Case Number: TUR1/338(2004)

24 May 2004

 

 

 

CENTRAL ARBITRATION COMMITTEE

 

TRADE UNION AND LABOUR RELATIONS (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1992

 

SCHEDULE A1 - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING: RECOGNITION

 

DECLARATION OF RECOGNITION

 

 

 

The Parties:

 

GMB

 

 

and

 

 

Tristar Cars Ltd.

 

 

Introduction

 

1.         GMB (the Union) submitted an application to the CAC dated 15 January 2004 that it should be recognised for collective bargaining by Tristar Cars Ltd (the Company) in respect of a bargaining unit comprising ‘[d]rivers operating from control centres in West Drayton, Crawley and Slough’.  The CAC gave both Parties notice of receipt of the application on 20 January 2004.  The Company submitted a response to the CAC on 27 January 2004 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 Chairman established a Panel to consider the case.  The Panel consisted of Professor Gillian Morris, Panel Chairman, and as Members, Mr Rod Hastie and Mr Simon Petch.  The Case Manager appointed to support the Panel was Nigel Cookson.

 

3.         The CAC Panel had extended the acceptance period in this case on two occasions. The initial period expired on 3 February 2004.  The period was extended until 13 February 2004 in order to allow time for a membership and support check to be undertaken, for the Parties to comment thereon and for the Panel to consider such comments before reaching a decision. The period was further extended until 12 March 2004 in order to allow time for a hearing to take place and for the Panel to reach its decision.

 

4.         By a decision dated 12 March 2004, the Panel accepted the Union’s application.  The Parties agreed, prior to acceptance, that the proposed bargaining unit was correctly described as drivers controlled centrally from the Company’s West Drayton Headquarters.  The Parties subsequently agreed the bargaining unit, and this was the same as that proposed by the Union subject to the amended wording above.  The Union did not claim that a majority of the workers constituting the bargaining unit were Union members, so the Panel gave notice to the Parties that it intended to arrange for the holding of a secret ballot.  The Parties were notified accordingly and were advised that the Panel would wait until the end of the notification period of ten working days, as specified in paragraph 24(5), before arranging a secret ballot. The Parties were also asked for their views on which form the ballot should take.

 

5.         In a decision dated 7 April 2004 the Panel announced that the ballot would be a postal ballot.  

 

6.         The Panel directed that a qualified independent person (QIP) should be appointed to conduct a ballot of all workers in the agreed bargaining unit on the question of whether they wished the Union to be recognised for the purposes of conducting collective bargaining on their behalf.

 

The Ballot

 

7.         Electoral Reform Services was appointed as QIP on 20 April 2004 to conduct the ballot and the Parties were notified accordingly.  The balloting period commenced on Wednesday 21 April 2004 and closed on Wednesday 19 May 2004.  The postal ballot papers were despatched on 5 May 2004 to be returned by 10.00 a.m. on Wednesday 19 May 2004. 

 

8.         The QIP reported to the CAC, on Wednesday 19 May 2004, that out of 344 workers in the bargaining unit at the close of the ballot, two hundred and forty-six (246) workers had voted; there were no blank or spoilt papers.  One hundred and eighty-five (185) workers, that is 75.2% of those voting, had voted to support the proposal that the Union be recognised for purposes of collective bargaining with the Company.  Sixty-one (61) workers, that is 24.8% of those voting, had voted to reject that proposal.  The number of votes supporting the proposal as a percentage of the bargaining unit was 53.8%.

 

Declaration of Recognition

 

9.         The CAC informed the Company and the Union on 19 May 2004 of the result of the ballot in accordance with paragraph 29(2) of Schedule A1 to the Act.

 

10.       The ballot establishes that a majority of the workers voting and at least 40% of the workers constituting the bargaining unit support the proposal that the Union should be recognised by the Company for the purpose of conducting collective bargaining in respect of the agreed 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 Schedule A1 to the Act.

 

11.       The CAC declares that the Union is recognised by the Company as entitled to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of the bargaining unit comprising all drivers controlled centrally from the Company’s West Drayton Headquarters.

 

Panel

 

Professor Gillian Morris, Panel Chairman

Mr Rod Hastie

Mr Simon Petch. 

 

24 May 2004