Member

This would preserve the Government’s aim of stability in most circumstances while allowing the CAC to respond to genuinely transformative changes. It is not carte blanche for frequent challenges; rather, it would require the CAC to be satisfied that the restructuring is “substantial”, meaning it must materially alter who is in the unit or how the unit functions in collective bargaining. This strikes the right balance: it prevents frivolous or incremental challenges, yet it also ensures that in cases of genuine change, representation would remain fit for purpose. I simply cannot understand why the Government would not want to accept that amendment. I could go on with examples, but I will not.