Decision

Recognition Decision

Updated 3 July 2025

Applies to England, Scotland and Wales

Case Number: TUR1/1472(2025)

02 July 2025

CENTRAL ARBITRATION COMMITTEE

TRADE UNION AND LABOUR RELATIONS (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1992

SCHEDULE A1 - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING: RECOGNITION

DECLARATION OF RECOGNITION WITHOUT A BALLOT

The Parties:

URTU

and

Lineage

1. Introduction

1)         URTU (the Union) submitted an application to the CAC on 2 June 2025 that it should be recognised for collective bargaining by Lineage (the Employer) for a bargaining unit comprising of “Class 1 HGV drivers, Class 2 HGV drivers, and Shunter Drivers” based at Hareshill Road, Heywood, OL10 2TP.  The CAC gave both parties notice of receipt of the application on 2 June 2025.  The Employer submitted a response to the CAC dated 11 June 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 Mr Rohan Pirani, Panel Chair, and, as Members, Mr Mark Pennifold and Mr Christopher Burrows.  The Case Manager appointed to support the Panel was Kaniza Bibi.

3)         As the Employer, in its response to the application, had stated its agreement to the proposed bargaining unit the CAC Panel had to decide whether a majority of the workers in the bargaining unit were members of the Union.  If the Panel was not satisfied that the majority of the workers in the bargaining unit are members of the Union, then it must arrange for the holding of a ballot.

2. Issues

4)     Paragraph 22 of Schedule A1 to the Act (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.  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. 

5)       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 claim to majority membership and submission that it should be recognised without a ballot

6)         In an email dated 26 June 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 an email dated 26 June 2025, stated “As evidenced by the membership check carried out by the CAC, the majority of the proposed bargaining unit are members of the URTU (58.44%). Furthermore, we have conducted a site petition with 61 signatures from workers at Lineage Heywood which we believe is further evidence of strong support of Union recognition. Therefore, we submit that the Union should be granted recognition without a ballot. It is very reasonable to assume all members and non-members would vote in favour of Union recognition at Lineage Heywood which would far exceed 50% of the vote”.

7)         On 30 June 2025 the CAC copied the Union’s email of 26 June 2025 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.

8)         In its response dated 30 June 2025 the Employer stated that it had no submissions to make at this time.

4. Considerations

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

10)       The membership and support check conducted on 12 June 2025 showed that the number of union members in the proposed bargaining unit was 45 out of 77 workers in the bargaining unit, a membership level of 58.44%.  Neither party has claimed that there have been any changes that would affect the level of membership. Accordingly, the Panel accepts that the majority of workers in the bargaining unit are members of the Union.

11)       The Panel has considered the submissions of both parties 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 are fulfilled.

Paragraph 22(4) (a)

12)       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)

13)       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 does not apply.

Paragraph 22(4) (c)

14)       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 does not apply.

5. Declaration of recognition

15)       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 of  “Class 1 HGV drivers, Class 2 HGV drivers, and Shunter Drivers” based at Hareshill Road, Heywood, OL10 2TP.

Panel

Mr Rohan Pirani, Panel Chair

Mr Mark Pennifold

Mr Christopher Burrows

02 July 2025