18 May 2007

 

 

                                    CENTRAL ARBITRATION COMMITTEE

 

TRADE UNION AND LABOUR RELATIONS (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1992

 

SCHEDULE A1 - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING: RECOGNITION

 

DECLARATION THAT THE UNION IS ENTITLED TO BE RECOGNISED

 

 

The Parties:

The Amalgamated Union (formerly known as T&GWU)

and

Harrods

 

1.         The Amalgamated Union formerly known as T&GWU (the Union) submitted an application to the CAC on 3 October 2006 that it should be recognised for collective bargaining by Harrods (the Company).  In accordance with section 263 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (the Act), the CAC Chairman established a Panel to deal with the case.  The Panel consisted of Professor John Purcell, Deputy Chairman, and, as members, Mr Arthur Lodge and Ms Lesley Mercer.  The Case Manager appointed to support the Panel was Sharmin Khan. For the purposes of this decision the Case Manager was Kate Norgate.

 

2.         By a decision dated 24 November 2006, the CAC accepted the application. 

 

3.         The Parties subsequently agreed that the appropriate bargaining unit should be “all cleaners and cleaning supervisors employed in store service including the night shift cleaners”.  As the agreed bargaining unit covered the same group of workers as proposed

 

 

by the Union in its application to the CAC the Panel did not apply the validity provisions set out in paragraphs 43 to 50 of the Schedule.

 

The Ballot

 

4.         The Union did not claim that a majority of the workers constituting the bargaining unit were members of the Union.  The Panel therefore gave notice that it intended to arrange a ballot.  The Panel asked for the views of the Parties on the form of the ballot and, in a letter dated 7 February 2007 announced that the ballot should be a workplace ballot.  Following further information from the Parties the Panel reconsidered its decision directing that there should be a combination ballot to allow weekend shift workers a postal vote.  The Parties were then able to reach agreement as to access during the balloting period and the CAC was notified accordingly.

 

5.         The Panel subsequently directed that Popularis should be appointed as the Qualified Independent Person (QIP) to conduct the ballot.

 

6.         The QIP was appointed on 5 April 2007 and the Parties were notified accordingly in a letter of the same date.  The Parties were informed that the balloting period would commence on 10 April 2007 and close at 2.00 p.m. on 8 May 2007.  The postal ballot papers would be dispatched on 24 April 2007 to be returned by no later than 2.00 p.m. on 8 May 2007. 

 

7.         The QIP reported to the CAC on 8 May 2007 that, of the 150 workers in the bargaining unit, 139 had voted in the ballot; there were no spoilt ballot papers. 94 workers (67.62% of those voting) had voted to support the proposal that the Union should be recognised by the Employer, and 45 workers (32.37% of those voting) had voted to reject the proposal.  The proportion of workers constituting the bargaining unit who supported the proposal was 62.66%.

 

 

 

 

8.         On 20 April 2007 the Union complained to the CAC of what it regarded as an unfair practice by the Employer.  The complaint was considered by the Panel and by its decision dated 27 April 2007 the Panel found the complaints to be not well founded.

 

Declaration of Recognition

 

9.         In accordance with paragraph 29(2) of the Schedule the CAC informed both Parties, on 9 May 2007, of the result of the ballot.

 

10.       The ballot established that the majority of the workers voting, and at least 40% of the workers in the bargaining unit, supported the proposal that the Union should be recognised by the Employer for the purposes of collective bargaining within the bargaining unit.  This satisfies the conditions under which the CAC must issue a declaration in favour of recognition in accordance with paragraph 29 (3) of the Schedule to the Act.

 

11.       The CAC accordingly declares that the Union is recognised as entitled to conduct collective bargaining unit on behalf of the bargaining unit consisting of “all cleaners and cleaning supervisors employed in store service including the night shift cleaners”.

 

Panel

Professor John Purcell, Chairman

Mr Arthur Lodge

Ms Leslie Mercer

 

18 May 2007