In person For the v Respondent — 2023

The tribunal heard claims by Ms Balbas Brigido and Mr Mbeki, both health and safety representatives, arising from the respondent's decision in 2021/2022 to reduce the release days previously used for workplace inspections from 10 days to 5 days per round of inspections. It found that the 2015 arrangement had been reached through discussions and email exchanges, but there was no complete written document showing a binding rule that the number of days could never be revisited, and the Chair of the MATS Function Council was entitled to consider and approve release days rather than simply rubber-stamp them.

The claim under Regulation 4(2) failed because the tribunal was not satisfied that the claimants had shown the extra time they wanted, including travel time, report writing time, time with TOMs and time to speak to staff, was necessary for the inspections. It accepted that the inspections varied in length, but found no evidence that the claimants could not complete the July and October 2022 inspections within the 5 days allowed, and no evidence that any health and safety risk had arisen from the reduction. The tribunal also found that travel to the first site and home from the last site was commuting time, not a right to paid inspection time, and that the claimants had not proved paid travel time was a facility they reasonably required under Regulation 5(3).

The Regulation 7(1) document claim also failed. The tribunal found that there was no single 2015 agreement document available for inspection and copying, that the respondent had tried to locate it, and that neither the unions nor the witnesses had produced a copy. On the section 2(6) consultation issue, the tribunal found that the respondent had consulted over a period of about six months, from September 2021 to April 2022, through meetings, emails, an ad hoc meeting and a Tier 2 directors' meeting, and that the proposal was discussed rather than imposed as a fait accompli. It therefore did not uphold any part of the claims and later ordered costs against the claimants: Mr Mbeki was ordered to pay £3,000 and Ms Balbas Brigido £4,000.