Collective Bargaining: Unlawful Inducement

THE FACTS

As we reported (available here), the EAT last year considered section 145B of the Trade Union Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act (TULR(C)A) for the first time. The EAT's decision, which went against the employer Kostal, upheld the employment tribunal's decision that Kostal had offered employees unlawful inducements to cease collective bargaining when it directly offered them a package of terms and conditions, going over the head of the recognised trade union. Kostal appealed to the Court of Appeal.

Section 145B prohibits employers making offers to workers who are members of a recognised trade union, if acceptance of the offer would have "the prohibited result" and the employer's sole or main purpose in making the offer is to achieve that result. The "prohibited result" is that the workers' terms of employment, or any of those terms, "will not (or will no longer) be determined by collective agreement negotiated on behalf of the union". The aim of the legislation is to prevent employers going over the head of the union with direct offers to workers in order to achieve the result that one or more terms will not be determined by collective agreement.

The recognition agreement between Unite and Kostal provided that formal pay negotiations would take place annually, and that any proposed changes to terms and conditions would be negotiated with Unite. In 2015, Unite and Kostal entered into pay negotiations for the first time. Kostal offered a 2% increase in basic pay and a lump sum Christmas bonus in return for (amongst other things) a reduction of sick pay for new joiners and a reduction in Sunday overtime. Unite felt that it could not recommend the offer made by Kostal and gave its members a "free vote" in a subsequent ballot. Only 20% of those who turned out voted to accept the proposal. Kostal was disappointed in this result and it wrote to Unite informing it that Kostal was going to write to every individual employee to offer the pay increase and changes to terms and conditions. Kostal put up posters in the workplace explaining this and then wrote to every employee, setting out the pay offer and explaining that if the offer was not accepted by 18 December, employees would not receive a Christmas bonus.

In January, Kostal wrote again to employees who had not accepted the offer, this time offering a 4% increase in basic pay if they agreed to the proposed changes in terms and conditions and threatening dismissal if they did not do...