A recent case highlights the current technicalities around a worker’s right to be accompanied.

In the case of Wolfe v Taka Mayfair Ltd, Wolfe was the Head Sommelier at the Taka Mayfair restaurant in London. He was called in for a meeting with the owners at the end of his shift, and was dismissed. Wolfe had not been informed of the purpose of the meeting or even the potential outcome.

Although Wolfe’s one month of service meant he was unable to bring a claim of ordinary unfair dismissal, he did instead make a claim to the tribunal of breaching the statutory right to be accompanied. As Wolfe had not been made aware of the meeting’s purpose, or given any notice, he argued that he was unable to bring a companion, thus breaching his right to be accompanied.

However, the Employment Tribunal (ET) dismissed the claim, citing that the requirements for the statutory right to be accompanied, under Section 10(1) of the Employment Relations Act 1999, are as follows:

(i) The worker must be invited or required to attend a disciplinary or grievance hearing; and
(ii) The worker must make a reasonable request to be accompanied.

As Wolfe had not made a request to be accompanied in the meeting, the claim could not be successful. Wolfe appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT).

The EAT agreed with the ET’s ruling but acknowledged that, if Wolfe had requested to be accompanied, this could have become a duty for the employer.

Wolfe went on to argue that the employer had breached the Acas Code of Practice in their failure not to provide any notice in writing or outline his right to be accompanied; however, the EAT identified that the Acas Code of Practice was not law.

It is important to recognise that, had Wolfe had sufficient service, he would’ve been able to make an unfair dismissal claim, and the lack of notice in writing and the right to be accompanied would have contributed significantly to the facts of this claim.

The current statutory right limits the right for employees and workers to be accompanied to certain meetings; namely those that may result in a warning or an action (such as demotion or dismissal), or the appeal meeting. Companions must also either be a colleague, trade union representative or an official who is employed by the trade union to act as a companion for such meetings.

Employees are also permitted to propose an alternative time for the meeting (before the end of five working days) if their companion is unavailable.

Therefore, while the case of Wolfe vs Taka Mayfair Ltd suggests that the worker has to request the right to be accompanied, there are still plenty of obligations on the part of the employer, and good practice would suggest allowing companions beyond statutory requirements.

There are now also prospective changes to the Acas Code of Practice, with a consultation looking at expanding statutory rights and identifying the employer’s obligation to make reasonable adjustments for workers with disabilities (as per the Equality Act 2010), which can include allowing a support worker or interpreter to act as a companion.

The right to be accompanied only applies if a worker asks for it. Telling staff about the right upfront, rather than waiting to be asked, protects you if a decision is challenged later. Contact Solutions for HR to review your disciplinary and grievance procedures.

Amy Reeves vs Kier Ltd

Amy Reeves started as a Commercial Administrator with Kier Ltd on a 12-month fixed-term contract from November 2024 to November 2025. Reeves described herself as being British and Jamaican and, during her time at the Company, reported a series of events that led to her tribunal claim.

On her first day, there was a comment made by a colleague referring to a tenant as a “little old black lady”, which made Reeves feel uncomfortable. Later incidents included having a colleague make comments which she viewed as mocking non-English names, and another colleague referring to two women standing outside the office as “two coloured ladies outside.”

Reeves raised these initial concerns to the Operational Manager, Wayne Bramley, but she chose not to follow this up with HR, as she had felt supported by the conversation with Bramley. He did, however, send staff an email reminding them of respectful behaviour and appropriate training.

Reeves later reported further incidents, such as colleagues whispering in the office (which Reeves believed to relate to her), a failure to include a photograph of Reeves with a photograph of colleagues attending a client event that she did not attend, her tasks being deleted and reassigned by a colleague, and a change to her contract end date.

Reeves went on to submit a formal grievance and went off with work-related stress, during which time the Company tried to keep in touch with welfare calls and offers of support, including occupational health referrals and temporary relocation. The grievance was not upheld, and Reeves resigned in July 2025 before making a claim to the tribunal for harassment related to race, direct race discrimination and victimisation. The claims were dismissed by the tribunal.

Under section 26 of the Equality Act, harassment occurs where an employee experiences unwanted conduct related to a protected characteristic, such as sex, race or disability, and that conduct has the purpose or effect of violating their dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment for them.

In relation to the comment of the two women, the tribunal acknowledged that this was a single comment related to race and, although old-fashioned and upsetting to Reeves, was not, in all the circumstances, reasonable for the comment to have had the effect on Reeves that would amount to harassment.

The other comment relating to a “little old Black lady” was considered to be a descriptor without any negative connotations, and the mocking comments were unsubstantiated. The reassigned tasks were carried out while she had been on sick leave to ensure that her work was being carried out in her absence, and the change to the contract end date had been a result of an IT system update that affected all staff, and had no actual impact on her contract terms.

The tribunal also took into account the level of support provided by the Company, and rejected the claim that Reeves’ grievance wasn’t handled properly or that she had been victimised. The Company had clear evidence of trying to engage with Reeves and offer support throughout the process, including adjustments to her work, and exploring all of the concerns that she had raised.

This case shows that tribunals will consider all circumstances of a claim, including the purpose or effect of actions or comments, and if this would be seen as reasonable to have the effect reported by the claimant.

Whilst in this example the Tribunal found that it was not reasonable for the conduct to have had this effect, employers should however make sure that offensive comments are speedily challenged, and respect and inclusion is ensured. This case highlights the importance of employers responding appropriately to concerns, taking reasonable steps, and offering continued support.

The comments alone weren’t enough to amount to harassment in this case, but that outcome isn’t guaranteed. What protects you afterwards is challenging comments quickly, investigating fairly and supporting the employee through a grievance. Contact Solutions for HR to review your grievance process.

After the Royal Assent was given to the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Act 2025 back in December 2025, employers will face further requirements and liabilities for right-to-work checks within the workplace from the 1st October 2026.

Namely, the requirement for employers to carry out right to work checks will no longer be limited to staff who have a direct contractual relationship with the employer; instead, the definition of employment will be expanded to include any individual who is personally providing a service to the employer.

Employers will be expected to ensure that sufficient right to work checks are carried out for individuals employed under worker contracts, as well as individual subcontractors, and those who have been engaged through online matching services, such as food delivery or courier services.

This means that where an employer is part of a chain of contracts for supplying services, they can be held liable and receive a civil penalty if there is evidence of illegal working in the chain. However, it is important to note that this does not apply to an employer purchasing services for their own use (i.e., the end user).

The Government has published and updated a series of documents and guidance for employers (currently still in draft), including:

• Employer’s guide to right to work checks
• Code of Practice on preventing illegal working: Right to work scheme for employers
• Code of Practice for employers: Avoiding unlawful discrimination while preventing illegal working

The guidance helps to outline the checks that employers are required to carry out in order to avoid civil penalties, and the new extended statutory excuse for employers.

With these updates due to take effect, employers are being advised to review their onboarding processes to ensure that these will be in line with the new requirements. Employers should check their right to work policies and procedures, provide further training to staff involved in the right to work process, and set up regular audits for staff and supply chains to ensure continued compliance. 

Right to work checks now cover subcontractors, casual workers and anyone supplied through an online platform, not just direct employees. A civil penalty applies per worker, whether or not you employ them directly. Contact Solutions for HR if you’re not sure your checks cover this.

Employees resigning shortly before or during a disciplinary process is not unusual.

However, an employee’s resignation does not always bring disciplinary proceedings to an end.

Employers should weigh up the situation and any potential risks before accepting the resignation.

If the resignation is with immediate effect, they are no longer an employee; therefore, you don’t have the same level of control.

In these situations, it may be appropriate to accept the resignation and draw a line under the process.

However, employers should consider the nature of the allegations and whether it is appropriate to proceed in the employee’s absence, especially if the allegations are serious, illegal, or the industry is a regulated one such as education, childcare or healthcare.

Continuing with the process in the employee’s absence allows a formal conclusion and ensures that a record is made of the outcome.

This will allow any further reporting to be concluded, for example, a safeguarding referral.

Although an employee who resigns after misconduct allegations can’t then claim unfair dismissal, there is the potential for claims of constructive dismissal or even discrimination.

Therefore, employers must continue to act reasonably, follow a fair process and keep necessary records, even where an individual chooses to resign before matters have concluded.

Handling a resignation like this correctly reduces the risk of a constructive dismissal or discrimination claim. Contact Solutions for HR before it becomes one.

New restrictions on ‘exploitative’ zero-hours contracts

The Employment Rights Act 2025 stops short of banning zero-hours contracts, but new restrictions will be introduced.

The Government are consulting on the proposed changes to zero-hours contracts, and this consultation closes on the 25th of August 2026.

The restrictions will focus on a new right for zero, low or irregular hours workers to a ‘guaranteed hours offer’ which reflects the number of hours they have regularly worked over a specified period, provided their work history and hours meet certain conditions.

This new rule would ensure that employees’ contracts reflect an average number of hours that they regularly work over a reference period and aims to provide some stability for employees.

There is currently an open consultation which aims to set out the finer details of this new right, such as:

• A potential 12-week reference period for working out regular hours per week;
• A threshold for low hours, which is currently proposed at eight to 20 hours per week.

Workers will also have special legal protection against detriment/dismissal in connection with the terms of the guaranteed hours offer.

If you want to find out more and/or have your say on how these changes will form, visit Make Work Pay on the gov.uk website.

The changes are expected to come into effect sometime in 2027.

We can help you prepare ahead of 2027. Contact Solutions for HR today.

Strengthened Rights from October 2026

The Employment Rights Act 2025 enhances the duty to prevent sexual harassment from the 30th October 2026 by requiring an employer to take ‘all’ reasonable steps to prevent harassment (currently it is “reasonable steps”).

In addition, there is an obligation on employers not to permit the harassment of their employees by third parties.

Moving from “reasonable steps” to “all reasonable steps” means employers must do more to prove they are complying.

Employers must demonstrate comprehensive, documented, and continuous actions to stop both internal and third-party harassment.

This should include risk assessments, introduction of specific policies that explicitly cover sexual harassment and employee and management training.

Solutions for HR are able to offer training on the education and prevention of harassment and sexual harassment.

Please get in touch for further details.

In addition, reporting sexual harassment will amount to a protected disclosure for whistleblowing protection.

New Rights from October 2026

On the 30th October 2026, UK employers must provide all workers with a written statement informing them of their legal right to join a trade union.

This requires employers to give workers a written statement advising them of their right to join a union, delivered at the start of employment alongside the worker’s written statement of particulars or contract. It is expected that the Regulations will require annual updates or reminders.

The duty applies to all employers in England, Wales, and Scotland, regardless of size or whether a union is recognised. Every worker is entitled to receive this statement.

The exact content of the statement will be confirmed in time; however, it is expected that this will include:

• A brief overview of the functions of a trade union.
• A summary of statutory rights for union members, including protection from detriment for joining or not joining a union.
• A list of trade unions recognised by the employer, if any.

Employers will need to update key documents to comply with the duty, including written statements of particulars or contracts, induction materials and staff handbooks.

Trade unions also gain strengthened rights from this date. This right is to access workplaces, both physical and digital, to meet, represent, recruit, and organise workers. The premise behind this is to allow for enhanced representation and to promote engagement and collaboration in the workplace for better industrial relations.

If you are unsure whether your new starter paperwork already covers this new written statement duty, contact Solutions for HR today.

Under the Employment Rights Act 2025, significant changes will be made to the law on unfair dismissal from the 1st of January 2027.

As it stands currently, employees do not gain the right to claim ordinary unfair dismissal until they have completed two years of continuous service. This gives employers two years and significant flexibility in managing probation reviews and dismissals without the risk of an unfair dismissal claim. However, this will change in January 2027.

From the 1st of January 2027, the qualifying period for employees to claim ordinary unfair dismissal will reduce from two years to six months. This reduction will apply retrospectively, meaning any employee with six months of continuous service as of the 1st January 2027 will gain unfair dismissal rights, so anyone employed on or before the 1st of July 2026 will be protected from the 1st of January 2027.

Employers must think about how to manage probation periods and new hires due to the reduced timescales. We are recommending a shorter probation period of 3 months with the ability to extend for up to a further 2 months, ensuring that there is then time to enact a dismissal, if necessary, before the 6-month “deadline”.

If terminations are not enacted within this 6-month window, a full and fair procedure has to be followed to meet the fair and reasonable requirements of the Employment Rights Act 1996. For example, in the context of a conduct dismissal, this would involve a series of disciplinary warnings given over time, in accordance with your disciplinary procedure.

The Employment Rights Act 2025 also extends the time limit for bringing an unfair dismissal tribunal claim from three months to six months, effective from October 2026, giving employees more time to bring claims.

The risk of an unfair dismissal claim is further increased by the removal of the compensation cap for unfair dismissal claims, effective from the 1st of January 2027. The cap is currently the lower of a year’s pay or £123,543. By removing this cap, the potential award in unfair dismissal claims is unlimited, which could be costly for employers of high earners.

Alongside the extension of tribunal time limits, the Government has also amended the Acas Early Conciliation regime. Under the Employment Tribunals (Early Conciliation: Exemptions and Rules of Procedure) (Amendment) Regulations 2025, where a prospective claimant presents an Early Conciliation notification to Acas the conciliation period may now last for up to 12 weeks (previously six).

The Department for Business and Trade will produce guidance for employers to help them understand the likely practical implications of the changes in due course.

If you are unsure whether you have valid consent before responding to a reference request, contact Solutions for HR today.

What do employers need to know about data protection rules and references?

Providing a reference involves the disclosure and processing of personal data under the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR).

So what do employers need to be aware of when responding to a reference request?

Employers must identify a lawful basis for all data processing activities. When providing a reference, this lawful basis is that the data subject (the individual asking for a reference) has given their consent.

For consent to be valid under data protection principles, it must be unambiguous and freely given.

So how does an employer ensure that they have this consent?

1. Record consent at an exit interview
2. Require the prospective employer to obtain written consent

Employers should keep a copy of the evidence of consent to be able to demonstrate their lawful basis for processing.

If you are uncertain whether you have consent, you should always contact the individual to check this and, ideally, obtain the consent in writing.

It is worth noting that GDPR provisions expressly exempt references from data subject access requests (DSARs), meaning that references do not have to be disclosed under a DSAR.

However, care should always be taken if providing anything other than a “basic” reference, containing dates of employment and job role. Employers have a duty of care to ensure that references are truthful and fair and do not mislead the reference receiver. Failing to do so could lead to a civil claim against the reference giver.

If you are unsure whether you have valid consent before responding to a reference request, contact Solutions for HR today.

A new requirement for employers

There is a huge increase in the number of data subject access requests (DSARs) that we are seeing.

Employees are more aware of their rights, and they are being used in workplace disputes as a mechanism to obtain as much information as possible to feed into a grievance or tribunal claim.

From the 19th of June 2026, however, there is a key legal change which employers must be aware of.

New provisions under the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 now require employers to have a formal data protection complaints procedure in place to allow employees to raise a complaint directly with their employer about how their personal data has been handled, including how a DSAR has been dealt with.

Where a complaint is received, employers must:

• Acknowledge complaints within 30 days of receipt
• Carry out a reasonable investigation into the complaint
• Take appropriate steps to respond without undue delay
• Inform the complainant of the outcome without undue delay
• Keep records of complaints and outcomes

Importantly, this does not replace complaints to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO); if employees are not satisfied with their employer’s response, they can still escalate the issue to the ICO.

Employers must now:

1. Put a data protection complaints procedure in place setting out how employees can raise concerns and how those concerns will be handled.
2. Update privacy notices to signpost employees to the internal complaints procedure.
3. Train anyone responsible for handling DSARs to ensure they can identify a data protection complaint.

We have prepared a data protection complaints procedure and updated privacy notice that can be adapted for your business.

If you’re not sure your complaints procedure meets the new requirement, contact Solutions for HR today.