Bargaining Unit Decision

Question 1

1. Introduction

Accepted Answer

1)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 URTU (the Union) submitted an application to the CAC on 17 January 2025 that it should be recognised for collective bargaining by Ellgia Recycling Limited (the Employer) for a bargaining unit comprising the 鈥淒rivers鈥� based at Winterton Road, Scunthorpe DN15 0DH.聽 The CAC gave both parties notice of receipt of the application on 17 January 2025. 聽The Employer submitted a response to the CAC dated 30 January 2025 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, Ms Julia Buck and Ms Claire Sullivan.聽 The Case Manager appointed to support the Panel was Kaniza Bibi.

3)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 By a decision dated 20 February 2025 the Panel accepted the Union鈥檚 application.聽 The parties then entered a period of negotiation in an attempt to reach agreement on the appropriate bargaining unit.聽 As no agreement was reached the parties were invited to supply the Panel with, and to exchange, written submissions relating to the question of the determination of the appropriate bargaining unit.

4)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 In a letter dated 30 May 2025 the parties were told that a hearing would take place on 13 June 2025 to determine the appropriate bargaining unit and that their written submissions addressing the considerations set out in Paragraph 19B of Schedule A1 to the Act (the Schedule) should be lodged by no later than noon on 9 June 2025. The Case Manager explained in this letter that whilst it was ordinarily the case that the CAC would hold a public hearing to assist the Panel to determine the question of the appropriate bargaining unit, the Panel may, upon considering the parties鈥� written submissions, decide that the matter could be disposed of without the need for a hearing. The parties were informed that if the Panel did reach such a conclusion, the CAC would write and confirm that this was the case.

5)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 On 6 June 2025 the Employer鈥檚 submissions were received by the CAC and on 10 June 2025 the Union鈥檚 submissions were received.聽 On 10 June 2025 the submissions were cross copied and forwarded to the Panel.聽 On 11 June 2025 the parties were informed that having examined the respective submissions, the preliminary view of the Panel was that it believed that it could reach a decision on the basis of the submissions alone and that a hearing was not required but, if the parties took a contrary view, they were invited to make representations on the need for a hearing, if they so wished, by no later than the close of business on 12 June 2025. The parties were given the opportunity to comment on each other鈥檚 submissions, by no later than the close of business on 12 June 2025.聽 Any further comments received would be cross copied, and closing statements would also be sought before the Panel proceeded to reach its decision on the appropriate bargaining unit.聽 If the Panel concluded that it could not reach its decision fairly without a hearing, the parties would be informed accordingly and provided at that stage with further information.

6)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 On 11 June 2025 the Union confirmed that it was happy for the Panel to conclude its decision as to the appropriate bargaining unit based upon submissions alone. In an email dated 12 June 2025 the Employer confirmed that it was also happy for the Panel to reach its decision without the need for a hearing.

7)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Panel is required, by paragraph 19(2) of the Schedule, to decide whether the Union鈥檚 proposed bargaining unit is appropriate and, if found not to be appropriate, to decide in accordance with paragraph 19(3) a bargaining unit which is appropriate. Paragraph 19B(1) and (2) state that, in making those decisions, the Panel must take into account the need for the unit to be compatible with effective management and the matters listed in paragraph 19B(3) of the Schedule so far as they do not conflict with that need.聽 The matters listed in paragraph 19B(3) are: the views of the employer and the union; existing national and local bargaining arrangements; the desirability of avoiding small, fragmented bargaining units within an undertaking; the characteristics of workers falling within the bargaining unit under consideration and of any other employees of the employer whom the CAC considers relevant; and the location of workers. Paragraph 19B(4) states that in taking an employer鈥檚 views into account for the purpose of deciding whether the proposed bargaining unit is appropriate, the CAC must take into account any view the employer has about any other bargaining unit that it considers would be appropriate.

8)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 This decision sets out background information relating to the workforce supplied by, or sought by the Panel from the Employer. 聽It then summarises the submissions of each party in a form which includes their initial written submissions, as appropriate, and the parties鈥� comments on each other鈥檚 submissions.

Question 2

2. Summary of the Union鈥檚 submissions

Accepted Answer

9)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 In an email dated 10 June 2025 the Union submitted that its membership based in Scunthorpe remains of the view that the Union should be granted recognition for the 鈥楧rivers鈥� at this site.聽 The Union had a membership level of over 60% of the current driver population with others awaiting formal recognition to be established before joining the branch. 聽Presently it was only the driver population that the Union had an interest in. 聽The Union had sent a copy of a draft agreement to the Employer for its perusal and comment but had yet to receive a response despite further prompts. 聽In short, the Union had an established branch at the Employer鈥檚 premises in Scunthorpe and remained committed to forming a good relationship with all concerned.

Question 3

3. Summary of the Employer鈥檚 submissions

Accepted Answer

10)聽聽聽聽聽聽 In an email dated 6 June 2025 the Employer submitted that the original concerns raised by drivers related to a difference in pay across different depots. These concerns had since been fully addressed by the Employer. As of 1 April 2025, all drivers across the business received a pay increase, and pay rates had now been aligned across all sites. There was no longer any disparity in pay between the depots. This resolution was communicated to drivers and had been implemented effectively across the workforce.

11)聽聽聽聽聽聽 Going forward, the Employer was committed to consulting with drivers on any future changes affecting their roles, including operational or contractual matters.聽 It would also engage drivers in discussions on future pay reviews to ensure transparency and fair consideration.聽 This showed the Employer鈥檚 clear commitment to fair treatment and inclusive communication with drivers across all sites.

12)聽聽聽聽聽聽 Regarding the size of the proposed bargaining unit the Employer submitted that the proposed bargaining unit comprised only 17 drivers. 聽This was a very small group within the business and, in its view, did not constitute a sufficiently substantial or representative unit to justify independent bargaining arrangements. Recognising such a small unit risked fragmenting worker representation; duplicating consultation processes unnecessarily and undermining coherent company-wide policy implementation.

13)聽聽聽聽聽聽 Finally, the Employer respectfully called upon the Panel to consider these facts and determine that the proposed unit was not appropriate under Paragraph 19B of the Schedule.

Question 4

4. The Union鈥檚 comments on the Employer鈥檚 submissions

Accepted Answer

14)聽聽聽聽聽聽 In a letter dated 11 June 2025 the Union stated that the drivers based at the Employer鈥檚 site in Scunthorpe had joined the Union with the sole aim of securing collective bargaining rights at their place of employment. The Union believed that it had followed due process with the request to the Employer/CAC. The size of the bargaining unit was over 60% of the Driver population at Scunthorpe presently and was expected to rise upon conclusion of this process.

Question 5

5. The Employer鈥檚 comments on the Union鈥檚 submissions

Accepted Answer

15)聽聽聽聽聽聽 In an email dated 12 June 2025, the Employer set out its comments on the Union鈥檚 submissions.聽 The Employer noted the Union鈥檚 assertion that it had membership of 鈥渙ver 60% of the current driver population but the Employer respectfully wished to reiterate that it had not been provided with any formal or verifiable list of workers who were union members, either at the time of the application or since. 聽While the Employer understood the need to protect the confidentiality of individual members, this had made it difficult for the Employer to meaningfully assess the Union鈥檚 claims or engage with workers directly regarding their preferences. As noted in earlier correspondence, the Employer had approximately 78 drivers across its sites, with 30 drivers identified within the proposed bargaining unit at the Scunthorpe depot, with 17 being current union members. The current request for recognition, therefore, related to a very small proportion of the total workforce, raising concerns about creating a fragmented unit not aligned with operational structures.

16)聽聽聽聽聽聽 In relation to the Union鈥檚 reference to a draft recognition agreement, the Employer acknowledged receipt of this document and remained open to constructive engagement. However, the Employer鈥檚 focus was currently on resolving the appropriateness of the proposed bargaining unit, as directed by the CAC. The Employer remained committed to open dialogue and fair treatment of all workers and awaited the outcome of the Panel鈥檚 determination in respect of Paragraph 19 of the Schedule.

Question 6

6. Considerations

Accepted Answer

17)聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Panel begins with the statutory framework. The Panel is required, by paragraph 19(2) of the Schedule to the Act, to decide whether the proposed bargaining unit is appropriate and, if found not to be appropriate, to decide in accordance with paragraph 19(3) a bargaining unit which is appropriate. Paragraph 19B (1) and (2) state that, in making those decisions, the Panel must take into account the need for the unit to be compatible with effective management and the matters listed in paragraph 19B(3) of the Schedule so far as they do not conflict with that need. The matters listed in paragraph 19B (3) are: the views of the employer and the union; existing national and local bargaining arrangements; the desirability of avoiding small, fragmented bargaining units within an undertaking; the characteristics of workers falling within the bargaining unit under consideration and of any other employees of the employer whom the CAC considers relevant; and the location of workers. Paragraph 19B(4) states that in taking an employer鈥檚 views into account for the purpose of deciding whether the proposed bargaining unit is appropriate, the CAC must take into account any view the employer has about any other bargaining unit that it considers would be appropriate.聽 The Panel must also have regard to paragraph 171 of the Schedule which provides that 鈥淚n exercising functions under this Schedule in any particular case the CAC must have regard to the object of encouraging and promoting fair and efficient practices and arrangements in the workplace, so far as having regard to that object is consistent with applying other provisions of this Schedule in the case concerned. The Panel鈥檚 decision has been taken after a full and detailed consideration of the views of both parties as expressed in their written submissions.

18)聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Panel鈥檚 first responsibility is to decide, in accordance with paragraph 19(2) of the Schedule, whether the Union鈥檚 proposed bargaining unit is appropriate. That does not require the Panel to determine whether it is the most appropriate bargaining unit; only whether it is appropriate. This is the overriding requirement under 19B(2) and relates principally to the matters to be collectively bargained for under the statutory regime namely pay, hours and holidays. The requirement is that the proposed bargaining unit would be compatible with effective management, not that it be compatible with the most effective management. Against the background of that overall responsibility the Panel has to consider the matters listed in paragraph 19B(3) of the Schedule reminding itself that these matters must not conflict with the need for the unit to be compatible with effective management.

19)聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Panel finds in the circumstances that the bargaining unit proposed by the Union is compatible with effective management. The Panel鈥檚 reasons are as follows:

(a)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 the roles in the Union鈥檚 proposed bargaining unit are all situated in one location, namely, Winterton Road, Scunthorpe, DN15 0DH.聽

(b)聽聽聽聽聽聽 all of the workers in the roles in the Union鈥檚 proposed bargaining unit are subject to the same contracts of employment.

(c)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 All of the workers are drivers and so have the same characteristics.

20)聽聽聽聽聽聽 As part of those deliberations the Panel considered those matters at 19(B)(2)(b) not dealt with above as follows:

(a)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 The views of the Employer and Union were fully considered.

(b)聽聽聽聽聽聽 There are no current national or local bargaining arrangements.

(c)聽聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Union鈥檚 proposal was a bargaining unit at one location. The Union鈥檚 proposal avoided small, fragmented bargaining units. It has a clear boundary and as it covers all drivers at the one location will not give rise to proliferation. The Employer had not suggested an alternative bargaining unit other than saying that the Union鈥檚 proposed unit was a very small group within the business and, in its view, did not constitute a sufficiently substantial or representative unit to justify independent bargaining arrangements.

Question 7

7. Decision

Accepted Answer

21)聽聽聽聽聽聽 The Panel鈥檚 decision is that the appropriate bargaining unit is that proposed by the Union, namely 鈥淒rivers鈥� based at Winterton Road, Scunthorpe, DN15 0DH.聽

Panel

Mrs Lisa Gettins, Panel Chair

Ms Julia Buck

Ms Claire Sullivan

26 June 2025

天美影院