Acceptance Decision

Question 1

1. Introduction

Accepted Answer

1)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 Unite the Union (the Union) submitted an application to the CAC on 16 April 2024 that it should be recognised for collective bargaining by Calor Gas Limited (the Employer) for a bargaining unit comprising of 鈥淎ll HGV Drivers based at the Immingham depot鈥�. The location of the bargaining unit was given as Calor Gas Limited, Manby Road, Immingham, DN40 3DX. 聽The CAC gave both parties notice of receipt of the application on 16 April 2024. 聽The Employer submitted a response to the CAC dated 19 April 2024 which was copied to the Union.

2)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 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.聽 The Panel consisted of Mrs Lisa Gettins, Panel Chair, and, as Members, Mr Alistair Paton, and Mr Matt Smith OBE.聽 The Case Manager appointed to support the Panel was Kaniza Bibi.

3)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Panel has extended the acceptance period in this case. The initial period expired on 30 April 2024.聽 The acceptance period was extended to 14 May 2024 to allow time to conduct a membership check and for the parties to comment on the results before the Panel arrived at a decision.

Question 2

2. Issues

Accepted Answer

4)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Panel is required by paragraph 15 of Schedule A1 to the Act (the Schedule) to decide whether the Union鈥檚 application to the CAC is valid within the terms of paragraphs 5 to 9; is made in accordance with paragraphs 11 or 12; is admissible within the terms of paragraphs 33 to 42; and therefore, should be accepted.

Question 3

3. Summary of the Union鈥檚 application

Accepted Answer

5)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 In its application to the CAC the Union stated that it made its formal request for recognition on 4 March 2024 for voluntary recognition at the site. The Employer in its response email, received by the Union on 11 March 2024 stated it did not wish to pursue the Union鈥檚 request for voluntary recognition.

6)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 When asked whether the Union had made a previous application under the Schedule for statutory recognition for workers in the proposed bargaining unit or a similar unit the Union answered 鈥湵反氢€�. The Union stated that, following receipt of the request for recognition, the Employer had not proposed that Acas should be requested to assist the parties.

7)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Union stated that the total number of workers employed by the Employer was 1760 and 37 of the workers were in the proposed bargaining unit, of whom 25 were Union members.

8)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 Asked whether the Employer agreed on the number of workers in the proposed bargaining unit the Union answered, 鈥淵es and 狈辞鈥�.聽 When called upon to provide evidence that the majority of the workers in the proposed bargaining unit were likely to support recognition for collective bargaining, the Union stated, 鈥淲hatsApp survey was carried out on 12.04.24, the results being 25 members were in favour of Unite the union representing them for recognition for collective bargaining purposes鈥�.

9)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Union stated it had selected the proposed bargaining unit because 鈥淭his includes all members who wish Unite the union to represent them for recognition鈥�. The Union also confirmed that the proposed bargaining unit had not been agreed with the Employer.

10)聽聽聽聽聽聽 Finally, the Union stated that it was not aware of any existing recognition agreements which covered any of the workers in the bargaining unit, it confirmed that it held a current certificate of independence. When asked if it had copied the application and supporting documents to the Employer, this part was left blank by the Union.聽聽

Question 4

4. Summary of the Employer鈥檚 response to the Union鈥檚 application

Accepted Answer

11)聽聽聽聽聽聽 In its response to the Union鈥檚 application the Employer stated that it received the Union鈥檚 written request for recognition on 9 November 2023. It replied via email on 23 November 2023 refusing the request.

12)聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Employer stated that it had received a copy of the Union鈥檚 application form direct from the Union on 16 April 2024.

13)聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Employer stated that, following receipt of the Union鈥檚 request, it had not proposed that Acas should be requested to assist.

14)聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Employer confirmed it did not agree with the proposed bargaining unit. The Employer considered that the Union鈥檚 proposed bargaining unit was not an appropriate bargaining unit and confirmed its objections to the proposed unit stating, 鈥淐alor strongly disputes the bargaining unit (Immingham) and disputes the number of HGV Drivers quoted by Unite and the total headcount. Calor considers the establishment of a single bargaining unit to be counter productive to our strategy of treating HGV drivers on a national and regional basis. The proposed bargaining Until will create additional complexity in the adoption of the business strategy, cause division within the driver community and is considered not in the best interest of productive employee relations鈥�.

15)聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Employer stated that it employed a total of 2334 workers. When asked whether it agreed with the number of workers in the proposed bargaining unit as defined in the Union鈥檚 application the Employer answered, 鈥淣o, the Union suggest 37 HGV Drivers鈥�.

16)聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Employer, when asked if it disagreed with the Union鈥檚 estimate of membership in the proposed bargaining unit, and to indicate its reasons for disagreeing, with any available evidence, the Employer鈥檚 response was to state, 鈥淯nable to agree. We do not collect trade union membership data as part of recruitment or onboarding activity. We have no way of validating the membership claim put forward by Unite. Would expect such a claim be validated鈥�.

17)聽聽聽聽聽聽 When asked if the Employer considered that a majority of the workers in the bargaining unit are likely to support recognition, and to indicate its reasons for taking this view, the Employer stated 鈥淐alor understands that there have been representations made to the workforce concerning Union representation made from within the local cohort of the proposed Bargaining Unit. Calor has not made any direct counter proposals with the Cohort at this point and therefore disputes if there is support majority support for recognition. Calor have not been afforded opportunity to make our case prior to any ballot to the contrary/counter argument directly to the workforce. We believe this to be unfair as workers have not had opportunity to discuss concerns relating to representation with Calor鈥�.

18)聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Employer said 鈥湵反氢€� when asked if there was any existing agreement for recognition in force covering workers in the proposed bargaining unit.

19)聽聽聽聽聽聽 Finally, the Employer stated 鈥淣ot aware, not within last three years鈥� when asked if it was aware of any previous application under the Schedule for statutory recognition by the Union in respect of this or a similar bargaining unit.聽聽 Asked whether it had received any other applications under the Schedule for recognition in respect of any of the workers in the proposed bargaining unit the Employer answered, 鈥淪ingle Application from Unite the Union鈥�.

Question 5

5. The check of membership and support

Accepted Answer

20)聽聽聽聽聽聽 To assist the determination of two of the admissibility criteria specified in the Schedule, namely, whether 10% of the workers in the proposed bargaining unit are members of the Union (paragraph 36(1)(a)) and whether a majority of the workers in the proposed bargaining unit would be likely to favour recognition of the Union as entitled to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of the bargaining unit (paragraph 36(1)(b)), the Panel proposed an independent check of the level of Union membership within the proposed bargaining unit and a check of the Union鈥檚 petition.聽 It was agreed with the parties that the Employer would supply to the Case Manager a list of the names, dates of birth and job titles of workers within the proposed bargaining unit, and that the Union would supply to the Case Manager a list of its paid-up members within that unit (including dates of birth) and a copy of the petition signed by workers in favour of recognition. It was explicitly agreed with both parties that, to preserve confidentiality, the respective lists would not be copied to the other party and that agreement was confirmed in a letter dated 24 April 2024 from the Case Manager to both parties.

21)聽聽聽聽聽聽 The information requested from the Union was received by the CAC on 26 April 2024 and from the Employer on 25 April 2024.聽 The Panel is satisfied that this check was conducted properly and impartially in accordance with the agreement with the parties.聽聽聽

22)聽聽聽聽聽聽 The list supplied by the Employer showed that there were 33 workers in the proposed bargaining unit.聽 The list of members supplied by the Union contained 23 names. 聽According to the Case Manager鈥檚 report the number of Union members in the proposed bargaining unit was 23, a membership level of 69.70%.聽

23)聽聽聽聽聽聽 The petition supplied by the Union contained 21 names. The Union鈥檚 petition was sent by an e-mail, which showed 3 screen shots of a WhatsApp petition.聽聽 The petition was set out as follows:

鈥淎re you in favour of Unite being recognised at Calor Gas Immingham?

Select one

Yes

狈辞鈥漒u003c/p>

The report showed that 63.64% of workers in the proposed bargaining unit had completed the petition in favour of recognition. All signatories were members of the Union. A report of the result of the membership check was circulated to the Panel and the parties on 29 April 2024 and the parties鈥� comments invited.

Question 6

6. Parties鈥� comments on the membership check

Accepted Answer

24)聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Employer in its response dated 30 April 2024 stated, 鈥淥n the ballot, my main concern is that Calor were not made aware of it happening and therefore were not afforded an opportunity to make our case. I鈥檓 not surprised the Union ballot came out as it did, after all they had nothing to compare it against鈥�.

25)聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Union did not submit any comments on the results of the membership report by the deadline imposed.

Question 7

7. Considerations

Accepted Answer

26)聽聽聽聽聽聽 In determining whether to accept the application the Panel must decide whether the admissibility and validity provisions referred to in paragraph 4 above are satisfied. 聽The Panel has considered the submissions of both parties and all the evidence in reaching its decision.聽

27)聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Panel is satisfied that the Union made a valid request to the Employer within the terms of paragraphs 5 to 9 of the Schedule and that its application was made in accordance with paragraph 11. Furthermore, the Panel is satisfied that the application is not rendered inadmissible by any of the provisions in paragraphs 33 to 35 and 37 to 42 of the Schedule. The remaining issues for the Panel to decide are whether the admissibility criteria contained in paragraphs 36(1)(a) and 36(1)(b) are met.聽

Paragraph 36(1)(a)

28)聽聽聽聽聽聽 Under paragraph 36(1)(a) of the Schedule an application is not admissible unless the Panel decides that members of the Union constitute at least 10% of the workers in the Union鈥檚 proposed bargaining unit.聽 The membership check conducted by the Case Manager described in paragraph 22 above showed that 69.70% of the workers in the proposed bargaining unit were members of the Union. The Panel is satisfied that this check was conducted properly and impartially and in accordance with the arrangements agreed with the parties. The Panel has therefore decided that members of the Union constitute at least 10% of the workers in the proposed bargaining unit as required by paragraph 36(1)(a) of the Schedule.

Paragraph 36(1)(b)

29)聽聽聽聽聽聽 Under paragraph 36(1)(b) of the Schedule, an application is not admissible unless the Panel decides that a majority of the workers constituting the proposed bargaining unit would be likely to favour recognition of the union as entitled to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of the bargaining unit.

30)聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Panel considers that members of the Union would be likely to favour recognition of the Union for collective bargaining. As stated above, these amount to 69.70% of the workers in the bargaining unit. The Panel also notes that 21 of the 23 Union members, representing 63.64% of the workers in the proposed bargaining unit, had signed the Union鈥檚 petition in favour of recognition. 聽On the basis of the evidence in this case, therefore, the Panel decides that a majority of the workers in the proposed 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 36(1)(b) of the Schedule.

Question 8

8. Decision

Accepted Answer

31)聽聽聽聽聽聽 For the reasons given above, the Panel鈥檚 decision is that the application is accepted by the CAC.

Panel

Mrs Lisa Gettins, Panel Chair

Mr Alistair Paton

Mr Matt Smith OBE

7 May 2024

伊人直播