Summary of questions asked at the C1/C2 open question sessions If we do have our own representation will we still be supported by Unite and have a separate bargaining group? No. The proposals under discussion are for the C1/C2 population to be removed completely from Unite’s bargaining unit. Associates may still choose to remain or become members of Unite and be represented on individual matters (such as grievances, disciplinaries or appeals), but the C1/C2 group would not be collectively represented by Unite. If the C1/C2 Consultation Forum was established and you ran a ballot on a particular issue, could HUM ignore the results? Only a ballot run by a recognised trade union is legally binding, however HUM would use the ballot to gauge strength of feeling and direction on an issue; those views would be listened to. We are exploring any firmer guarantee we can give to C1/C2 Associates regarding abiding by the outcome of a company initiated ballot. How many reps would be on the Forum? Based on the current C1/C2 population, there would be six reps, elected by the whole of the C1/C2 population and provided with training to help them perform their rep role. If any of the six reps were Unite members or reps, would this make a ballot legally binding? No, it would not. If any of the reps were Unite members or reps, they would still not fall under collective bargaining arrangements (which make ballot outcomes legally binding) as Unite would need to be formally recognised as collectively representing the C1/C2 population (i.e. under a Recognition Agreement) for this to apply. Could there be different offers, for example for pay review, for the GA and C1/C2 populations? Yes, potentially these arrangements could result in having proposed pay settlements that are tailored for the different populations. Isn’t this just divide and conquer, as was attempted in this year’s pay review with the two different options? From HUM’s perspective, it was about different ways of spending the same amount of money, which would be more or less attractive to different populations and to try to rectify some items which were either considered unfair or were not appropriate for the business in the current operating environment From Unite’s perspective Unite were not in favour of having two different options but HUM felt that discussions had been exhausted. Couldn’t you have different arrangements or offers for the two populations but still keep C1/C2s in the bargaining unit? From Unite’s perspective, we could and have balloted only the population that an issue impacts (shift start times in Line 2 for example, where we only balloted Line 2 Associates). C grade reps input into the Collective Bargaining process and are not excluded by the GA reps. There is also no dominance from any individual rep as Unite operate on an aggregate view. From HUM’s perspective, we would still be concerned that discussions would be dominated by the viewpoints of GA reps, even if we were to increase the number of C1/C2 reps within the Unite recognition agreement, they would still be considerably outnumbered by the GA reps 1 of 3 It sounds like the union don’t want to keep the C1/C2 population? Since the current recognition agreement was put in place in 2002, Unite’s view has been that you’re stronger in the union than not. Over the years typically C1/C2 Associates have chosen not to join. What will make Unite decide whether or not we let you go, is if we see large numbers of you join – then we would say to the company that we want to keep you in the bargaining unit as stated by the Unite official who attended both sessions in room 508 How much divergence in T&C’s does the company predict between GA and C grades? It would depend on what feedback from the C1/C2 population indicated they valued most. There may, for example, be items that wouldn’t be appropriate to put in place for all GAs, but could be accommodated for C1/C2s; more flexible hours for indirect roles for example. We would listen to your feedback before coming up with proposals as HUM currently do Additional questions asked since the open question session What is the proposed mandate for the C1/2 Council, before it can be voted on HUM need to clearly define the structure, selection process, members training, the scope of the council, the powers they have and the companies legal undertakings or commitments towards this council. Whilst the high level proposals were shared at the C1/C2 open question session, we appreciate Associates would like further details, as outlined in the question. We are currently further developing our proposals, including the process that would be in place for ballots and their outcomes. There is suspicion with the timing of this proposal that HUM are trying to get this in place before the announcement of the Job family groups and if the C grades can be split out from the union representation HUM can have the freedom to do as they please. If Honda is serious about this change, why can't the C1/2 Council be put in place now, within the current frame work on the ARC. This will allow it to matured and proven before the vote to break‐a‐way from the collective bargaining group and it would also be after the changes, so to remove this fear. The timing is not linked to the launch of Job Families. The proposals put forward for an Associate Consultative Forum for the C1/C2 population is based upon the model of all Associates being able to stand and vote. This would not be possible under the current recognition agreement as only Unite members may become reps or vote in ballots. If a ballot is taken and the majority of C1/2 population decide to leave the current bargaining group do Unite have to agree to this change before the group can leave? Since the open question sessions, HUM and Unite have spent some time discussing the next stages of the process that would be required if the C1/C2 population were to come out of the bargaining unit. We have agreed to refer the matter to the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC) for their guidance. (The CAC facilitated the establishment of the existing recognition agreement). Who will make the final decision on whether or not C1/C2s remain within the current bargaining group? Please give a clear answer (for example, the decision will be made by ballot of the C1/C2 group, or the decision will be made by consensus between the company and the union). I believe that the company wishes to remove the C1/C2 group from the bargaining group to make it easier to bring in changes to terms and conditions, including job families (and associated pay freezes or reductions), outsourcing, redundancies, removal of company sick pay, reduction of service related holidays. Please can you clearly confirm or deny this. See previous question and response regarding the process for taking proposals further – we are currently 2 of 3 seeking guidance from the CAC. The proposals are to allow for a higher level of engagement with the C1/C2 population than is currently facilitated via the recognition agreement. Any consultation regarding outsourcing or redundancy would require consultation whether this is via Unite/ARC or a C1/C2 consultative forum. The separation of the C1/2 group has not been raised due to anything other than the fact that the business does not feel there is adequate representation of this populations' views and Unite are aware that membership in this population is low. Has the possibility of union representation via a different union for C1/C2's been considered? This would potentially add a further layer of complexity to the arrangements and is not something that HUM is currently exploring and is not something that Unite would ever agree to. Why will HUM not agree to a separate C1 / C2 group for collective bargaining, as allowed under current CAC rulings? This would allow a voting system that worked and had some meaning. This would not address the low Unite membership levels in the C1/C2 population and would not provide a voice for the entire C1/C2 population. What is happening with the PS C grade pay? Is there going to be an increase in basic salary for C grade PS associates and if so is there a date of when this is happening? An Alpha payment was discussed during the pay negotiations earlier in the year but this item was rejected by Associates following a Unite Ballot. The ARC asked for the Company to prepare the best consolidated package possible for all with extras removed. This item was therefore not included in the final package. We are currently undertaking a further review of up‐to‐date market data to establish if there are any roles where HUM salaries/benefits have fallen behind the market. If the review highlights an area of concern we will formulate proposals to address this. I have noticed that the Union only represent Direct workers in the pay deals which is the reason I have never joined so my question is: ‐ Would it be possible for Indirect workers to have their own union to give a true representation of our requirements? To introduce a different union, other than our recognised trade union, Unite, would potentially add a further layer of complexity to the arrangements and is not something that HUM is currently exploring and is not something that Unite would ever agree to. With regards to the C1/C2 representation I would like to see a set of rules in place that would give confidence to the C1/C2 group that the representative group would be listened to. The guide lines shown at the recent C1/C2 open forum were weak. But everything needs a starting point. Q1 Will there be improved guide lines based on feedback from the forums. Q2 Will the avenue be explored to make it legally binding Q3 If it is not legally binding will it be written into the HR procedure (including no changes to be made to the guidelines without first consulting the C1/C2 group / representatives) that would make it a part of how HUM functions. This would at least give some confidence that the related processes would take place. Thank you for your feedback. We agree that some further detail will help to provide a clearer picture of how a new arrangement will operate. We will take on board the feedback from the Q&A sessions, plus questions that have been posed subsequently to draw up more detailed proposals. We are exploring any firmer guarantee we can give to C1/C2 Associates regarding abiding by the outcome of a company initiated ballot. If agreement is gained to providing this commitment, it would be written into the Forum constitution document; any changes to this document in the future would require consultation with the elected Forum. 3 of 3