Union Recognition Letter

From: Ian Allinson, MSF Group Secretary
To: Karen Meakin, HPS HR Director
Date: 04/11/99

Karen,
we are writing to you about a very serious matter.  Earlier this
week, Mike Russell supplied John Wood with a series of responses
to issues we'd raised as part of our grievance over the HPS job
cuts and reorganisation.

His answer to question 4 included the statement:
"For A&TC staff remaining at MAN05, recognition will not apply."

This is not a decision for Mike to make, but a matter of written
agreement between ICL and MSF.

MSF has a union recognition agreement with "ICL West Gorton site".
Section 4.1 reads:

>The Management recognises the Association as the trade union
>having the right to represent members employed on the West Gorton
>site and negotiate on behalf of staff up to and including GSS17
>employed on the West Gorton site excluding those for whom other
>bargaining arrangements exist.

Since union recognition was withdrawn nationally, ICL has
interpreted the last clause to refer to certain parts of what is
now OSD which had separate bargaining arrangements, which were
withdrawn.

A&TC did not exist at the time the union recognition agreement was
signed, and the staff in question are being moved from an area
where union recognition has not been in dispute.  Staff being
moved from HPS to A&TC at West Gorton clearly ARE covered by the
union recognition agreement.

When ICL uses the slogan "One ICL", we can't believe the company
would want to behave in such a hypocritical way as to reduce
employee's rights at work simply because they are moved from one
part of the organisation to another.

As you are aware, we are currently engaged in the grievance
procedure over this reorganisation.  To be notified AFTER the
transfers have taken place that ICL has broken the union
recognition agreement is unacceptable.  ICL has not registered
a "Failure To Agree" in the grievance procedure, and we expect
the status quo (i.e. union recognition) to hold.

Employees would be angry enough if ICL were trying (again) to
take away their right to choose who represents them.  Further
factors would make ICL's action even more provocative:
1) ICL hasn't even given MSF notice to end union recognition (as
required by the agreement).  We understand that even some
of the staff involved haven't been told.
2) ICL have picked 3 out of 6 (50%) of the MSF reps in HPS to
be moved to A&TC, compared with picking 14 out of 638 (2%) of
the HPS population.  If ICL really removed union recognition
from this group, this could only be interpreted as union-
busting, discrimination, and victimisation.
3) ICL plans to move most staff into A&TC, so your employees
would see this as the start of an attempt at full-scale union
derecognition.

We can only assume that the statement was made in error.  Until
this has been through the proper grievance procedure, we assume
that the status quo (i.e. union recognition) applies.  We do hope
you can promptly defuse this situation.

It would be strange indeed for ICL to adopt such a confrontational
approach at a time when we are trying to build a more constructive
working relationship at local and national level.

In order to deal with this, and other questions around the HPS
job cuts, we need to postpone Monday's Health & Safety grievance
meeting.

We look forward to ICL's considered response to the points we have
raised, which we expect within a week.  We would be happy to hold
a formal meeting to seek an agreed solution, if issues remain.

MSF