Employer against Union being recognised- Help please.

jacques_chirac

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

I am sure someone will explain but I find it hard to see how they choose which sections of a company they can target and which ones they can exclude.

They can, as long as the members of that unit all have a common characteristic and mutual interests - shopfloor workers would be distinct from admin staff.

(I can't post links but there is lots of information on Google as to how the relevant group is determined.)

Takeaway_Addict

anamenottaken wrote: »

I think it is about what constitutes a "bargaining unit". It might also be appropriate for different unions to represent different sections of the workforce.

Certainly it seems the OP is concerned that shopfloor and office workers may have differing views on representation.

Just seems very convenient for unions lol

jacques_chirac

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

Just seems very convenient for unions lol

And can make relations between departments very messy - this is what happened with the Ford sewing machine workers in the 1960's, they were not entitled to the same deals negotiated for the equivalent male workers.

anamenottaken

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

Just seems very convenient for unions lol

Not necessarily.
Demarcation disputes come to mind (though that can work both ways).

Andy_L

antrobus wrote: »

Because it's a distinct "bargaining unit". Possibly.

Isn't the GMB a blue-collar workers union so the white-collar office staff would typically join a different one

ValHaller

bob_dob wrote: »

I was under the impression that so long as we had over 50% of the shop floor workforce joined up to a union then such a ballot would be irrelevant?

As far as I can see the bosses' ballot is irrelevant - particularly if it is not conducted with the Union. If I were a member in the situation, I would be looking at putting a letter together signed by at least 50% of the staff in the proposed bargaining unit, the letter to identify the bargaining unit.

colino

The bosses are taking an active view of union interest. If a company employs more than 20 people and the company hasn't voluntarily recognised the union (in this case it seems to be gauging employees interest) the union can seek to be recognised under a set process. For the first time in decades unions appear to be actively seeking new members. Probably because of huge decline in membership and it is finally dawning on some that a whole lot of TU wages aren't going to be covered soon. What collective bargaining goes on at the moment without a union and what will be added to really benefit members justifying the check offs?

ohreally

When making a formal application, the union has to identify the bargaining unit for which it is seeking recognition. This is the group of workers it wants to represent. It is important to choose the bargaining unit carefully, as the outcome of any eventual ballot can hang on who is, or is not, included in the unit. The law says that the CAC must examine whether a bargaining unit is “compatible with effective management”.

The courts have interpreted this to mean that the union’s bargaining unit will usually only be successfully challenged where the employer can show that it is not compatible with management. It does not have to be the most effective unit of organisation, as long as it is not an ineffective one. If the employer successfully challenges the union’s preferred bargaining unit, the CAC can impose a different one. At this stage the union may choose to withdraw the application.


Normally only one union can apply for recognition for the bargaining unit at a time. Where more than one union wishes to gain recognition for the same group, they must apply together and show that they are capable of co-operation. If they cannot do this, both applications are invalid. A union cannot apply for statutory recognition where there is already a recognised union, even if the recognised union does not have the support of the majority of the workforce in the bargaining unit. An employer can even decide to recognise another union at any time until the CAC accepts the application as valid, which would block the first union from making a statutory claim.


If the union has recruited more than half the workers in the bargaining unit, the CAC may be able to award recognition without the need for a ballot. Only a minority of unions have achieved statutory recognition this way. Generally, the claim goes through a series of procedures and is most likely to be concluded by means of a secret ballot of workers.

To win a recognition ballot it is not enough simply to get a majority of the votes cast (50% plus one). At least 40% of the entire bargaining unit must also vote in favour of recognition. In effect, abstentions count as votes against the union.

If employers and unions cannot reach an agreement on procedures, the CAC will impose one. This will normally involve setting up a joint negotiating body and a six-stage bargaining procedure, with each stage having a specified timetable.

Although the law on recognition appears extremely complicated, unions have had significant successes since its introduction. It has led to both statutory awards for recognition and to a significant increase in voluntary recognition, as employers realise that they could secure a more acceptable agreement through co-operation.

..........

bob_dob

Just an update: The GMB have spoken to our manager and the GMB now proposes to include the office staff and count us as a 'whole'. A lot of the factory floor employees are angry that they 'Don't want the office staff on board' for various reasons but suffice to say they smell a rat as we(they) specifically asked the GMB for us not to be connected to the office staff. They are upset at the prospect of the office staff joining us but aren't quite sure why.

Please can I ask are there any negatives to the office staff joining us? Or positives?

Thank you.

ohreally

By office staff, do you mean managers?