Mr M Bell v Unite the Union AT A HEARING — 2021

The tribunal heard Mr M Bell's complaint against Unite the Union at Leeds by CVP on 9 and 10 March 2021 before Employment Judge Lancaster and members C Childs and EC McEvoy. It identified the central issue as the "reason why question": whether one reason for any discipline, if there was discipline, was that Mr Bell had brought a complaint to the Certification Officer about his purported removal from the post of Health and Safety Representative.

The tribunal accepted that the protected act was clearly established and noted that the dispute about his removal from post had been resolved on 25 June 2019 when he withdrew the Certification Officer complaint after being reconfirmed in post. It considered it arguable that the decision of the regional officer on 8 October 2019 to give effect to the workplace petition and to hold a fresh election before the end of Mr Bell's three-year term could amount to discipline or some other detriment, but it nevertheless found against the Claimant and held that the complaint was not well founded.

Unite's application for costs, limited to £1,000, was refused. The tribunal said Mr Bell had not conducted the proceedings unreasonably and that the claim did not have no reasonable prospect of success from the outset. It also noted that he was unrepresented, that there had been no successful preliminary application challenging the merits, that the Respondent had partly contributed to the lack of clarity about the central issue, and that although Mr Bell earned £38,000 per annum he had debts of about £60,000 under a debt management programme.