Case Number: TUR3/3/(2006)

21 June 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 UNDER PART III TO THE SCHEDULE

The Parties:

The National Union of Journalists (the Union)

and

Bristol News and Media Limited (the Employer)

(formerly Bristol United Press Limited)

Introduction

1. The NUJ (the Union) submitted an application dated 16 October 2006, made under paragraph 66 of Part III of the Schedule to the CAC, to determine whether the original bargaining unit in respect of the Editorial Department at the Bristol News and Media Ltd (the Employer), (formerly known as Bristol United Press Ltd and prior to that as Bristol Evening Post and Press Ltd), was no longer appropriate and, if so, what would constitute an appropriate bargaining unit.
2. The original bargaining unit consisted of the following workers engaged in the production of the Bristol Evening Post:

Deputy Editor and Assistant Editor, News Editor, Deputy News Editor, District News Editor, Reporters and one of the Messengers; Chief Sub Editor, Deputy Chief Sub Editor, Assistant Chief Sub Editor and Sub-Editors; Features Editor, Assistant Features Editors and Writers/Subs; Picture Editor, Deputy Picture Editor and Photographers, Design Editor and Artist; Sports Editor, Deputy Sports Editor, Assistant Sports Editor and Writers/Subs; Night Editor, Night News Editor and Night Chief Sub Editor; Production Editor.

3. In accordance with section 263 of the Act, the CAC Chairman established a Panel to deal with this case. The Panel consisted of Professor Roy Lewis, Panel Chairman, and as Members, Paul Gates and Jackie Patel. The Case Manager appointed to support the Panel was Sharmin Khan, for whom Maverlie Tavares has been substituted.

The appropriate bargaining unit

4. By a decision dated 13 November 2006, the Panel accepted the Union’s application.

5. The next stage of the procedure was under paragraph 70 of the Schedule, and required the CAC to decide two specific questions: (a) whether or not the original bargaining unit continued to be an appropriate bargaining unit, and (b) if it did not so continue, what other bargaining unit or units were appropriate. A hearing was held on 2 February 2007 and the Panel issued its decision on the appropriate bargaining unit on 27 February 2007.

6. The Panel decided that the original bargaining unit did not continue to be an appropriate bargaining unit, and that the appropriate bargaining unit consisted of the following workers:

Editorial staff working on the Bristol Evening Post. Editorial staff working on the Western Daily Press. Editorial staff within the spinal departments servicing both the Bristol Evening Post and the Western Daily Press, including George Halladay. For the avoidance of doubt, Wendy Jean Butt, Community Editor, was to be counted as a member of the editorial staff of the spinal departments servicing both titles.

7. The following were expressly excluded from the bargaining unit:

The Editor of the Bristol Evening Post/Editor-in-Chief of Bristol United Press Ltd. The Editor of the Western Daily Press. The PAs to the aforementioned Editors. The staff (other than Wendy Jean Butt) listed under the heading of Administration (non-journalists) on the Employer’s organisational chart attached to Mike Norton’s witness statement. The following 5 freelance journalists: Liz Marlyen, Phil Tottle, Frank Emery, Alan Ford, and Des Price.

8. Subsequently it was agreed by the parties that Des Price was no longer freelance and should be included within the new bargaining unit.

Likely support

9. The next stage in the statutory process was under paragraph 85 of the Schedule. The Panel was required to decide whether the difference between the original bargaining unit and the new bargaining unit was such that support for the Union within the new bargaining unit needed to be assessed. By a decision dated 2 March 2007, the Panel decided that this was necessary.

10. Paragraph 86 of the Schedule requires the CAC to decide whether members of the Union constitute at least 10% of the workers in the new bargaining unit, and whether the majority of the workers constituting the new unit would be likely to favour recognition of the Union as entitled to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of the new unit. By a decision dated 23 April 2007, the Panel found that both these requirements were met.

The decision to hold a ballot

11. At this point in the statutory process paragraph 87 of the Schedule requires the CAC to issue a declaration of recognition, unless any of the 3 qualifying conditions in paragraph 87(4) apply, in which case the CAC notifies the parties that a secret ballot will be held. The three qualifying conditions are as follows:

(a) the CAC is satisfied that a ballot should be held in the interests of good industrial relations;

(b) the CAC has evidence, which it considers to be credible, from a significant number of the union members within the new bargaining unit that they do not want the union (or unions) to conduct collective bargaining on their behalf;

(c) membership evidence is produced which leads the CAC to conclude that there are doubts whether a significant number of the union members within the new unit want the union (or unions) to conduct collective bargaining on their behalf.

12. By its decision dated 23 April 2007 the Panel found that the qualifying conditions in paragraph 87(4)(a) and (b) were fulfilled. Accordingly, it notified the parties that it intended to arrange for the holding of a secret ballot in which the workers constituting the new unit would be asked whether they wanted the Union to conduct collective bargaining on their behalf.

13. By letter dated 4 May 2007, the Panel informed the parties that a postal ballot was to be held. The parties reached an agreement on the Union’s access during the balloting period and the CAC subsequently appointed Popularis Ltd as the Qualified Independent Person (“QIP”) to conduct the ballot.

The ballot result

14. The QIP was appointed on 17 May 2007 and the balloting period started on 18 May 2007, with a completion date of 15 June 2007.

15. The QIP reported to the CAC on 15 June 2007 that, of the 140 workers in the bargaining unit, 112 had voted in the ballot; there was one spoilt ballot paper. 74 workers (66.07% of those voting) had voted to support the proposal that the Union should be recognised by the Employer and 37 workers (33.04% of those voting) had voted to reject that proposal. The proportion of workers constituting the bargaining unit who supported the proposal was 52.86%.

16. In accordance with paragraph 29(2) of the Schedule, the CAC informed both parties on 18 June 2007 of the result of the ballot.

17. The ballot established that a 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 on behalf of 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.

Declaration of Recognition

18. The CAC declares that the Union is recognised as entitled to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of the workers constituting the new bargaining unit, which unit is described at paragraphs 6-8 above.

19. In accordance with paragraph 89(6)(a) of the Schedule, so far as it affects workers in the new unit who fell within the original unit, this declaration shall have effect in place of any declaration that the Union is recognised as entitled to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of the original unit.

20. In accordance with paragraph 89(6)(b) of the Schedule, the method of collective bargaining relating to the original unit shall have effect in relation to the new unit, with the following modifications which the Panel considers necessary to take account of the change of bargaining unit:

In the preamble, delete “the Bristol Evening Post & Press Ltd”, and substitute “the Bristol News and Media Ltd”

In clause 2, after the word “comprising”, delete “the bargaining unit”, and substitute “the new bargaining unit determined by the CAC in its decision dated 27 February 2007 and described at paragraphs 6-8 of the CAC’s decision dated 21 June 2007 containing the CAC’s declaration of recognition”.

PANEL

Professor Roy Lewis – Panel Chairman

Jackie Patel

Paul Gates

21 June 2007