Form of Ballot Decision
Updated 18 March 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-unite-the-union-natures-grub-limited/form-of-ballot-decision
Case Number: TUR1/1520(2026)
18 March 2026
CENTRAL ARBITRATION COMMITTEE
TRADE UNION AND LABOUR RELATIONS (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1992
SCHEDULE A1 - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING: RECOGNITION
DECISION ON FORM OF BALLOT
The Parties:
Unite the Union
and
Natures Grub Limited
1. Introduction
1) Unite the Union (the Union) submitted an application to the CAC on 22 January 2026 that it should be recognised for collective bargaining by Natures Grub Limited (the Employer) for a bargaining unit comprising of “All employees at Natures Grub Limited up to and including supervisors”. The CAC gave both parties notice of receipt of the application on 22 January 2026. The Employer submitted a response to the CAC dated 27 January 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 Laura Prince K.C., Panel Chair, and, as Members, Mr Richard Fulham and Mr Paul Moloney. The Case Manager appointed to support the Panel was Kaniza Bibi.
3) By a decision dated 27 February 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. In an email dated 5 March 2026, both parties confirmed that they agreed to the bargaining unit as proposed by the Union in its application as “All employees at Natures Grub Limited up to and including supervisors”.
2. Issues
4) On 9 March 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 20 March 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 10 March 2026 the Employer stated, “We would request that a workplace ballot would be our preferred option, with absent staff having the ability to vote by post if required. Our preference for the workplace ballot would be on a Monday before 2pm, this is when almost all staff will be in the business”.
4. Union’s submissions on the form of ballot
7) By an e-mail to the Case Manager dated 11 March 2026 the Union stated “We would like to request that the ballot is a postal one please. It is important that all the staff do not feel intimidated or pressurised by the union or the company in the decisions that they make and we don’t feel that a workplace ballot would support that. A postal ballot would allow all staff included in the bargaining unit to feel that they are making a truly safe and secret vote – whether that for them, is to vote yes, no or abstain. We do not want either side to be accused of forcing staff down either route so a postal ballot is, for us, the safest and most far path.”.
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 workplace ballot whereas the Union has submitted that the ballot should be a postal ballot.
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 conducting a workplace ballot would not be cost‑effective given the relatively small size of the determined bargaining unit. In addition, the Panel concluded that a postal ballot would reduce the likelihood of allegations of unfairness arising in the workplace. A postal ballot would also be less expensive and administratively simpler to arrange.
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 shortly as will the period within which the ballot is to be held.
Panel
Ms Laura Prince K.C., Panel Chair
Mr Richard Fulham
Mr Paul Moloney
18 March 2026