Decision

Validity Decision

Updated 8 June 2026

Applies to England, Scotland and Wales

Case Number: TUR1/1524(20264)

8 June 2026

CENTRAL ARBITRATION COMMITTEE

TRADE UNION AND LABOUR RELATIONS (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1992

SCHEDULE A1 - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING: RECOGNITION

DECISION ON WHETHER THE APPLICATION IS VALID FOLLOWING

AGREEMENT ON THE BARGAINING UNIT

United Voices of the World

and

Solace Women’s Aid

1. Introduction

1)         United Voices of the World (the Union) submitted an application to the CAC on 4 February 2026 that it should be recognised for collective bargaining by Solace Women’s Aid (the Employer) for a bargaining unit comprising the “All members of staff of the Tower Hamlets SASS team”. The CAC gave both parties notice of receipt of the application on 4 February 2026. The Employer submitted a response to the CAC dated 11 February 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 Mrs Lisa Gettins, Panel Chair, and, as Members, Mr Richard Fulham and Mr Steve Gillan. The Case Manager appointed to support the Panel was Kaniza Bibi.

3)         By its written decision dated 4 March 2026 the Panel accepted the Union’s application. The Employer, in its response to the application, had stated its agreement to the proposed bargaining unit as per the Unions application as “All members of staff of the Tower Hamlets SASS team”. The parties then agreed to a different bargaining unit “All members of staff of the Tower Hamlets SASS Team, excluding the Service Manager and Deputy Service Manager, to include the following roles as well as any new roles created within the Tower Hamlets SASS Team which are directly funded through the relevant local authority contract. Floating Housing Support Worker, Tower Hamlets SASS, Primary Care IDVA, IDVA, Bengali Speaking IDVA, Senior IDVA, MASH IDVA, Duty IDVA, Hospital IDVA, DWP IDVA and Housing IDVA”. This bargaining unit differed from that originally proposed by the Union in its application.

2. Issues

4)         As the bargaining unit agreed by the parties differed from that proposed by the Union, paragraph 20 of Schedule A1 to the Act (the Schedule) requires the Panel to decide whether the Union application is valid within the terms of paragraphs 43 to 50 the Schedule. The matters that the Panel must consider are: -

• is there an existing recognition agreement covering any of the workers within the new bargaining unit? (paragraph 44)

• is there 10% union membership within the new bargaining unit? (paragraph 45(a))

• are the majority of the workers in the new bargaining unit likely to favour recognition? (paragraph 45(b))

• is there a competing application, from another union, where their proposed bargaining unit covers any workers in the new bargaining unit? (paragraph 46)

• has there been a previous application in respect of the new bargaining unit? (paragraphs 47 to 49)

5)         In a letter dated 5 May 2026 the Panel invited the parties to make submissions on these matters for consideration by the Panel.

3. Views of the Union

6)         In an email dated 8 May 2026 the Union advised that

• there was no existing recognition agreement covering any of the workers within the new bargaining unit;

• There was significantly more than 10% membership, with 8 verified members out of 11 positions (or 9 including a previously omitted member), representing 72.73% based on confirmed figures.

• Given the membership levels the majority of workers in the bargaining unit were likely to support Union recognition, as shown by both strong union membership levels and additional support from workers who signed a petition in favour.

• there was no competing application from another union that covered any worker in the new bargaining unit;

• there was no previous application in respect of the new bargaining unit.

4. Views of the Employer

7)         The Employer confirmed it had no further comments to make in relation to the validity tests.

5. The membership and support check

8)         To assist in the determination of two of the validity tests specified in the Schedule, namely, whether 10% of the workers in the agreed bargaining unit are members of the union (paragraph 45(a)) and whether a majority of the workers in the agreed bargaining unit would be likely to favour recognition of the union as entitled to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of the bargaining unit (paragraph 45(b)), the Panel proposed an independent check of the level of union membership and support for recognition within the agreed bargaining unit. The Union provided a list of Union members in the agreed bargaining unit, and a copy of their petition. The information from the Union was received by the CAC on 14 May 2026. The Employer provided a list of workers in the agreed bargaining unit on 15 May 2026. It was explicitly agreed with both parties that, to preserve confidentiality, the respective lists and petition would not be copied to the other party and that agreement was confirmed in a letter from the Case Manager to both parties dated 11 May 2026. The Panel is satisfied that the check was conducted properly and impartially and in accordance with the agreement reached with the parties.

9)         The Employer’s list identified 10 workers in the agreed bargaining unit. The Union provided a membership list containing 9 names. The Case Manager’s report confirmed that all 9 individuals were union members, representing a membership level of 90.00% within the bargaining unit. The Union’s petition was also signed by 9 workers, all of whom were confirmed to be within the bargaining unit. All 9 signatories were union members (90.00% of the bargaining unit), with no non-members identified (0.00%).

10)       A report of the result of the membership check was circulated to the Panel and the parties on 18 May 2026 and the parties were invited to comment on the result.

6. Parties’ comments on the membership check

11)       In an email dated 19 May 2026 the Union stated that its membership stood at 90% of the bargaining unit, far exceeding the 10% statutory requirement and there was also clear evidence that a majority of workers support recognition of the Union. The Union confirmed that this demonstrated high membership levels and petition support and, on this basis, it asked the CAC to accept the application.

12)       The Employer did not submit any comments by the deadline imposed.

7. Discussion and conclusions

13)       The Panel must decide whether the Union application is valid within the terms of paragraphs 43 to 50 of the Schedule. In reaching its decision the Panel has considered the parties’ submissions and the other evidence before it. The following matters are not disputed:

• there is no existing recognition agreement covering any of the workers within the agreed bargaining unit;

• there is no competing application from another union; and

• there has been no previous application in respect of the agreed bargaining unit.

14)       The remaining issues for the Panel to decide are whether the validity criteria contained in paragraphs 45(a) and (b) are met.

Paragraph 45(a)

15)       Under paragraph 45(a) of the Schedule an application is invalid unless the Panel decides that members of the union constitute at least 10% of the workers in the agreed bargaining unit.

16)       The membership check conducted by the Case Manager outlined above showed that 90.00% of the workers in the agreed bargaining unit were members of the Union. As previously stated, the Panel is satisfied that the 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 10% of the workers in the agreed bargaining unit as required by paragraph 45(a) of the Schedule.

Paragraph 45(b)

17)       Under paragraph 45(b) of the Schedule, an application is invalid unless the Panel decides that a majority of the workers constituting the agreed bargaining unit would be likely to favour recognition of the union as entitled to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of the bargaining unit.

18)       The membership check showed that 90.00% of the bargaining unit were Union members. The petition check confirmed that all signatories were Union members, with no non-members identified. Taken together, this indicates that support for the Union is at approximately 90.00% of the agreed bargaining unit.

19)       Accordingly, on the evidence before it, the Panel has decided that, on the balance of probabilities, a majority of the workers in the agreed bargaining unit would be likely to favour recognition of the Union as entitled to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of the bargaining unit, as required by paragraph 45(b) of the Schedule.

8. Decision

20)       The decision of the Panel is that the application is valid for the purposes of paragraph 20 of the Schedule and the CAC must proceed with the application.

Panel

Mrs Lisa Gettins, Panel Chair

Mr Richard Fulham

Mr Steve Gillan

8 June 2026