- MR M PUAR (COUNSEL) FOR THE v Mr S Davies (counsel – unregistered) — 2025

The claimant, a GMB member and field-based employee who transferred to the respondent on 1 April 2018, was elected as a GMB workplace organiser and health and safety representative on 26 July 2021. He was given paid time off for organiser training and level 1 health and safety training, then in April 2022 asked for health and safety documents and raised a grievance after being told to go through the National Staff Council and that the respondent did not recognise him as a safety representative.

The tribunal held that the 1996 collective agreement remained the relevant recognition agreement and that, for the purposes of the Safety Representatives and Safety Committees Regulations 1977, the GMB was a recognised trade union. It also held that the claimant had been validly notified under Regulation 3(2), so he was appointed as a safety representative. However, the tribunal found that Regulation 4(2) only required time off that was necessary, and on the facts it was not necessary to create a separate health and safety structure or give the claimant the additional time off sought because the respondent already had a comprehensive SHEQ system and formal trade union involvement through the NSC/HSSC.

The tribunal therefore dismissed the Regulation 4(2) claim. It also dismissed the s.146 and s.170 TULR(C)A 1992 claims and the s.44 ERA 1996 detriment claim, treating them as largely dependent on the same underlying allegation. It accepted the respondent's case that its purpose was to avoid duplicating existing health and safety arrangements rather than to deter union membership or activities, and it found no separate evidential basis for the asserted detriments, including the complaint about correspondence and the grievance outcome. No financial award was made.