragraph 20 of Schedule A1 to the Act (the Schedule) to decide whether the Union’s application was valid or invalid within the terms of paragraphs 43 to 50 of the Schedule. By a decision dated 25 March 2026 the Panel determined that the application was valid for the purposes of paragraph 20 and that the CAC would therefore proceed with the application.

2. Issues

5.         Paragraph 22 of the Schedule provides that, if 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 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. 

6)         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 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 to conduct collective bargaining on their behalf. 

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 submission that it should be recognised without a ballot

7)         In a letter dated 25 March 2025 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 25 March 2025, stated: “The Union does not agree that a ballot is appropriate. The CAC has accepted that a majority of the workers in the bargaining unit are members of the Union. The narrowness of the Union’s majority is not of itself a ground for ordering a ballot; the CAC is not entitled to ‘impose, in effect, a threshold for recognition without a ballot higher than that stipulated by the legislators. On this point, the Union relies on the decision in ISTC and Fuller Computer Industries Ltd (TUR1/29/00) which was affirmed on an application for judicial review in Re Fullarton Computer Industries Ltd, [2001] IRLR 752. In the Union’s submission, once majority membership is established, the Union should be awarded recognition without a ballot unless there is good reason to hold otherwise. The Union submits that none of the 3 statutory exceptions apply in these circumstances. In particular, the Union submits that holding a ballot would not be in the interests of good industrial relations. The Union has sought to establish good industrial relations both before and during the CAC process without any success. In the Union’s submission, the practical effect of a ballot would by its very nature engender an adversarial situation within the workplace, with the Union and the Employer embroiled in a divisive contest. In summary, the Union’s submission is that it has demonstrated majority membership within the bargaining unit, none of the 3 statutory exceptions apply and, therefore, the Union should be granted recognition.”.

4. The Employer’s response

8)         The CAC copied the Union’s letter of 25 March 2026 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.

9)         No response was received from the Employer.

5. Considerations

10)       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 conditions is fulfilled, it must give notice to the parties that it intends to arrange for the holding of a secret ballot. 

11)       In the membership check carried out by the CAC Case Manager on 16 March 2026 the list supplied by the Employer indicated that there were 38 workers in the agreed bargaining unit. The list of members supplied by the Union contained 24 names. According to the Case Manager’s report, the number of union members in the agreed bargaining unit was 24, a membership level of 63.16%. Accordingly, the Panel accepts that the majority of workers in the bargaining unit are members of the Union.

12)       The Panel has considered the correspondence received from the Union 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. In the absence of any submissions from the Employer the Panel has had to rely solely on the correspondence and submissions received from the Union in arriving at a decision as to whether any of the qualifying conditions laid down in paragraph 22(4) of the Schedule is fulfilled.

Paragraph 22(4) (a)

13)       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)

14)       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 therefore does not apply.

Paragraph 22(4) (c)

15)       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 therefore does not apply.

6. Declaration of recognition

16)       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 “Debriefers, HGV Drivers and Shunters, working at the Culina Logistics Warehouse at the Port of Tilbury (Culina Logistics Limited, Berth 45, Port of Tilbury, Tilbury, Essex RM18 7EH)”.

Panel

Professor Alan Bogg, Panel Chair

Mr Rob Lummis

Mr Paul Noon OBE

17 April 2026