Case 2600341/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Cattermole v SPS Technologies Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2600341/2023
- Decision date
- 10 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Adkinson
- Panel members
- Ms J Barrowclough, Ms K McLeod
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Cattermole
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Cattermole was employed by SPS Technologies Limited as a setter and was a UNITE convenor. The dispute arose after the announcement of an extra bank holiday for the Queen’s funeral on 19 September 2022, when SPS decided it would be a normal working day. Mr Cattermole obtained a memo from AETC, another company in the same wider group, saying AETC staff could take the day as holiday or work it and take another day later in the year.
The tribunal accepted that Mr Cattermole printed and distributed about five copies of the memo on the factory floor, and found that this happened at an “appropriate time” because he had implied permission to step away briefly from work. It also found that UNITE had not instructed him to distribute the memo; the decision to do so was his alone, although Mr Purslow did not object if that was what he chose to do.
The tribunal found Mr Cattermole’s real purpose was to agitate fellow employees and pressure management to grant the Monday as a holiday, rather than to carry out an activity of UNITE. It considered that he did not use the normal union channels available to him, such as the WhatsApp group or noticeboard, did not add any union context to the memo, and did not begin a grievance or negotiation. On that basis, it held that his conduct was not an activity of an independent trade union within section 146 TULCRA 1992.
Because Mr Cattermole was not undertaking protected trade union activities, the claim failed and was dismissed. The tribunal said that the respondent’s reason for the 6-month verbal warning did not arise for decision once that conclusion had been reached.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | Single claim under s.146 TULCRA 1992 alleging detriment for activities of an independent trade union at an appropriate time. Tribunal held Mr Cattermole was not undertaking activities of UNITE when he printed and distributed the AETC memo, so the claim fell outside s.146(1)(b). | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- s.146 TULCRA 1992
- s.148(1) TULCRA 1992
- Yewdall v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2005] EWCA Civ 1549
- Chant v Aquaboats Limited [1978] ICR 643
- Dixon v West Ella Developments Limited [1978] ICR 856
- University College, London v Brown [2021] IRLR 200
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.