In September 2026, the Government published their response to the recent consultation around improving access to flexible working.

The consultation found majority support for employers to work with employees to explore ways in which to deal with barriers to flexible working requests. Or, where that is not possible, looking at alternative arrangements that would benefit all parties.

Communication between employers and employees was identified as essential to ensure a balance between requests being considered fairly and feasibility for the business.

Current legislation only gives employees the right to request flexible working, and employers could refuse a request based on one of the statutory business reasons.

However, the Employment Rights Act 2025 will build on protections for employees by ensuring that a consultation process is followed. There must be a meeting with the employee, with reasonable notice given to the employee of the timing and purpose of the meeting.

During this meeting, the employer must demonstrate that they have done the following:

• Considered whether the request can be accommodated;
• Identified any potential barriers and how these might be dealt with;
• Worked out any possible adjustments or solutions; and
• Considered any alternative arrangements that may work for both parties (this may also include trials or temporary arrangements).

The employer will also be required to provide written confirmation of the meeting outcome to the employee.

The Employment Rights Act 2025 has also proposed a new reasonableness test that must be applied if employers intend to reject a flexible working request. Further details on what this would look like are expected to come from ACAS (to be used alongside their existing Code of Practice on flexible working).

These changes are expected to come into force through secondary legislation in the second half of 2027. We should therefore expect to hear more information over the next year, along with the new ACAS guidance.

If you’re unsure how to handle a flexible working request under the Employment Rights Act 2025, contact Solutions for HR before you respond.

One of the main changes from the Employment Rights Act 2025 was a series of new duties and rights for Trade Unions, including a new duty on employers to inform workers of their right to join a Trade Union.

This was expected to come into force in October this year; however, there have been delays in the guidance for employers on what will be required. As such, the Government have now confirmed that the duty itself will be delayed until January 2027.

However, following a recent public consultation, the Government has provided some initial information on what will be expected from employers.

Namely, employers will be expected to provide a written statement that informs workers of their right to join a Trade Union. This will be standardised by the Government and must not be amended by the employer, except to add the specific workplace information.

The statement will include an explanation of union functions and statutory rights, along with a list of recognised Trade Unions (and a link to the Certification Officer’s list of Trade Unions) and statutory access agreements.

The statement must either be issued alongside the contract, or as part of the worker’s contract, and for existing workers they must have reasonable access to the statement.

If existing employees are given direct access to the statement (i.e., this is delivered via the employer), it must be done so annually by the 5th April each year. If this is going to be indirect (i.e., placed in a location available for staff to access), employers must still send out an annual reminder to staff on where this is located.

Furthermore, if there are any changes to the identity of any recognised unions or statutory access agreements, the statement will need to be reissued within one month of the change.

We shall update with further information once published on how to approach the issuing of the statement for new and existing employees.

If you’re not sure your contracts meet the trade union statement duty, contact Solutions for HR to review them.

The Fair Work Agency (FWA) was introduced under the Employment Rights Act 2025. From April 2026, the new UK executive agency brought together a host of entities into a single enforcement agency.

These previous entities included the Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority, the Employment Agency Standards Inspectorate, HMRC’s National Minimum Wage team, and the Office of the Director of Labour Market Enforcement.

The FWA’s initial functions include protecting workers’ rights, ensuring compliance with employment law and agency standards, and ensuring fair competition. These functions either have already been and/or will be further expanded to include the following:

• Supporting or even bringing tribunal proceedings on behalf of workers.
• Enforcing rights around the National Minimum Wage (NMW), Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) and holiday pay.
• Maintaining the regulation of umbrella companies.
• Investigating breaches of employment law and labour exploitation.
• Recovering costs owed to workers and introducing financial penalties to employers who fail to comply.
• Requiring employers to attend meetings and provide specific information or documentation.
• Accessing business premises to carry out inspections and gather evidence of non-compliance.

The FWA can provide advice and guidance to employees and employers. However, they also have the power to enforce through warning letters or prohibition notices, naming and shaming, and even civil proceedings or criminal investigations.

Employers should therefore look to ensure continued compliance throughout their organisation by keeping on top of policies and procedures, ensuring up-to-date and accurate records, and carrying out regular audits and reviews.

Because the Fair Work Agency can inspect your premises and request your records, your paperwork and policies need to hold up to scrutiny. Contact Solutions for HR to review them before the FWA does.

The government has published proposals for bereavement leave

A new statutory entitlement to unpaid bereavement leave will be arriving in April 2027.

Following the Employment Rights Act 2025 receiving Royal Assent, the Government has consulted on the details of this new statutory entitlement and we now have more information on how this will work.

It is proposed that all employees will be entitled to up to two weeks of unpaid bereavement leave from day one of employment (pro rata for part-time employees), which can be used within 56 weeks of the bereavement (or the employee’s knowledge of it). Employees can also choose to take this leave in blocks of as little as one day at a time.

This entitlement will fit around the existing statutory entitlement to Parental Bereavement Leave (PBL), which offers two weeks of paid leave to parents who have experienced the death of a child under 18 years old, or a stillbirth after 24 weeks of pregnancy.

This new entitlement will therefore apply to the following forms of bereavement:

• Pregnancy loss before 24 weeks, which includes miscarriage, terminations and IVF embryo transfer loss (this applies to the pregnant person as well as the spouse, civil partner, committed partner, other biological parent, or the intended parents in a surrogacy arrangement);
• Bereavement of an adult child (i.e., 18 years old or above);
• Bereavement of a spouse, civil partner or committed partner; and
• Bereavement of a sibling.

This entitlement will also recognise step, half, adoptive, kinship care and/or foster relationships.

Notice requirements for bereavement leave will depend on when it is taken. Within the first eight weeks of bereavement, notice only needs to be given before the employee starts work on that day. After eight weeks, one week’s notice should be provided; however, there is no prescribed way in which notification should be given.

Furthermore, employees do not need to provide any evidence of their loss in order to take bereavement leave.

If the proposals go ahead as published, your employees will be able to take bereavement leave from their first day without giving you any proof of their loss. Contact Solutions for HR to review your leave policy before a manager has to deal with one of these requests.

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 Operations 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. Reeves resigned in July 2025 and made a claim to the tribunal for harassment related to race, direct race discrimination and victimisation. The Company completed its grievance investigation after she had left, and the grievance was not upheld. 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.