R (Cable & Wireless Services UK Ltd) v Central Arbitration Committee: [2008] EWHC 115 (Admin)

QBD: Collins J: 4 February 2008

A trade union made an application to the defendant committee, pursuant to Part 1 of Schedule A1 to the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, seeking recognition to be entitled to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of a proposed bargaining unit made up of field services employees constituting 7% of the claimant company’s workforce. The committee upheld the application and decided that the proposed bargaining unit was the appropriate one for the purposes of paragraph 19(2) of Schedule A1.

The company sought judicial review of the committee’s decision, contending that the committee had misconstrued “small fragmented bargaining units” when considering the desirability of avoiding such units pursuant to paragraph 19B(3)(c).

Collins J held:
Paragraph 19B(3)(c) of Schedule A1 to the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 required the committee, when considering whether a proposed bargaining unit was appropriate, to look both at whether the unit was small and whether it was fragmented, and, while the unit in question might be small, smallness would not of itself necessarily result in fragmentation. Although small fragmented bargaining units were in themselves undesirable, what was regarded as undesirable was the risk of the proliferation of such units likely to result from the creation of a unit lacking in any obviously identifiable boundary. In the circumstances of the present case, there had been no error of law in the committee’s decision that the proposed unit would not be likely to lead to the establishment of other units, and it had been entitled to conclude that it was an appropriate unit for recognition.

The claim was dismissed.

Appearances: Nigel Giffin QC (Herbert Smith LLP) for the claimant company; Paul Nicholls (Pattinson & Brewer) for the union as the interested party; the defendant committee did not appear and was not represented.