How effectively do Acas resolve collective employment disputes?

About the study

Acas collective conciliation aims to resolve employment disputes between employers and groups of employees, the latter typically represented by trade unions. The service has experienced several changes over recent years and has recently experienced an increase in use after several decades of decline. 

Collective conciliation was last evaluated in 2016, looking at cases that were conciliated in 2014-15. There was therefore a need to update Acas’s understanding of how the service was performing. This report presents the results of a new evaluation of the service, looking at cases that took place in 2022-23. It assesses how the service is being delivered, whether it is achieving its intended impacts, and what improvements could be made.

Findings

In general, conciliators remain highly regarded by customers. However, employee representatives feel more positively about conciliators than do employers, which is unchanged since 2014-15. Pay disputes have significantly increased due to cost of living pressures, leading to disputes escalating more quickly and more threats of industrial action.

Acas's collective conciliation service performance remains largely consistent with 2014-15 levels, maintaining high customer satisfaction and dispute resolution rates. About 75% of disputes are either settled or show progress, with 58% reaching full settlement. 

Despite facing an increase in challenging pay disputes due to economic pressures, Acas has maintained its effectiveness. However, this shift has led to more short-term solutions, potentially increasing the likelihood of recurring disputes. The proportion of long-term resolutions has declined from 76% in 2014-15 to 66% in 2022-23, highlighting the evolving nature of workplace disputes and the ongoing importance of Acas's role in industrial relations.

The qualitative evidence suggests that Acas's collective conciliation service could be enhanced by focusing on improvements in both pre-conciliation preparation and post-conciliation aftercare. For example, aftercare was recognised as valuable, and it could be offered more systematically to enhance long-term workplace relations.

Methodology

This evaluation was based around a Theory of Change, which set out how the collective conciliation service was expected to bring about its intended outcomes and impacts. The service was assessed against the outcomes and impacts identified in the Theory of Change by conducting both a survey of 241 collective conciliation customers who had used the service in 2022-23, and in-depth qualitative interviews with 26 of these customers.