The NFU recently raised these concerns directly with the GCA (Groceries Code Adjudicator), sharing evidence and urging the regulator to focus on retailer compliance with the seven golden rules, which are designed to promote transparency, collaboration and fair treatment throughout commercial negotiations.
GCA’s remit
The GCA cannot decide whether a retailer should accept or reject a CPI (cost price increase) request.
What it can influence, however, is the transparency, fairness and timeliness of the process. For growers and suppliers, that distinction is crucial.
Retailer behaviour mixed
Evidence emerging from the sector suggests that some retailers operate a clear and predictable process, while others can leave suppliers facing long periods of uncertainty.
Several members have spoken to the NFU describing a well-established “playbook” used consistently across buying teams, indicating that the issue is often systemic rather than the result of an individual buyer’s approach.
While some retailers are viewed as relatively predictable in their handling of CPI discussions, others are perceived as less structured, making outcomes and timelines harder to anticipate.
A key concern is the so-called “head in the sand” approach. Members report about being asked to provide detailed evidence by a specific deadline, only to hear nothing for weeks or even months afterwards.
Golden rules
The seven golden rules are as follows:
- Clear communication from the outset about the process and how long it will take.
- Awareness of the greater impact on smaller suppliers, with appropriate prioritisation.
- Support for buyers from colleagues experienced in handling CPI discussions.
- Only requesting the specific information needed to make a decision – no unnecessary data demands.
- Clear communication of the outcome, avoiding any ambiguity.
- No automatic delists or fixed delist notice periods as a result of CPI negotiations.
- Strict compliance with competition law, including never asking suppliers about other retailers’ plans or retail prices.
Provide evidence to the GCA
The GCA is interested to informally hear more from growers about these behaviours and is asking for more granular evidence about buyers’ delay tactics. More specifically:
- What information is being asked for, beyond what is reasonable, and how is it being asked for?
- Is it clear why the buyer wants the information?
- Was the CPI request escalated to the buyer’s manager?
- Did this cause a delay?
- How long did the escalation take?
- What communication, if any, was received during the period of silence?
These details help build a clearer picture of retailer behaviour and demonstrate whether processes align with the principles of transparency set out in GSCOP (Groceries Supply Code of Practice).
Member feedback important
The NFU would welcome receiving further evidence from members on buying practices that appear inconsistent with the requirements of GSCOP or the principles set out in the seven golden rules.
Member feedback plays an important role in helping the NFU identify common concerns and engage constructively with the adjudicator.
Any evidence shared with the NFU will be treated in the strictest confidence and will be shared anonymously to the GCA’s office.
To further reduce the risk of individual businesses being identified, the NFU will collate evidence shared with us into overarching themes and trends. Feedback provided to the GCA will not include business names, crop sectors or any other identifying information, ensuring members can raise concerns in confidence while helping the NFU and GCA to build a clearer picture of retailer behaviour across the sector.
Members willing to share evidence with the NFU and the GCA can do so by submitting information in confidence via [email protected].
Keeping records
For growers navigating CPI negotiations, good record-keeping is increasingly important.
NFU members are being encouraged to keep detailed timelines on record. This includes documenting when initial engagement took place; what information was requested; when it was supplied; the deadlines that were agreed; and how long any subsequent delays lasted.
Equally important is knowing and recording how your data was used internally by the retailer and whether further requests for evidence extended the process unnecessarily.
Maintaining a clear timeline of interactions can provide valuable evidence should concerns arise. The GCA recommends that members make full use of the language contained within GSCOP and the GCA’s seven golden rules when drafting correspondence to buyers, helping to reinforce expectations around fair dealing, transparency and timely communication throughout the negotiation process.