Case
Number TUR1/446/2005
18 October 2005
CENTRAL
ARBITRATION COMMITTEE
TRADE
UNION AND LABOUR RELATIONS (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1992
SCHEDULE
A1 - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING: RECOGNITION
DECLARATION
THAT UNION IS NOT ENTITLED TO BE RECOGNISED
The Parties:
Amicus
And
Baker Oil Tools
Introduction
1. Amicus (the Union) submitted an application to the
CAC dated 7 April 2005 that it should be recognised for collective
bargaining by Baker Oil Tools (the Employer) for “Machine Shop; Warehouse;
Gofers; Inspection; Toolroom; Maintenance; Welders;
Assembly; Labourers and Apprentices” at the premises
of Woodside Road, Aberdeen.
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 deal with the case. The Panel consisted of Professor Kenny Miller, Deputy
Chairman, and, as Members, Mrs Maureen Shaw and Mr Bill Speirs. The
Case Manager appointed to support the Panel was Sarah Kendall.
3. By
a decision dated 16 May 2005,
the Panel accepted the Union's application and, as no
agreement was reached on the bargaining unit, subsequently invited both Parties
to supply the Panel with, and to exchange, written submissions relating to the
question of the determination of the appropriate bargaining unit. A hearing was held on 13 July 2005. In a decision dated 28 July
2005 the Panel
decided that the appropriate bargaining unit was, “Machine Shop; Warehouse;
Gofers; Inspection; Toolroom; Maintenance; Welders;
Assembly; Labourers and Apprentices” at the premises
of Woodside Road, Aberdeen.
4. The
Panel, not satisfied that a majority of workers constituting the bargaining
unit were members of the Union, gave notice that it
intended to arrange a ballot. The Panel
asked for the Parties views on the form of the ballot. The Employer, in its letter dated 4 August 2005,
stated that it would
prefer a workplace ballot to take place, as the bargaining unit was located at
a single site and that the business would be able to accommodate a workplace ballot
for approximately 200 people. The Union in its letter dated 15 August
2005 confirmed
that its preference would be a workplace ballot.
5. As
the Parties were in agreement regarding the form of ballot, the Panel confirmed
the ballot should be a workplace ballot in a letter to both Parties dated 16 August
2005.
The Ballot
6. Once an access agreement had been
reached by the Parties, the Panel directed that Popularis Limited was appointed as the Qualified Independent
Person (QIP) on 15 September 2005. The
QIP conducted the ballot of all workers in the bargaining
unit on the question of whether they wished the Union
to be recognised for the purposes of collective bargaining on their behalf and
the Parties were notified accordingly. The balloting period commenced on 16
September 2005
and closed on 13 October 2005.
Ballot papers were posted to workers that it was known in advance would
not to be at work on either 12 or 13 October 2005, the days on which the workplace ballot was
being held. The QIP determined that
postal ballot papers were to be returned by first post on 13
October 2005. The workplace ballot was carried out at the Bridge of Don site on 12 October 2005 between the hours of 13.00 and 16.00 and on 13
October 2005 between
the hours of 22.00 and 01.00.
7. The QIP reported to the CAC, on 13 October 2005,
that of the 186 workers in the bargaining unit, 181 workers had voted in the
ballot. This represented 97.31% of the
eligible vote. There were three spoilt
ballot papers. Of those who had voted in
the ballot, 100 (55.25%) workers had voted to reject the proposal whilst 78 (43.09%)
workers had voted in support of the proposal that the Union
be recognised for the purpose of collective bargaining. The number of votes supporting the proposal as
a percentage of the bargaining unit was 41.94%.
Declaration that the Union is not entitled to be recognised
8. In accordance with paragraph 29 (2) of
Schedule A1 of the Act the CAC informed the Union
and the Employer on 14
October 2005 of the result of the ballot.
9. Paragraph 29(3) of the Schedule directs
that if the result of the secret ballot is that the Union is supported by a
majority of the workers voting and that the Union is supported by at least 40%
of the workers constituting the bargaining unit then the CAC must issue a
declaration that the Union is recognised as entitled to conduct collective
bargaining on behalf of the bargaining unit.
10. The ballot did not establish that a
majority of the workers voting supported the proposal that the Union
should be recognised by the Employer for the purposes of collective bargaining
on behalf of the bargaining unit.
11. Accordingly, the CAC declares that the Union
is not recognised by the Employer as entitled to conduct collective bargaining
on behalf of the workers constituting the bargaining unit specified in
paragraph 3 of this decision.
Panel:
Professor Kenny Miller
Mrs Maureen Shaw
Mr Bill Speirs
18 October 2005