The cost of a workplace accident is spread across multiple categories: sick pay, lost output, cover for absent staff, insurance excesses, investigation time, regulatory fees, legal costs, and, in the most serious cases, fines that can reach several million pounds. Some of these costs are recoverable through insurance, and many are not.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) estimates the total annual cost of workplace injuries and new cases of work-related ill health in Great Britain at [£22.9 billion for 2023/24](https://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/cost.htm), based on its three-year rolling cost model published in January 2026 \[1\]. That figure covers around [680,000 workers](https://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/overview.htm) who sustained an injury at work during 2024/25, alongside 1.9 million experiencing work-related ill health \[2\].

For individual employers, the more relevant figures are the average cost per case and the additional costs that arise once regulatory action or civil claims are involved.

In this article, we’ll discuss the current data on the cost of workplace accidents in the GB: the HSE's unit cost estimates, the share borne by employers, the enforcement landscape as of 2025 and 2026, and the categories of expense that often fall outside standard insurance cover.

## Summary

*   The HSE estimates workplace injuries and new cases of work-related ill health cost Great Britain £22.9 billion in 2023/24, split £6.5 billion for injury and £16.4 billion for ill health \[1\].
*   The average unit cost is approximately £10,000 per injury and £24,200 per case of work-related ill health \[1\].
*   Individuals bear the largest share (£13.4 billion), followed by government (£5.2 billion) and employers (£4.3 billion) - though employer costs are magnified by uninsured losses \[1\].
*   HSE estimates uninsured losses of £8 to £36 for every £1 recovered from insurers, equivalent to around £315 per employee per year in smaller firms \[3\].
*   The Fee for Intervention rate stood at £183 per hour in April 2025 and rose to £188 per hour from April 2026, applied when a material breach is identified \[4\]\[5\].
*   Average HSE prosecution fines reached £170,000 in the 12 months from August 2024, with total annual fines averaging £44.1 million between 2021 and 2025 \[6\]\[7\].
*   The largest single fine of 2025 was £6 million (Cambridgeshire County Council), followed by £3.2 million (British Airways) and £2.5 million (Industrial Chemicals Ltd) \[8\].
*   Slips, trips and falls on the same level account for 30% of non-fatal workplace injuries, followed by manual handling at 17% and being struck by a moving object at 10% \[9\].
*   Compensation for serious workplace injuries can range from a few thousand pounds for minor cases to over £250,000 for severe permanent harm, based on Judicial College Guidelines \[10\].
*   The cost model excludes long-latency illness such as occupational cancer, meaning the true economic cost of workplace exposure is higher than the headline figure suggests \[1\].

## The HSE cost model: What £22.9 billion covers

The £22.9 billion headline figure comes from the HSE's _Costs to Britain of workplace fatalities and self-reported injuries and ill health_, updated in January 2026 with data covering 2023/24 \[1\]. It represents new cases arising from current working conditions and uses a three-year rolling average, so the 2023/24 reference year captures data from 2021/22 through 2023/24.

The two categories that make up the total include:

*   **injury**: £6.5 billion, equivalent to a unit cost of around £10,000 per case
*   **ill health**: £16.4 billion, equivalent to a unit cost of around £24,200 per case \[1\].

Ill health accounts for approximately 72% of total costs despite injury cases being more visible in day-to-day operations - ill health cases typically involve longer absence and greater long-term impact.

The model includes both financial costs (loss of output, healthcare, benefits payments) and human costs - the monetary valuation applied to pain, grief, suffering and loss of life. It excludes long-latency conditions such as occupational cancer and asbestos-related disease, meaning the actual economic burden of workplace exposure is materially higher than £22.9 billion.

### Who pays

The HSE's distributional analysis for 2023/24 shows the £22.9 billion is not borne evenly \[1\]:

*   **individuals and their families**: £13.4 billion (approximately 59%)
*   **government and taxpayers**: £5.2 billion (approximately 23%)
*   **employers**: £4.3 billion (approximately 19%).

Individuals bear the largest share, driven primarily by human costs and financial losses that fall outside employer sick pay or insurance cover. Government costs include NHS treatment, benefits payments, and lost tax revenue. Employer costs cover sick pay, cover for absent staff, insurance premiums, uninsured losses, and administrative time. The 19% aggregate share reflects average cost distribution across the economy rather than what any individual employer pays when an incident occurs at their premises.

## Uninsured losses

Employers' Liability insurance is a legal requirement and covers compensation, medical costs, and defence legal fees. It does not cover the majority of costs that arise from a workplace accident. The HSE estimates that for every £1 an employer recovers from insurers, [uninsured losses run at £8 to £36](https://riskassessmenttraining.co.uk/blog/cost-of-workplace-injury-and-ill-health-statistics-uk) \[3\].

Uninsured costs typically include [statutory sick pay](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/statutory-sick-pay-ssp-changes) and any enhanced contractual sick pay, cover for absent employees, lost production and disrupted schedules, damaged product or materials, overtime for existing staff, recruitment and training costs where an injured worker cannot return, management time spent on investigation, increased insurance premiums at renewal, and reputational impact with customers or contractors.

Applying the HSE and RoSPA costing model, uninsured accident costs are estimated at around £315 per employee per year in smaller firms, before any fine, insured claim, or one-off compensation payment is factored in \[3\].

## The most common causes and where costs concentrate

Five causes account for the majority of non-fatal workplace injuries in Great Britain, according to 2024/25 HSE data drawn from [RIDDOR employer reports](https://ukc-word-edit.officeapps.live.com/we/...) \[9\]:

*   slips, trips and falls on the same level: 30%
*   handling, lifting or carrying: 17%
*   struck by moving object: 10%
*   acts of violence: 10%
*   falls from height: 8%.

[Slips, trips and falls](https://www.manualhandlingtraining.org.uk/blog/slips-trips-and-falls-statistics-uk) remain the single largest cause of non-fatal workplace injury and have been for many years \[11\]. Applied to the 680,000 non-fatal workplace injuries in 2024/25, approximately 204,000 were slips, trips or falls on the same level. Falls from height account for a smaller share of non-fatal injuries but a much larger share of fatalities - [35 of 124 worker deaths](http://www.safeworkforce.com/insights/news/hse-accident-incident-statistics-2024-25/) in 2024/25 \[12\].

Cost concentration follows sector risk profiles. Accommodation and food services now has the highest rate of workplace non-fatal injuries, with construction, transportation and storage, and retail also showing above-average rates \[12\]. [Construction accounted for 35 fatalities](https://www.freshlawblog.com/2025/09/30/latest-hse-work-related-fatal-injury-statistics/) in 2024/25, making it the sector with the highest number of worker deaths \[13\].

## Regulatory costs: Fee for Intervention and prosecution fines

Where an HSE inspector identifies a material breach of health and safety law, the Fee for Intervention (FFI) scheme allows the regulator to recover the cost of its investigation directly from the business. The hourly rate has increased steadily since the scheme was introduced in 2012 at £124 per hour. It reached [£183 per hour](https://www.weightmans.com/media-centre/news/hse-investigations-and-fee-for-intervention-why-health-and-safety-breaches-will-now-cost-organisations-more/) on 1 April 2025 \[4\] and rose to [£188 per hour](https://www.hse.gov.uk/enforce/charging/rates.htm) on 1 April 2026 \[5\].

FFI charges apply from the point a material breach is identified through to closure of the case, covering inspector time on site, follow-up work, statement-taking, notice-issuing, and specialist support. The [average FFI invoice](https://www.haspod.com/blog/management/hse-fee-intervention-charges-explained) is around £700 to £875 \[14\]\[15\], and more complex cases involving multiple visits or extended investigation can result in higher figures. Businesses receive an invoice every two months and are expected to pay within 30 days of receipt.

### Prosecution fine levels

The HSE achieved a [96% conviction rate](https://www.healthandsafetyinternational.com/article/1941130/hse-achieves-96-conviction-rate-reports-33m-fines-2025) in 2024/25, securing 246 prosecutions and reporting £33 million in fines during that period \[16\]. Analysis covering the 12 months from August 2024 puts the [average prosecution fine at £170,000](https://www.citation.co.uk/health-and-safety/fees-for-intervention/) \[6\]\[17\].

Freedom of Information data covering 2021 to 2025 shows British businesses were fined [an average of £44.1 million](https://www.cfwaccountants.co.uk/news/britain-s-yearly-ps44m-health-safety-violations-bill) per year for health and safety breaches, with 2025 recording £40.9 million \[7\]. The number of serious breaches resulting in prosecution charges rose year on year: 428 in 2023, 446 in 2024, and 496 in 2025 \[7\].

The [largest fines of 2025](https://shepwedd.com/knowledge/2025s-five-most-important-uk-health-safety-prosecutions/) included \[8\]:

*   **Cambridgeshire County Council**: £6 million plus £300,000 costs, following three deaths on the Guided Busway over a ten-year period
*   **British Airways**: £3.2 million, following serious injuries to baggage handlers
*   **Industrial Chemicals Ltd**: £2.5 million, following a major acid leak

Under the Sentencing Council guidelines for health and safety offences, fine levels are scaled to organisational turnover and to the level of culpability and harm involved. Large organisations (turnover above £50 million) can face fines in the millions for equivalent offences that would attract lower penalties for an SME.

## Civil claims and compensation

Beyond regulatory action, employers face civil liability for injuries their employees suffer as a result of workplace failings. Compensation awards are calculated in two parts: general damages (for pain, suffering, and loss of amenity) and special damages (for actual financial losses including lost earnings, medical costs, and rehabilitation).

General damages are assessed against the [Judicial College Guidelines](https://www.jflaw.co.uk/list-of-compensation-payouts-uk/) (JCG), currently in their 18th edition published in April 2026 \[18\]. Illustrative brackets from the JCG show the scale of exposure:

*   Minor injury (e.g. mild concussion): £3,000-£12,000 general damages, with total awards often reaching £4,000-£13,000 once special damages are added
*   Moderate injury: £15,000-£36,000 general damages, with total awards reaching £26,000-£48,000
*   Serious permanent injury: £50,000-£120,000 general damages, with total awards potentially exceeding £150,000
*   [Severe back injuries](https://www.fentons.co.uk/list-of-compensation-payouts-in-the-uk/): up to £196,450 in the most serious cases \[10\]\[19\]
*   [Brain injury and loss of limb](https://www.mrhsolicitors.co.uk/list-of-compensation-payouts-uk/) cases: over £250,000 \[20\]

Individual settlements can reach much higher figures where lifelong care, home adaptations, or permanent loss of earnings are involved.

## Working days lost

In 2024/25, an estimated [40.1 million working days](https://press.hse.gov.uk/2025/11/20/hse-publishes-annual-workplace-health-and-safety-statistics/) were lost across Great Britain due to workplace injury and ill health \[21\]. Of these, approximately 35.7 million were lost to work-related ill health and 4.4 million to workplace injuries. That total is [equivalent to 200,000 full-time workers](https://www.nvlegal.co.uk/the-real-cost-of-workplace-harm-in-the-uk-22-9-billion/) missing an entire year of work \[22\]. For individual employers, the average injury results in several days off, with more serious cases leading to weeks or months of absence, often followed by phased returns.

CIPD data for 2025 puts [average sickness absence](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/supporting-employees-during-long-term-sickness) at 9.4 days per employee, the highest in more than 15 years, up from 7.8 days in 2023 \[3\]. Public sector absence averaged 13.3 days against 9.1 in the private sector.

## Under-reporting of workplace injuries

There is a persistent gap between self-reported and formally reported workplace injuries. The Labour Force Survey records around 680,000 self-reported non-fatal injuries in 2024/25, but employers formally reported only 59,219 under RIDDOR during the same period \[12\]. Many less serious injuries fall below the RIDDOR reporting threshold, which generally requires injuries resulting in more than seven days of incapacity, or specified injuries such as fractures and amputations. Some incidents that should be reported are not. The operational impact on any given business is often larger than RIDDOR figures alone would indicate.

## Small business exposure

For smaller employers, a serious injury can absorb a disproportionate share of resources through cover requirements, management time, and operational disruption. Where multiple staff are involved in a single incident, the effect compounds.

Applying the HSE cost model, a 20-person business carries an implicit uninsured accident cost of roughly £6,300 annually before any specific incident occurs \[3\]. A single [prosecution fine at the average level](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/how-much-could-a-disciplinary-process-cost-your-business) (£170,000) would exceed a full year of typical operating profit for many SMEs. Employers' Liability insurance premiums also vary considerably by sector and claims history: office-based businesses typically pay from £60-£150 per year for basic cover, while construction, manufacturing, and care businesses can pay several thousand pounds annually for equivalent policies.

## Costs not included in the HSE model

The HSE cost model does not capture every category of expense an employer may incur. Areas not included or understated in the £22.9 billion figure are long-latency illness (occupational cancer, asbestos-related disease, hearing loss from exposure decades earlier), reputational cost (lost customers, contractor de-listing, difficulty recruiting), management time spent on investigation and liaison, staff turnover following a serious incident, and legal or consultancy fees incurred defending regulatory action.

These costs are difficult to quantify at aggregate level but often represent a substantial portion of the total bill from a specific incident.

## Preventive spend as a comparison point

Basic risk assessments, staff training, equipment inspections, and [workplace adjustments](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/reasonable-adjustments-in-the-workplace) typically cost a fraction of what a single serious incident will cost to manage. Manual handling training sessions run from around £30-£175 per person, and a workplace needs assessment through the [Access to Work scheme](https://www.gov.uk/access-to-work) is available at no cost to eligible employees \[23\]. Noise-cancelling equipment, adjustable workstations, and improved lighting all fall well below the £315-per-employee uninsured cost estimate for accidents.

The HSE reports that most workplace incidents are preventable. The cost ratio between prevention and response varies by sector and incident type.

_This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information is accurate at the time of writing but may be subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified professional._

\[1\] Health and Safety Executive, _Costs to Britain of workplace fatalities and self-reported injuries and ill health, 2023/24_, updated January 2026.

\[2\] HSE, _Key figures for Great Britain 2024/25_, 2025.

\[3\] Risk Assessment Training, _Cost of workplace injury and ill health statistics UK_, 2026.

\[4\] Weightmans, _HSE Investigations and Fee for Intervention: new rates effective 1 April 2025_, 2025.

\[5\] HSE, _HSE fees and charges: current rates_, updated 1 April 2026.

\[6\] Citation, _Fee for Intervention (FFI) Support_, October 2025.

\[7\] CFW Accountants, _Britain's yearly £44m health & safety violations bill_, July 2026.

\[8\] Shepherd and Wedderburn, _2025's five most important UK health and safety prosecutions_, January 2026.

\[9\] Arinite, _HSE Statistics 2025: complete guide to workplace health and safety data_, May 2026.

\[10\] Fentons, _List of Compensation Payouts in the UK - 2026 Update_, May 2026.

\[11\] Manual Handling Training, _Slips, Trips & Falls Statistics UK 2026_, April 2026.

\[12\] SafeWorkforce, _HSE Accident & Incident Statistics 2024/25: What they mean for UK businesses_, November 2025.

\[13\] fresh, _Latest HSE Work-related Fatal Injury Statistics_, September 2025.

\[14\] InstallerSHOW, _HSE Fee for Intervention_, 2026.

\[15\] HASpod, _HSE Fee For Intervention Charges Explained_, October 2025.

\[16\] Health and Safety International, _HSE achieves 96% conviction rate and reports £33m in fines for 2025_, November 2025.

\[17\] Manual Handling Training, _Cost of Workplace Injuries to UK Businesses 2026_, April 2026.

\[18\] JF Law, _A Complete List of Compensation Payouts in the UK_, 2026.

\[19\] UK Legal Guides, _How Workplace Injury Compensation Is Calculated (2026)_, March 2026.

\[20\] MRH Solicitors, _List of Compensation Payouts UK_, 2025.

\[21\] HSE Media Centre, _HSE publishes annual workplace health and safety statistics_, 20 November 2025.

\[22\] Nv Legal, _The real cost of workplace harm in the UK - £22.9 billion_, February 2026.

\[23\] GOV.UK, _Access to Work factsheet for customers_, 2025.

Average cost of workplace accidents: What GB employers actually pay

GettyImages-1134027904-cropped.jpg

Average cost of workplace accidents: What employers actually pay

Section 48 of the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Act 2025 [comes into force on 1st October 2026](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2026/683/contents/made), alongside a revised [Code of Practice](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6a608779f869f6a53d0c89e7/30_June_-_Code_of_practice_on_preventing_illegal_working_-_Right_to_Work_Scheme_for_employers.pdf) on preventing illegal working. Together, they mark one of the most significant changes to UK immigration compliance in years, extending illegal working civil penalty risk well beyond the traditional direct employer relationship - reaching into labour supply chains, subcontracting arrangements and online job-matching platforms.  

In practice, this means agency workers, individual subcontractors, zero-hours staff, gig economy workers and platform-based labour will all fall within scope, regardless of how the engagement is labelled. Businesses that have only ever run [right to work checks](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/right-to-work-checks-your-duties-as-an-employer) on direct employees will need to map their entire labour supply chain and reassess where their compliance obligations now sit. 

## Summary

- From 1 October 2026, the definition of "employer" for right to work purposes widens to include certain subcontracting arrangements, worker's contracts, individual sub-contractors and online matching services - not just direct employment relationships. 
- Civil penalties for illegal working can reach up to £60,000 per worker, and businesses with complex labour supply chains, subcontractors or agency arrangements face the greatest exposure. 
- Employers facing extended liability must meet new "prescribed requirements" - written contractual terms, substitution controls and identity verification - to establish a statutory excuse against penalty. 
- Right to Work Digital Verification Service Providers (RtW DVSPs) must be registered.  

## What's changing on 1st October 2026?

### Who counts as an "employer" under the new rules?

Section 48 of the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Act 2025 inserts a new section 14A into the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006. From 1st October 2026, references to an "employer" of an "individual" for right to work purposes will include a business that: 

- employs someone under a contract of employment (a contract of service or apprenticeship) 
- engages someone under a worker's contract 
- engages an individual sub-contractor 
- operates an online matching service and puts individual service providers in touch with clients or customers. 

This goes well beyond the traditional direct employer, and organisations that don't consider themselves to be "employing" anyone in the conventional sense - because they rely on subcontractors, agency staff or an online platform to connect workers with clients - may still fall within scope. 

The Code of Practice also introduces a set of new defined terms, including "individual sub-contractor" (someone providing work or services under a contract, where that work ultimately fulfils a separate third-party contract they aren't party to) and "online matching service" (a business that keeps a register of service providers and charges a fee when it matches them with clients). Businesses using complex supply chains should expect these definitions to require careful, case-by-case interpretation. 

### How to establish a statutory excuse

Where extended liability applies, an employer can still protect itself from a civil penalty by completing “prescribed requirements” to obtain a statutory excuse - but doing so now requires more than completing a standard right to work check. Depending on the arrangement, businesses may need to put in place the following arrangements: 

- **Written contractual terms** with other employers or service providers in the supply chain, requiring them to carry out right to work checks, restricting further subcontracting without consent, and allowing audits and enforcement action.
- **Substitution controls**, where a contract allows a worker to be substituted by someone else, ensuring that any substitute has their right to work verified before starting.  
- **Identity verification systems**, to confirm that the person actually doing the work is the person whose right to work was checked - this could include ID passes, biometric systems or facial verification. 

The Code is not prescriptive about exactly which systems to use, but employers relying on another party's checks (such as a Right to Work Digital Verification Service Provider) must take reasonable steps to satisfy themselves that those checks are effective. 

### Registration requirements for digital verification providers

The Code also renames "Digital Verification Service" (DVS) providers as "Right to Work Digital Verification Service Providers" (RtW DVSPs). From 1st October 2026, it becomes mandatory for any RtW DVSP an employer uses to be registered on the Office for Digital Identities and Attributes (OFDIA) register, with confirmation that it's authorised to carry out right to work checks. Employers are not required to use a RtW DVSP if another appropriate checking method is available. 

## What are the penalties for illegal working?

The consequences for getting this wrong are significant. Civil penalties can reach up to £45,000 per illegal worker for a first breach, rising to £60,000 for repeat breaches within three years, and licensed sponsors risk having their sponsor licence revoked entirely. Where a business knew, or had reasonable grounds to suspect, that a worker lacked the right to work, the matter can escalate to criminal liability - carrying an unlimited fine and a prison sentence of up to five years. Immigration Officers also hold the power to issue a closure notice, shutting down business premises immediately for up to 48 hours. That closure can then be extended for up to 12 months through an illegal working compliance order granted by the Court.  

## What should employers be doing before 1st October 2026?

Here’s a list of actions employers could be taking now to ensure future compliance with these changes.  

- [**Mapping labour supply chains**](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/workforce-planning-basics), identifying where subcontractors, agency workers or online platforms are used, and assessing which arrangements could bring the business into scope of the wider "employer" definition. 
- **Reviewing and updating contracts with agencies, subcontractors and service providers** to include the required written terms. 
- Checking RtW DVSP registration for any digital verification providers used, to confirm they're on the OFDIA register and authorised to carry out right to work checks. 
- **Reviewing identity verification processes**, particularly where substitution clauses exist in contracts. 
- **Training relevant teams** - HR, procurement, contract management and operational managers - so they understand the wider scope of liability. 
- **Retaining evidence of compliance**, since the Code expects businesses to be able to demonstrate the steps they've taken on request. 

## The bottom line for employers

Taken together, these changes represent the most significant expansion of UK illegal working liability since the Immigration Act 2016. The core message for businesses is simple: right to work compliance can no longer be treated as an HR-only, direct-employee exercise. Any organisation that engages labour through subcontractors, agencies, or platforms needs to trace those relationships now, tighten its contracts, and confirm its verification processes meet the new prescribed requirements - because from 1st October 2026, "we didn't employ them directly" will no longer be a defence. 

  
_This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information is accurate at the time of writing but may be subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified professional._

Colleagues reading and signing a legal contract

news image (4).jpg

Preventing illegal working and right to work checks: New rules from 1st October 2026 

The October reforms build on changes already introduced in February and [April 2026](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/employment-law-changes-in-april-2026-what-you-need-to-know), including reforms to statutory trade union recognition. They are also accompanied by further changes from August 2026, when statutory trade union ballots may be conducted electronically. Together, these measures represent a significant shift in the UK's trade union framework and may have important implications for employers.

The main package of changes taking effect on 30 October 2026 include a new duty to inform workers of their right to join a trade union, a statutory right for unions to access workplaces, enhanced facilities for union representatives, stronger protections for workers taking industrial action, and updates to the trade union recognition framework.

With several of the underlying regulations and codes of practice only recently published, and some details still to be finalised, employers should start reviewing their policies and practices now rather than waiting until the last minute.

## Summary

- From 30 October 2026, employers must provide workers with a written statement setting out their right to join a trade union.
- Trade unions gain a new statutory right to request access to workplaces - physically and digitally - to meet, support, represent, recruit or organise workers. Employers with fewer than 21 workers are exempt.
- Employers must provide reasonable facilities and accommodation to trade union officials, learning representatives and the newly created role of equality representatives.
- Workers taking part in lawful industrial action gain new protection from detriment, not just dismissal.
- An updated Code of Practice on trade union recognition takes effect, alongside new restrictions on unfair practices during recognition ballots.

## October 2026 changes

### Duty to inform workers of their right to join a trade union

For the first time, employers will have a proactive legal duty to tell workers that they have the right to join a trade union - regardless of whether the employer recognises a union or has any unionised staff.

This must be provided as a written statement. Government proposals for the statement include an explanation of what trade unions do, a summary of workers' statutory rights relating to union membership, details of any unions recognised by the employer and a signpost to further government information. The precise requirements will be set by secondary legislation, and the Government intends to provide the statement for employers to issue. 

Crucially, this is not a one-off task for new starters. The duty is expected to extend to the existing workforce too, and the statement will need to be reissued at prescribed intervals, so employers will need a process for keeping this current.

**Please note** - employers cannot be sued solely for failing to provide this information. However, where a worker successfully brings another relevant employment tribunal claim, the tribunal may award an additional two to four weeks' pay for the failure, subject to the statutory cap on a week's pay. This mirrors the enforcement mechanism that applies to section 1 statements of employment particulars.

### A new right of access to workplaces

Trade unions will gain a general right to request access to workplaces for the purpose of meeting, supporting, representing, recruiting or organising workers, and facilitating [collective bargaining](https://www.gov.uk/working-with-trade-unions/collective-bargaining). 

Employers and unions will remain free to agree access arrangements voluntarily, and any agreed arrangements can continue to operate outside the statutory regime, without needing to be formalised through it. However, a union will not be required to pursue voluntary discussions before using the statutory process.

This is a significant change. Unlike the current position, a union will be able to seek workplace access through a formal statutory procedure where agreement cannot be reached voluntarily. Ultimately, the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC) will have the power to determine the terms of access and impose a binding access arrangement.

Access can be physical or digital - for example, a union may ask to hold meetings on site, or to communicate with workers by email or virtual meeting. Importantly though, the statutory access purposes do not include organising industrial action. 

The government has published a [Code of Practice: Right of trade unions to access workplaces](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6a4b9abad200ca05e289e5e5/code-of-practice-right-of-trade-unions-to-access-workplaces.pdf), which sets out how the new right is expected to operate, including the standard forms for making and responding to a request. Employers should treat this Code as an important reference point when preparing for October.

The statutory process is subject to strict time limits:

1. The union submits a written access request to the employer.
2. The employer has 15 working days to respond in writing.
3. If the employer does not agree in full to the request, a 25 working-day negotiation period follows, during which the parties attempt to agree the terms of access.
4. If no agreement is reached, the union can refer the matter to the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC) within 55 working days of the original request. 
5. The CAC may determine the terms of access and impose a binding access arrangement.

In limited circumstances, the overall timetable could be extended to 70 working days. [1]

Employers with fewer than 21 workers are exempt from the access regime. The 21-worker threshold is assessed by reference to associated employers, meaning a business employing fewer than 21 workers may still be within scope if it forms part of a wider associated employer with 21 or more workers. 

For employers within scope, a blanket policy of refusing access to union representatives will no longer be a realistic option. Statutory access requests will need to be managed carefully and within the statutory timetable.

### Digital access

Digital access can include communications through channels the employer normally uses to communicate with staff, such as email, messaging systems, intranets or collaboration platforms. It can also involve facilitating online meetings between the union and workers. Where an employer cascades union communications, the Code says these should be provided in a standalone format rather than being incorporated into an unrelated workforce update.

Importantly, unions will not generally be given direct access to an employer's IT systems. Where a union wants to contact individual workers directly using their personal contact details, consent will generally be required for those details to be shared.

### Enforcement of access

The union or employer can complain to the CAC about a breach of an access agreement within three months of the breach.

If the complaint is upheld, the CAC can order steps to be taken to ensure compliance.

If there is another breach within 12 months, the CAC may impose the following financial penalties:

- The first penalty for breach of an access agreement will be capped at £75,000.
- The second penalty for repeated non-compliance will be capped at £150,000.
- The maximum penalty for each further breach of the same access agreement will be £500,000.

The three-tier framework will apply even if the subsequent breaches are of a different nature to the previous breaches. Breaches at multiple workplaces covered under the same access agreement can be treated cumulatively and enable a higher penalty to be imposed, though the penalty must be proportionate to the breach.

### Facilities and time off for union representatives

Employers who recognise a trade union already have to give union officials paid time off for union duties and related training. The ERA goes further, introducing a new duty to provide reasonable accommodation and facilities where a representative reasonably requests this to carry out their role.

This facilities duty applies not just to trade union officials, but also to trade union learning representatives and to the newly created category of trade union equality representatives, who support members on matters relating to equality in the workplace.

### Enhanced protection from detriment for industrial action

Dismissing a worker for taking part in lawful industrial action has long been automatically unfair, but the law has not, until now, protected workers from lesser detriments - such as action short of dismissal.

From 30 October 2026, workers will have a new right not to be subjected to a detriment where the employer's sole or main purpose is to prevent, deter or penalise them for taking part in protected industrial action. The protection is intended to cover detriments imposed for the purpose of penalising, preventing or deterring workers from taking protected industrial action. The detailed scope of prohibited detriments will be set out in the regulations. 

### Revised Code of Practice on trade union recognition

Following the simplification of the statutory recognition process introduced in April 2026, a revised Code of Practice on access and unfair practices during trade union recognition and derecognition processes is expected to come into force in October 2026, subject to final parliamentary approval. The revised draft Code has already been published and laid before Parliament. Alongside this, new restrictions on unfair practices during recognition ballots will apply, aimed at ensuring the process is conducted fairly by both employers and unions. [2]

The October reforms will also freeze the bargaining unit at the point a statutory recognition application is received. Workers who join the bargaining unit after the application date will generally be disregarded for the purposes of the recognition process. This is intended to prevent changes to the workforce from altering the composition of the bargaining unit after a recognition application has been made.

Employers who are, or may become, subject to a recognition claim should familiarise themselves with the revised Code now and monitor its progress through Parliament, as it is expected to set the benchmark for what regulators and tribunals consider reasonable conduct during a recognition campaign.

## What should employers do now?

Several of these reforms are still subject to final regulations, so some detail may shift before October. That said, employers shouldn't wait for every last piece of guidance before acting. Sensible steps now include:

- **Identifying whether your organisation is within scope of the new statutory access regime**, including considering associated employers and the 21-worker threshold.
- **Reviewing internal communication channels and data-sharing arrangements** so you can respond appropriately to requests for digital access.
- **Reviewing recognition procedures and ensuring HR teams understand the changes to the statutory recognition process**, including the new rules on bargaining units and unfair practices.
- **Reviewing the relevant Code of Practice and supporting guidance**, including any template letters and forms as they become available.
- **Identifying the individuals or teams responsible for managing trade union access requests** and ensuring that any requests are promptly escalated to them.
- **Briefing managers on the organisation's approach** so that requests are not refused informally or handled inconsistently.
- **Training managers, HR teams and visitor-facing staff** (such as receptionists and security guards) to ensure union visits are handled appropriately (once arrangements are in place).

## Further reading

For more information on the wider changes taking effect throughout 2026, you may find the following articles helpful:

- [Employment Rights Act: October 2026 changes](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/employment-rights-act-october-2026-changes)
- [Employment law changes in April 2026: What you need to know](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/employment-law-changes-in-april-2026-what-you-need-to-know)
- [The Fair Work Agency: What this new enforcement body means for employers](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/the-fair-work-agency)
- [Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) changes from April 2026](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/statutory-sick-pay-ssp-changes)
- [Unfair dismissal changes 2027: The six-month qualifying period explained](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/unfair-dismissal-changes-2027)

Not sure what to prioritise before October? Our free ERA webinar on 16 September walks through upcoming legislation changes, the practical steps employers can take now, and the risks of leaving policy reviews too late. [<u>Register here</u>](https://rbs.zoom.us/webinar/register/3317815412217/WN_19H9XUlMRfKnmcDbKdFYTQ#/registration).

## Frequently asked questions

- **When do the new trade union rules take effect?** The main package of reforms takes effect on 30 October 2026. It builds on earlier changes introduced in February and April 2026 (including reforms to statutory trade union recognition), and is accompanied by separate changes from August 2026, when statutory ballots may be conducted electronically. 
- **Do employers need to tell staff about their right to join a trade union?** Yes. From 30 October 2026, employers have a new proactive legal duty to give workers a written statement setting out their right to join a trade union - even if the employer doesn't recognise a union or have any unionised staff. The statement is expected to cover what trade unions do, a summary of workers' statutory rights on union membership, details of any recognised unions, and a signpost to further government information.
- **Is this a one-off requirement for new starters?** No. The duty is expected to extend to the existing workforce as well as new joiners, and the statement may need to be reissued at prescribed intervals, so employers will need an ongoing process to keep it current.
- **What happens if an employer fails to provide the statement?** An employer cannot be sued solely for failing to provide it. However, if a worker successfully brings another relevant employment tribunal claim, the tribunal may award an additional two to four weeks' pay for the failure, subject to the statutory cap on a week's pay.
- **Do trade unions now have a right to access workplaces?** Yes. Unions gain a general statutory right to request access to workplaces from 30 October 2026 - physically or digitally - to meet, support, represent, recruit or organise workers, and to facilitate collective bargaining. Where a voluntary agreement can't be reached, the union can use a formal statutory procedure, and the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC) can ultimately determine and impose binding access terms. 
- **Which employers are exempt from the access regime?** Employers with fewer than 21 workers are exempt. This threshold includes workers from any associated companies, so a business with fewer than 21 workers could still be in scope if it's part of a wider group with 21 or more workers overall.
- **What are the time limits for a workplace access request?** The union submits a written request; the employer has 15 working days to respond; a 25-working day negotiation period follows; if unresolved, the union can refer the matter to the CAC within 55 working days of the original request; and in limited circumstances the overall timetable can extend to 70 working days.
- **What does "digital access" cover?** It can include communication through channels the employer already uses with staff - email, messaging systems, intranets or collaboration platforms - as well as facilitating online meetings. Union communications cascaded by the employer should be sent in a standalone format rather than folded into an unrelated staff update. Unions won't generally get direct access to an employer's IT systems, and sharing individual workers' personal contact details will generally require their consent.
- **What happens if an access agreement is breached?** Either party can complain to the CAC within three months of a breach, and the CAC can order compliance steps. If a further breach occurs within 12 months, the CAC can impose escalating financial penalties: up to £75,000 for the first breach, up to £150,000 for a second, and up to £500,000 for each further breach of the same agreement - even if the nature of the breaches differs, and potentially cumulative across multiple workplaces under the same agreement.
- **Do employers need to provide facilities to union representatives?** Yes. Employers already have to give union officials paid time off for union duties and training where a union is recognised. The ERA adds a new duty to provide reasonable accommodation and facilities on request, and this now extends beyond union officials to trade union learning representatives and the newly created role of trade union equality representatives.
- **Are workers protected if they take industrial action?** Dismissal for lawful industrial action has long been automatically unfair. From 30 October 2026, workers also gain a new right not to be subjected to a detriment (short of dismissal) where the employer's sole or main purpose is to prevent, deter or penalise them for taking part in protected industrial action. The detailed scope will be set out in regulations.
- **Is the trade union recognition process changing too?** Yes. A revised Code of Practice on access and unfair practices during recognition and derecognition processes is expected to come into force in October 2026, alongside new restrictions on unfair practices during recognition ballots. The bargaining unit will also be "frozen" at the point a recognition application is received, so workers joining afterwards are generally disregarded for that process.
- **What should employers do to prepare?** Key steps include checking whether the organisation is in scope of the access regime (including the 21-worker threshold and associated employers), reviewing internal communication and data-sharing arrangements, updating recognition procedures, reviewing the relevant Codes of Practice and template forms, assigning responsibility for handling access requests, updating internal policies, and training managers and visitor-facing staff.

_This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information is accurate at the time of writing but may be subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified professional._

[1] Department for Business & Trade.  [Code of Practice: Right of trade unions to access workplaces](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6a4b9abad200ca05e289e5e5/code-of-practice-right-of-trade-unions-to-access-workplaces.pdf), July 2026. 

[2] GOV.UK. Consultation outcome. [Make Work Pay: recognition code of practice and e-balloting unfair practices](https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/make-work-pay-recognition-code-of-practice-and-e-balloting-unfair-practices), February 2026. 

Colleagues discussing workplace issues with a trade union representative

New trade union rules coming in October 2026

New trade union rules coming in October 2026: What employers need to know 

Display Screen Equipment assessments for hybrid workers

iStock-1396082125 (1).jpg

Display Screen Equipment assessments: Are your hybrid workers covered?

How much could a disciplinary process cost your business?

GettyImages-937103108 (1).jpg

A Skilled Worker visa is rarely one fee. By the time a business has paid for a sponsor licence, a Certificate of Sponsorship and the Immigration Skills Charge - and the worker has paid their application fee and Immigration Health Surcharge - a single three-year hire can run from £6,500 to over £10,000.

This article breaks down what each one costs in 2026, who pays it, and when it falls due. It's intended as an informational overview for a business weighing [its first sponsored hire](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/how-to-employ-someone), rather than guidance on how to sponsor someone, which is a specialist area in its own right.

Sponsorship has also become less common as it has become more expensive. Applications on the Skilled Worker and Health and Care Worker routes fell from 228,917 for main applicants in the year ending December 2023 to 55,704 in the year ending December 2025, while the proportion refused rose from 7% to 19% over the same period \[8\]. For employers who still need skills the domestic labour market isn't supplying, and who would otherwise [leave roles vacant for months](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/time-to-hire-in-the-uk), the arithmetic is worth understanding properly.

## Summary

*   Sponsorship has become more expensive and less common: applications on the Skilled Worker and Health and Care Worker routes fell from 228,917 to 55,704 between the years ending December 2023 and December 2025, with refusals rising from 7% to 19% \[8\].
*   Sponsorship costs are split across several charges rather than one headline fee, and the total varies with sponsor size, visa length, and who covers the worker's own costs.
*   The employer pays for the sponsor licence, the Certificate of Sponsorship, and the Immigration Skills Charge. The worker typically pays the visa application fee and the Immigration Health Surcharge, though employers sometimes cover these.
*   A sponsor licence costs £611 for small or charitable sponsors and £1,682 for medium or large sponsors from 8 April 2026 - a one-off charge, not a per-hire cost \[1\].
*   The Certificate of Sponsorship sits at £525 per worker, and must be paid again for every hire \[1\].
*   The Immigration Skills Charge rose by around a third on 16 December 2025, to £480 per year for small or charitable sponsors and £1,320 per year for medium or large sponsors \[5\].
*   The Immigration Health Surcharge holds steady at £1,035 per year per person and is often the single largest cost across a multi-year visa \[3\].
*   Worked examples below show a three-year hire costing around £6,500 through a small sponsor and just over £10,000 through a medium or large one, split between employer and worker.
*   Costs fall per head as hiring volume rises, because the licence is a fixed one-off outlay spread across every worker sponsored.

## Why there's no single "sponsorship fee"

The first thing to understand is that sponsorship is a bundle of charges rather than one transaction. Some businesses budget for the headline visa fee, discover the additional charges midway through, and find their forecast wide of the mark.

Broadly, the costs fall into two groups. There are the **charges the sponsoring employer pays** - the sponsor licence, the Certificate of Sponsorship, and the Immigration Skills Charge. And there are the **charges the worker usually pays** - the visa application fee and the Immigration Health Surcharge \[6\].

The other reason there's no single figure is that the total flexes with several variables: whether the business counts as a small or a large sponsor, how long the visa runs, whether the role qualifies for a discounted route, and whether the employer chooses to cover the worker's own costs. Two businesses hiring for the same role can end up with very different bills.

With that framing in place, here's what each individual charge looks like in 2026.

## The sponsor licence: A one-off entry cost

Before a business can sponsor anyone, it needs a sponsor licence. This is a one-off application rather than a per-worker charge, and it's the first outlay in the process.

[From 8 April 2026](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/visa-regulations-revised-table/home-office-immigration-and-nationality-fees-8-april-2026), the licence costs £611 for a small or charitable sponsor and £1,682 for a medium or large sponsor. These figures replaced the previous rates of £574 and £1,579 respectively - increases of £37 and £103, part of a wider round of immigration fee rises that spring \[1\].

Which rate applies depends on the organisation's size, assessed against the small companies regime in the Companies Act 2006. A business generally counts as a small sponsor if it meets [at least two of three tests](https://www.gov.uk/uk-visa-sponsorship-employers): an annual turnover of £15 million or less, a balance sheet total of £7.5 million or less, or 50 employees or fewer. Those thresholds rose on 6 April 2025 from £10.2 million and £5.1 million respectively, so older figures still circulate - worth knowing if a business is working from previous guidance \[7\]. Registered charities qualify for the lower rate regardless of size \[2\].

One point worth noting for smaller businesses: the licence is a fixed cost that doesn't scale with the number of workers sponsored. Whether a business sponsors one person or ten, the licence fee is the same. The cost per head therefore falls as hiring volume rises - a business sponsoring several workers effectively spreads that initial outlay across all of them.

There's also an optional priority service. For an additional £750, a business can request expedited processing of a sponsor licence application \[1\]. It's optional, and it's a cost some businesses factor in when timing matters.

## Certificate of Sponsorship

Once a business holds a licence, it assigns a Certificate of Sponsorship (CoS) to each worker it wants to sponsor. –This is an electronic record carrying a unique reference number that the worker uses to make their visa application, setting out the job, the salary, and the start and end dates \[6\].

The cost of assigning a Certificate of Sponsorship for a Skilled Worker is £525 per worker. That figure rose steeply from £239 in April 2025 - an increase of roughly 120% - and, notably, did not change in the April 2026 round \[1\].

Two things are worth noting. First, this is a per-hire charge: it applies every time a worker is sponsored, and again if a certificate needs reissuing. Second, employers are prohibited from recovering the CoS fee from the sponsored worker. This cost sits firmly with the employer \[6\].

## Immigration Skills Charge

The Immigration Skills Charge (ISC) is often the charge that catches businesses out, both because of its size and because it's paid upfront for the entire length of the visa.

The ISC rose by around a third on 16 December 2025 - its first increase since the charge was introduced in 2017. The current rates are £480 per year for small or charitable sponsors, up from £364, and £1,320 per year for medium or large sponsors, up from £1,000. For each additional six-month period beyond the first year, small sponsors pay £240 and large sponsors pay £660 \[5\].

Because the charge is paid in one go when the Certificate of Sponsorship is assigned, the numbers add up quickly over a multi-year visa. A small sponsor issuing a five-year certificate pays £2,400 in ISC upfront; a large sponsor pays £6,600 - due immediately, per worker, before the visa application is even made \[5\].

Like the CoS fee, the ISC is an employer cost that cannot be passed on to the worker. It's also worth knowing that the charge doesn't apply in every situation - certain occupations and circumstances fall outside it, including some PhD-level roles and workers switching from the student route \[6\].

## Visa application fee

The visa application fee is the charge most people picture when they think of a visa - and it's typically paid by the worker rather than the employer, though some businesses cover it as part of a competitive offer.

From 8 April 2026, the Skilled Worker visa application fee is £819 for a visa of three years or less applying from outside the UK, rising to £1,618 for a visa of over three years. Applying from inside the UK, the equivalent fees are £943 and £1,865. These replaced previous rates of £769 and £1,519 from outside the UK, and £885 and £1,751 from inside \[1\].

Reduced fees apply in certain cases. A role on the Immigration Salary List attracts a fee of £628 for three years or less and £1,235 for longer, while the Health and Care Worker route is cheaper still at £324 and £628 respectively - and these reduced rates apply whether the application is made from inside or outside the UK \[1\].

## Immigration Health Surcharge

The Immigration Health Surcharge (IHS) gives the worker access to the NHS during their stay, and across a multi-year visa it's frequently the single largest cost in the whole process.

[The IHS holds steady in 2026](https://www.gov.uk/healthcare-immigration-application) at £1,035 per year for an adult applicant, with a lower rate of £776 per year for under-18s. It's paid upfront and in full for the entire length of the visa. For a three-year visa, that's £3,105; for five years, £5,175. And it applies per person - so a worker bringing dependents attracts a separate surcharge for each one, which multiplies the figure considerably \[3\].

Like the visa application fee, the IHS is usually the worker's cost. But it frequently surfaces in salary negotiations, particularly for [senior or hard-to-fill roles](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/what-uk-employees-want-from-work), and some employers choose to cover it to make an offer more attractive. Applicants on the Health and Care Worker route are exempt from the surcharge altogether, along with their dependents - a substantial saving over the life of a visa \[3\].

## What a realistic total looks like

Individual figures are one thing; the combined total is what businesses actually need to plan for. Here's how the charges stack up for a typical scenario - a small sponsor, hiring one worker on a three-year visa from outside the UK, with no dependents and no priority service.

On the employer side: a sponsor licence at £611 (a one-off), a Certificate of Sponsorship at £525, and the Immigration Skills Charge at £480 per year, or £1,440 across three years. That comes to £2,576.

On the worker side: a visa application fee of £819 and the Immigration Health Surcharge at £1,035 per year, or £3,105 across three years. That's £3,924.

Combined, this example totals £6,500 - though the split means the employer's direct outlay is closer to £2,600 where the worker covers their own application fee and IHS.

The same hire at a medium or large sponsor looks rather different. The licence rises to £1,682 and the ISC to £1,320 per year, or £3,960 across three years, taking the employer's share to £6,167 against an unchanged £3,924 for the worker - a combined total of just over £10,000.

Stretch either scenario to five years and the numbers climb again, since both the ISC and the IHS are paid upfront for the full period. For a small sponsor that already holds a licence, a five-year hire means £2,400 in ISC and £525 for the certificate on the employer side, against £5,175 in IHS and £1,618 in application fees on the worker's - close to £9,700 between them.

## A few things that shift the total

Beyond the core charges, several factors move the final figure:

*   **Sponsor size.** The gap is significant - £611 versus £1,682 on the licence, and £480 versus £1,320 per year on the Immigration Skills Charge. Establishing which category a business falls into is the starting point for any accurate estimate.
*   **Visa length.** Because the ISC and IHS are both paid upfront for the full period, a longer visa means a larger day-one outlay.
*   **Dependents.** The Immigration Health Surcharge applies per person, and dependents also pay their own application fee, so a worker bringing a partner or children can add several thousand pounds.
*   **Discounted routes.** A role on the Immigration Salary List cuts the application fee substantially, and the Health and Care Worker route reduces it further while removing the IHS entirely - which changes the total dramatically.
*   **Who pays what.** The single biggest swing is often whether the employer covers the worker's application fee and IHS.
*   **Hiring volume.** Because the licence is a fixed one-off cost, the per-head figure falls as a business sponsors more workers.

## The wider cost picture

It's worth remembering that the Home Office charges are only part of the story. Businesses and workers also encounter [costs that fall outside the official fee schedule](https://www.gov.uk/skilled-worker-visa): English language tests, biometric appointments, document translations, and, where they choose to use it, professional advice to navigate the process \[4\]. These vary considerably by provider and circumstance, but they belong in any realistic budget - as does the fact that every one of these charges sits on top of the [ordinary cost of employing someone](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/how-much-does-it-cost-to-employ-someone), from salary and employer National Insurance to pension contributions.

There's also the matter of getting it right. Sponsorship carries ongoing responsibilities, and errors can prove costly - not just in fees, which are largely non-refundable once an application is decided, but in delays and the risk to a sponsor licence itself. Several of the figures here changed within the past eighteen months, and the rules around who pays which charge have tightened. Given that pace of change, the published rates are the only reliable reference point, and the complexity involved leads many businesses to seek specialist support.

## The case for sponsoring

The charges are the price of reaching candidates the domestic labour market can't supply. For roles where the skills genuinely aren't available at home - and the fall in application volumes suggests employers are now reserving sponsorship for exactly those cases - the alternative isn't a cheaper hire, it's an unfilled vacancy, with its own cost in lost output and overstretched colleagues. There are also other factors worth considering.

*   **Access to skills in genuine shortage.** Sponsorship is most often used where a role has proved hard to fill locally. Technology, engineering, healthcare and finance are among the sectors that have historically drawn most heavily on the route, reflecting persistent domestic shortages in those fields.
*   **A retention structure built into the visa.** A sponsored worker's permission is tied to their sponsoring employer, and the [Skilled Worker route is designed as a pathway to settlement](https://www.gov.uk/skilled-worker-visa) - workers can typically apply for indefinite leave to remain after a qualifying period of continuous residence \[4\]. That gives many sponsored employees a strong incentive to stay and progress with the employer who sponsored them, which can translate into lower turnover than a comparable open-market hire.
*   **A predictable, upfront cost.** Unlike some recruitment costs, most of the sponsorship charges are known in advance and paid at the outset. Once budgeted, they don't produce surprises later in the visa - which makes the total, however large, straightforward to plan around.
*   **A widening cost-per-head at volume.** The licence is a one-off, so a business that sponsors regularly spreads that fixed cost across every hire - making each additional sponsored worker cheaper than the first.

### The NHS case study

The NHS is the UK's biggest visa sponsor, and international recruitment has become structural to how it staffs itself rather than a stopgap. [As of September 2025](https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10568/), around 209,800 nurses, midwives and nursing associates on the Nursing and Midwifery Council register - roughly 24% - had trained overseas, while approximately 138,400 licensed doctors, some 42% of the total, qualified abroad. In 2024, around 20,100 internationally trained doctors joined the register, two-thirds of all new joiners that year. \[9\]

Those figures reflect a simple reality: training a doctor or nurse domestically takes years, and demand for care hasn't waited. For all the cost and administration sponsorship carries, it has given the health service a way to fill roles it could not otherwise fill.

_This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information is accurate at the time of writing but may be subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified professional._

\[1\] GOV.UK, _Home Office immigration and nationality fees, 8 April 2026_, UK Visas and Immigration, March 2026.

\[2\] GOV.UK, _UK visa sponsorship for employers: apply for a licence_, 2026.

\[3\] GOV.UK, _Pay for UK healthcare as part of your immigration application_, 2026.

\[4\] GOV.UK, _Skilled Worker visa_, 2026. \[5\] Legislation.gov.uk, _The Immigration Skills Charge (Amendment) Regulations 2025_ (SI 2025/1078), 2025.

\[6\] GOV.UK, _Workers and Temporary Workers: guidance for sponsors (sponsorship costs, Certificates of Sponsorship and Immigration Skills Charge exemptions)_, 2026.

\[7\] Legislation.gov.uk, _Companies Act 2006, Part 15 - company size thresholds, as amended April 2025_, 2025.

\[8\] GOV.UK, _Immigration system statistics, year ending December 2025: why do people come to the UK? Work_, Home Office, 2026.

\[9\] House of Commons Library, _International recruitment in the NHS workforce_ (CBP-10568), 2026.

How much does it cost to sponsor a skilled worker visa in 2026?

991443798 (3).jpg

How much does it cost to sponsor a Skilled Worker in 2026?

Somebody in your business has probably pasted something into a chatbot this week. They may have used it to draft a customer email, summarise a long document, or make sense of a spreadsheet. They will have decided for themselves whether that was acceptable, how far to trust what came back, and whether to mention it to anyone.

Those decisions get made whether or not you have written anything down. A policy determines whether they are made consistently, and whether you know they have been made at all.

Employees in 76% of UK organisations are now using AI tools at work, and 62% among SMEs \[1\]. While 61% of employers permit staff to use generative AI, only 31% have worked on a formal policy for it in the past year \[2\]. That number has doubled in two years, so employers are catching up, but a substantial number are still permitting a technology they have set no rules around.

This article sets out what belongs in an AI policy, how to write one your staff will actually follow, and how to introduce it.

## Summary

*   Employees in 76% of UK organisations use AI tools at work, and 62% of SMEs, but only 31% of employers worked on a formal AI policy in the past year \[12\].
*   Restricting AI use does not reliably reduce it. Microsoft research found 71% of UK employees have used unapproved consumer AI tools at work, and 51% do so weekly \[3\].
*   The reasons employees give are practical rather than rebellious: 41% say consumer tools are what they use at home, and 28% say their employer offers no approved alternative \[3\].
*   The absence of a policy tends to penalise the most cautious staff, who avoid AI entirely while less cautious colleagues proceed without guidance.
*   A workable policy answers four questions: which tools may be used, what must never be entered into them, who checks the output, and what to do when something goes wrong.
*   Naming the specific tool and account type matters, because free and paid tiers differ in whether the information entered is used to train the model.
*   The list of information that must never be entered is the most important section, and it works only if it is specific enough to be recalled under time pressure.
*   The level of checking should be proportionate to consequence. Fabricated figures, quotes and citations appear in the same confident register as accurate ones.
*   Time savings depend heavily on the task. A DWP trial found average savings of 19 minutes a day, but on some tasks verification cancelled the benefit out \[4\].
*   Training is where most employers fall short. Despite sessions being available, most staff in the DWP trial taught themselves by trial and error \[4\].
*   A policy is only as good as its distribution: it needs acknowledgement records, a place in induction, and a six-month review cycle.

## Why the gap between use and policy matters

### Restriction does not remove the behaviour

A quarter (25%) of UK organisations do not allow employees to use generative AI and have no plans to \[2\]. The evidence suggests this is less effective than it appears.

[Microsoft research conducted by Censuswide](https://ukstories.microsoft.com/features/rise-in-shadow-ai-tools-raising-security-concerns-for-uk/) among 2,003 UK employees in October 2025 found that 71% had used unapproved consumer AI tools at work, and 51% continued to do so every week \[3\]. The reasons employees gave were practical. Four in ten (41%) said consumer tools are what they are used to in their personal life. More than a quarter (28%) said their employer provided no work-approved option \[3\].

![image (1).png](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/media/image_1_bcabcead03.png)
_Reported use of free versus paid-for AI tools by UK employers. Source: CIPD, Labour Market Outlook Autumn 2025. \[1\]_

### The absence of a policy affects cautious staff most

Where no policy exists, employees tend to divide into two groups. Some treat the absence of a rule as permission and use AI freely, while others treat it as a risk and avoid AI altogether. The dividing line is disposition rather than seniority or competence.

The employees who abstain work more slowly as a result, while colleagues who are more comfortable making their own judgement calls are the ones deciding what customer information is safe to enter into a chatbot. The business gets neither the productivity benefit from the first group nor any oversight of the second.

### The time saved depends on the task

AI output has to be checked, and checking takes time. Where that time exceeds the time saved, the tool has cost the business rather than helped it.

The DWP published an [evaluation of its Copilot trial](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/an-evaluation-of-dwps-microsoft-copilot-365-trial/an-evaluation-of-dwps-microsoft-365-copilot-trial) in January 2026 \[4\]. 3,549 staff took part, and outcomes were compared against a group of 2,535 non-users rather than relying on users' impressions alone. The findings relate to office-based staff using a paid licence, so a smaller business on free tools should read them as indicative rather than directly transferable.

Copilot users saved an estimated average of 19 minutes per day across eight routine tasks.

The savings were not evenly distributed. They were largest for searching for existing information (26 minutes) and writing emails (25 minutes), and smallest for transcribing or summarising meetings (9 minutes) \[4\]. Users also reported that Copilot performed poorly on data-heavy work in Excel.

![image (2).png](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/media/image_2_b777662b3f.png)
_Estimated daily time saved by task. Source: DWP, An Evaluation of DWP's Microsoft 365 Copilot Trial, 2026. \[4\]_

The evaluation records the other side of this directly. Some users found that verifying the output removed the benefit, with one participant reporting that having checked the result, they concluded the task would have been quicker done manually from the start \[4\]. The report also found that output accuracy depended heavily on how the request was phrased, and that vague prompts produced fabricated or irrelevant results.

These findings are the reason guidance is worth writing. Employees given no direction on which tasks AI handles well will establish that individually, and some will spend longer checking a poor output than the task would have taken to do directly. Setting out which tasks the tool suits, which it does not, and what must always be checked against a source allows the organisation to apply what it has learned rather than requiring each employee to learn it separately.

## What an AI policy is for

An AI policy is a set of decisions made centrally so that employees do not have to make them individually. It should answer four questions:

*   Which tools may I use?
*   What information must never be entered into them?
*   Who checks the output before it leaves the business?
*   What do I do if something goes wrong?

If the document answers those questions in plain English, it is doing its job. A policy that needs a contents page is unlikely to be read, and an unread policy provides no protection.

## The sections a policy needs

### 1\. Purpose and scope

One paragraph covering who the policy applies to - including contractors and temporary staff - and why it exists.

Decide at this point whether the AI policy sits as a standalone document or as a section within your [employee handbook](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/drafting-an-employee-handbook-what-employers-need-to-know). A standalone document is easier to update on a six-month cycle, which matters more here than for most policies. It should be cross-referenced from the handbook and from your IT and data protection policies for ease of access.

### 2\. Approved tools

Name the tools. "Employees may use approved AI tools" is not a usable rule, because nobody knows which tools have been approved. "Employees may use Microsoft Copilot on their company account. Personal accounts must not be used for work tasks" can be followed or breached, and both the employee and the employer can tell which.

Specify the account type as well as the product. The distinction between a free consumer account and a paid business account usually determines whether the information entered is used to train the underlying model. Free tiers commonly do this; business and enterprise tiers commonly allow it to be switched off. Check the current terms with each provider rather than assuming, and check again at each review, because they change.

This is a common situation rather than an edge case. The [CIPD's Labour Market Outlook](https://www.cipd.org/globalassets/media/knowledge/knowledge-hub/reports/2025-pdfs/9024-lmo-autumn-2025-report-web.pdf), a survey of more than 2,000 UK employers, found that 54% said their employees use free versions of AI tools, compared with 42% using paid-for versions \[1\].

Include a process for adding tools to the approved list. Employees will find tools that are useful and not yet approved. If the only options are to use them without telling anyone or not to use them, the policy will be worked around rather than followed. A named contact and a short request process brings these tools into view.

### 3\. Information that must never be entered

This is the most important section, and it should be specific.

General wording does not work here, because it returns the judgement to the employee. "Employees must not enter confidential or sensitive data into AI tools" requires each member of staff to decide what counts as sensitive, and their definitions will vary. Compare:

**General**: "Employees must not enter confidential or sensitive data into AI tools."

**Specific**: "Never enter any of the following into any AI tool: customer names, addresses or account numbers; employee records, including pay, performance or absence; anything covered by an NDA; passwords or logins; unpublished financial results; supplier pricing."

### 4\. Human review and accountability

A named person is accountable for every output, regardless of how it was produced. AI use does not transfer responsibility away from the employee or the business.

Review should be proportionate to consequence. Applying the same level of scrutiny to an internal draft and a customer-facing financial summary wastes time on the first and provides insufficient protection on the second.

**Example:**

| Output type | Review needed |
| --- | --- |
| Internal drafts, brainstorming, summarising your own notes | Author's judgement |
| Internal documents others will rely on | Author checks facts and figures against source |
| Anything customer-facing | Named second person checks before it goes out |
| Any figures, quotes, statistics or citations | Verified against the original source, always |

The final row is the one that causes the most problems in practice. Generative AI tools produce fabricated figures, quotations and references in the same confident register as accurate ones, and there is no reliable way to identify them from the output alone. The DWP evaluation found that users were most cautious precisely where the tool drew on external sources or unfamiliar material, and that poorly framed requests produced fabricated results \[4\]. One participant summarised the position: the output is useful for starting research, but cannot be treated as a source in itself.

Any number, quotation or source that appears in AI output should be checked against the original before it is used.

### 5\. Disclosure

Decide when AI use should be declared, and to whom.

Some businesses require disclosure on any customer deliverable. Others require it only where AI made a substantive contribution, rather than assisting with drafting or formatting. Some customers and sectors will have their own expectations that override yours, and public sector or regulated clients increasingly ask the question directly at tender stage.

There is no single correct answer, and the right one depends on what you do and who you do it for. What causes problems is leaving the question open. Where the policy is silent, each employee answers it for themselves, which means your business gives different answers to different customers, and you may discover your own position for the first time when a customer asks.

Apply whatever you decide to the leadership team as well. A disclosure rule that exempts senior staff will not hold, because the people it exempts are the ones producing the most customer-facing material.

### 6\. AI in people decisions

If AI is used in recruitment, promotion, performance management or disciplinary processes, that use should be deliberate, documented, and subject to a human decision rather than human confirmation of an AI recommendation. State which of these processes AI may be used in, in what capacity, and who holds the decision.

The most common unplanned use is a manager entering a candidate shortlist into a chatbot and asking it to rank them. If the policy does not address this, it will happen without the employer's knowledge.

### 7\. What to do when something goes wrong

Employees need a route for reporting mistakes.

If someone enters customer data into a consumer chatbot, the employer needs to know quickly. That will only happen if the reporting route is clear and the response is proportionate. If employees expect disciplinary action, they are unlikely to report the error, and the business is more likely to find out from the customer.

### 8\. Ownership and review

Name the policy owner and the review date. Six months is a reasonable interval, as both the tools and their pricing tiers change frequently. Include a version number and date on the document.

## Writing the policy

### Establish current use first

Ask each team which AI tools they currently use and what they use them for. Phrase this as a question rather than an audit, or the answers will be incomplete.

This has two benefits. The policy will reflect how people actually work, which makes it more likely to be followed. It also corrects for the fact that senior teams often have an inaccurate picture of AI use in their organisation.

### Write for someone working under time pressure

The policy will usually be recalled from memory by someone with a deadline, not consulted at leisure. Use short sentences, specific examples, and concrete terms rather than general principles.

### Record who has read it

A policy only helps you if you can show that the current version reached the people it covers. Record acknowledgements, and build it into your [onboarding process](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/employers-guide-to-effective-employee-onboarding) so that new starters read it alongside your other day-one documentation. When the policy is updated, reissue it rather than relying on staff to notice the change.

## Introducing the policy

A policy sets out the rules. It does not explain what AI is reliable for, where it fails, or how to identify a fabricated statistic. Without that, review requirements become a formality.

[CIPD analysis of generative AI adoption](https://www.cipd.org/en/about/blogs/can-ai-deliver-productivity-boost-uk-needs/) found that 35% of employers had provided training and support to help employees use generative AI in the past 12 months \[2\], meaning the majority had not, including many who permit its use.

The DWP evaluation is useful on what training should look like. Despite formal sessions being available, 89% of participants learned to use the tool through self-directed exploration, and most did not recall attending any training \[4\]. What they asked for was training tailored to their own role and job function, practical examples of what worked, short sessions covering one feature at a time, and a reference sheet of prompts they could keep to hand \[4\].

![image (3).png](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/media/image_3_3ac098edd3.png)
_How staff actually learned to use the tool, despite training being available. Source: DWP, An Evaluation of DWP's Microsoft 365 Copilot Trial, 2026. \[4\]_

A short session in which each team works through examples from their own workload is more effective than general theory, and it surfaces situations the policy has not covered. Treat it as part of your wider approach to [employee development](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/best-practices-for-effective-employee-development) rather than as a one-off exercise attached to the policy launch.

### Address the effect on jobs

Employees are likely to be concerned about whether AI will affect their roles. If the employer does not address this, staff will draw their own conclusions, and that will shape how they respond to the policy.

The position for smaller businesses is genuinely different from the one reported in the headlines, and it is worth setting out. The CIPD found that 49% of employers expect AI to make no difference to their headcount over the next 12 months, and 17% expect it to reduce headcount. Among SMEs, however, only 7% expect a reduction, compared with 26% of large private sector employers \[1\]. The CIPD's own reading of this is that SMEs appear to be doing more with the same number of people, while large private sector employers appear to be streamlining \[1\].

If you are an SME, that is a fair thing to tell your staff: the intention is to remove work that nobody enjoys, not to remove people. Where that is your position, say so plainly, and be equally plain about what you cannot promise. Where AI does change what roles look like over time, that belongs in your [workforce planning](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/workforce-planning-basics) rather than being handled through an AI policy.

## Getting the balance right

Employers responding to AI tend to focus on constraining their use. On its own, restriction tends to move the activity out of view rather than stop it, which leaves the business without either the productivity benefit or the oversight.

The policies that work are short enough to be remembered, specific enough to be followed, based on how employees actually work, and supported by training that allows staff to exercise the judgement the policy asks of them. Employees are already making decisions about AI use. The policy determines the basis on which they make them.

_This article is intended for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, compliance or professional advice. While it highlights some key considerations for organisations developing an AI policy, Mentor does not provide AI policy creation services or advice tailored to individual organisations. We recommend seeking appropriate independent advice to ensure any AI policy is suitable for your organisation’s needs._

\[1\] CIPD, _Labour Market Outlook: Autumn 2025_, November 2025.

\[2\] CIPD, _Generative AI at work: can it deliver the productivity boost UK employers need?_, January 2026.

\[3\] Microsoft UK, _Rise in 'Shadow AI' tools raising security concerns for UK organisations_, October 2025.

\[4\] Department for Work and Pensions, _An Evaluation of DWP's Microsoft 365 Copilot Trial_, January 2026.

Oasis-Southbank-0122 (1).jpg

How to write an AI policy for your business

As the UK enters its third heatwave of 2026, with amber heat-health alerts issued across much of England, many employers are fielding a familiar question from staff: when is it too hot to work? The answer surprises most people. There is no temperature at which the law says work must stop.

That absence catches many employers off guard, because the assumption runs deep that a fixed threshold exists - 30°C is the figure most often cited - beyond which work must stop. No such threshold exists. What employers have instead is a broader and arguably more demanding duty: to keep the workplace at a "reasonable" temperature and to manage the health risks that heat creates \[1\]. A thermometer reading tells you very little on its own. What matters is whether staff are safe, comfortable enough to work effectively, and protected when conditions turn genuinely dangerous.

This article explains why no maximum exists, what "reasonable" means in practice, how to judge thermal comfort properly, and the concrete steps that keep staff healthy and working through hot spells - whether they sit at a desk, stand in a warehouse, or work outdoors.

## Summary

*   There is no legal maximum workplace temperature in the UK, and no temperature at which work must legally stop.
*   Employers must ensure indoor workplaces are maintained at a reasonable temperature during working hours and must assess and control any risks arising from excessive heat.
*   For outdoor workers, employers should consider providing shaded rest areas, access to drinking water, flexible working hours where practicable, and employee information on recognising the signs of heat-related illness.
*   Guidance sets a minimum of around 16°C for sedentary work and 13°C for physical work, but there is no equivalent ceiling.
*   "Thermal comfort" is the real test - HSE notes that this is often best judged by the level of employee dissatisfaction rather than by a single thermometer reading alone.
*   Six factors determine comfort: air temperature, radiant heat, humidity, air movement, how hard people are working, and what they are wearing.
*   A risk assessment is the starting point; from there, practical low-cost controls usually solve most problems.
*   Some workers face higher risk - including pregnant employees, older staff, and those with certain health conditions or medications.
*   Change may be coming: the Climate Change Committee and the TUC are both pressing the government for maximum-temperature rules, and a review of the guidance is underway.

## Why there is no maximum temperature

The absence of a maximum can seem like an obvious gap. If guidance sets a recommended minimum, why not a maximum to match?

The reason lies in how greatly workplaces differ. A temperature that would be alarming in an open-plan office is entirely normal in a commercial kitchen, a foundry, a bakery, or a glasshouse. A single national ceiling pitched for a call centre would either shut down legitimate industries or be set so high that it protected no one. Rather than impose a figure that suits nobody, the framework asks employers to keep conditions "reasonable" for their particular workplace and to control the risks that arise \[1\].

This is why guidance offers a minimum but not a maximum. For indoor workplaces, the [recommended floor](https://www.gov.uk/workplace-temperatures) is normally at least 16°C for sedentary work such as office tasks, or around 13°C where the work is physically demanding \[2\]. These are guideline figures rather than hard limits, and there is deliberately no figure at the top end. The duty to act does not switch on at a set reading - it applies whenever heat could foreseeably cause harm.

For employers, this represents a crucial shift in thinking. The question is not what the thermometer reads, but whether conditions are reasonable and whether the risk has been managed.

**Outdoor working**

Employees working outdoors may face additional risks from direct sunlight, radiant heat, and prolonged physical exertion. Employers should consider providing shaded rest areas, increasing access to drinking water, adjusting working hours where practicable, and ensuring workers understand the signs of heat-related illness.

## Thermal comfort: The test that actually matters

The concept that replaces a maximum temperature is "thermal comfort" - and it is worth understanding properly, because it reframes the whole problem.

Thermal comfort describes how satisfied people are with the temperature around them. The [official guidance](https://www.hse.gov.uk/temperature/thermal/) puts it memorably: thermal comfort is not measured by the temperature of the room, but by how many of your employees are complaining of thermal discomfort \[3\].

This matters because comfort depends on far more than air temperature. Six factors combine to determine whether a space feels comfortable \[3\]:

*   **air temperature** - the figure most people focus on, but only one part of the picture
*   **radiant heat** - warmth radiating from machinery, ovens, or direct sunlight through glass, which can make a space feel far hotter than the air temperature suggests
*   **humidity** - high humidity stops sweat evaporating, which is how the body cools itself, making moderate temperatures feel oppressive
*   **air movement** - a breeze or fan aids cooling; still, stagnant air traps heat against the body
*   **work rate** - physical effort generates body heat, so the same room is far hotter for someone lifting boxes than for someone typing
*   **clothing** - uniforms, protective equipment, and heavy fabrics all trap heat and limit the body's ability to cool

The practical lesson is that two workplaces at the same air temperature can pose completely different levels of risk. A humid, still warehouse where staff do heavy lifting in protective gear is a far greater concern than an airy office at the same reading.

## Why heat is a genuine safety issue, not just discomfort

There is a temptation to treat workplace heat as a question of comfort rather than safety. That underestimates it.

When people feel uncomfortably hot, their ability to make good decisions and perform tasks deteriorates, and they are more likely to behave unsafely - cutting corners to escape the heat, or wearing protective equipment improperly because it is uncomfortable \[3\]. In physically demanding or hazardous settings, that drop in judgement and compliance is where accidents happen. The [CIPD](https://www.cipd.org/en/about/press-releases/employers-should-consider-flexibility-as-temperatures-soar/), the professional body for HR, makes the same point about everyday roles: sustained heat causes fatigue and reduced concentration, and the effect is felt most acutely by those in safety-critical jobs such as driving or construction \[11\].

Beyond performance, heat carries direct health risks. [Heat exhaustion](https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/heat-exhaustion-heatstroke/) brings heavy sweating, dizziness, headache, muscle cramps, and nausea. Left unmanaged, it can progress to heatstroke - a medical emergency marked by confusion, a very high body temperature, or loss of consciousness, which requires an immediate 999 call \[9\]. These are not remote possibilities during a heatwave; they are foreseeable outcomes that employers are expected to plan for.

The wider context makes the point sharper. The UK [recorded a temperature of 40.3°C](https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/news-and-media/media-centre/weather-and-climate-news/2022/july-heat-review) in July 2022, the first time 40°C had been reached \[10\]. That summer's heat was associated with more than 3,000 excess deaths across England and Wales - a population-wide figure rather than a workplace one, but a measure of how dangerous extreme heat has become \[8\]. The country saw four heatwaves in the summer of 2025, each triggering official heat-health alerts \[7\]. Extreme heat is no longer an occasional freak event to be weathered - it is a recurring planning scenario, and workplaces that prepare for it fare considerably better than those that improvise each time.

## A practical framework for managing workplace heat

Managing heat does not require expensive engineering in most workplaces. It requires a considered process and a set of sensible controls. The approach below moves from assessment to action.

### 1\. Start with a risk assessment

Heat is one of the [risks an employer should assess](https://www.hse.gov.uk/temperature/employer/heat-stress.htm), indoors or outdoors. A heat risk assessment identifies where high temperatures are likely, who is most exposed, and what could go wrong. It should weigh the environmental factors (temperature, humidity, radiant heat, air movement), the work factors (how strenuous the task is, how long shifts run, what protective clothing is required), and the individual factors (who among your staff may be more vulnerable) \[4\]. This assessment is the foundation everything else builds on, and it should be revisited when conditions change rather than written once and filed away.

### 2\. Apply practical controls

Most heat problems are solved with straightforward, low-cost measures. The aim is to reduce the temperature, improve air movement, lower the physical demand, and give people the means to cool down \[5\]. Effective options include:

*   improving ventilation - opening windows, using fans, or running air conditioning where available
*   shading windows with blinds or reflective film to cut radiant heat from the sun
*   relaxing dress codes so staff can wear cooler, lighter clothing
*   providing ready access to cool drinking water and encouraging regular hydration
*   introducing more frequent breaks, ideally in a cooler area away from the heat source
*   rescheduling the most strenuous tasks to the cooler parts of the day
*   moving workstations away from direct sunlight or hot machinery
*   allowing flexible or remote working where the role permits, so staff avoid the hottest conditions entirely.

Employers are not expected to apply every measure in every workplace. The expectation is that heat risk has been assessed and suitable controls have been considered and put in place - a proportionate response to a foreseeable hazard.

### 3\. Pay attention to clothing and protective equipment

Protective equipment is a common and overlooked cause of heat stress. It adds weight, traps body heat, and stops sweat evaporating. Where protective gear is essential it cannot simply be removed, but employers can lighten the load: encouraging staff to take equipment off as soon as a task is finished so trapped heat can disperse, considering lighter or breathable alternatives, and in some settings looking at specialist clothing with built-in cooling \[5\]. The principle is to avoid people working hard, in heavy gear, in hot and humid conditions for long unbroken stretches.

### 4\. Protect those most at risk

Heat does not affect everyone equally. Some staff need extra consideration - including pregnant employees, older workers, those new to a hot environment and not yet acclimatised, and people whose health conditions or medications make them more susceptible \[4\]. Once a worker has notified you that they are pregnant, you should carry out an individual risk assessment and make any adjustments it identifies. For others, the same [reasonable adjustments](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/reasonable-adjustments-in-the-workplace) that help everyone apply with extra care: more frequent breaks, access to cooler areas, reduced exertion, and a watchful eye for early symptoms.

### 5\. Brief managers and first aiders

Controls only work if the people on the ground know what to watch for. Managers and first aiders should be able to recognise the signs of heat exhaustion and heatstroke and know what to do - move the affected person somewhere cool, give them fluids, and escalate to emergency services if serious symptoms appear. Briefing them before a heatwave, rather than during one, ensures the response is prompt.

## Talking to your team

One of the simplest and most effective measures costs nothing: asking staff directly. Because comfort is subjective and varies from person to person, the people best placed to tell you whether conditions are reasonable are the ones working in them. [Consulting staff](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/top-tips-for-effective-workplace-communication) on how to cope with high temperatures surfaces problems early, produces better solutions, and demonstrates that the issue is being taken seriously. The CIPD makes the same recommendation, advising that employers who speak to staff and establish their needs are best placed to keep them both comfortable and productive \[11\].

It also heads off the resentment that builds when people feel ignored. An employee who has been asked for their input, offered a fan, and told they can dress down responds very differently from one left to suffer while management debates whether 28°C counts as too hot - even when the temperature is identical.

## What might change

The lack of a maximum temperature is increasingly contested, and employers should expect movement in this area.

The [Trades Union Congress](https://www.tuc.org.uk/news/employers-must-keep-workers-safe-first-heatwave-2026) has long campaigned for legal limits, proposing that employers should be required to act once temperatures climb above 24°C and staff feel uncomfortable, and that a ceiling of 30°C - or 27°C for strenuous work - should trigger a right to stop \[7\]. In May 2026 the [Climate Change Committee](https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/a-well-adapted-uk/), the government's independent climate adviser, recommended that ministers set maximum-temperature rules for work to address the growing risks that heat poses to workers, though it did not propose a specific figure \[8\].

The government has [acknowledged the issue](https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10925/), committing to modernise health and safety guidance on extreme temperatures, and a review of the relevant code of practice is underway with a consultation expected \[6\]. Nothing has changed in law yet, and any new rules would take time to arrive. But the direction of travel is clear, and employers who build sensible heat management into their practices now will be well ahead of whatever guidance eventually lands.

## The bottom line

The instinct to look for a maximum temperature is understandable, but it misreads the obligation. There is no number that releases an employer from responsibility, and equally none that defines the limit of it. What exists is a continuous duty to keep conditions reasonable and to manage the risks heat creates - a duty that is met through assessment, sensible controls, and genuine attention to how staff are coping.

That is more demanding than a single threshold would be, but it is also more useful. A workplace that manages heat well is safer, more comfortable, and more productive than one waiting for a thermometer to hit a figure that never comes - and heat management sits naturally within broader [employee wellbeing initiatives](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/developing-employee-wellbeing-initiatives-in-the-workplace) rather than apart from them. As hot summers become the norm rather than the exception, the employers who treat heat as a foreseeable, manageable risk - rather than an annual surprise - are the ones whose people stay safe and keep working.

_This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information is accurate at the time of writing but may be subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified professional._

\[1\] Health and Safety Executive, _Temperature in the workplace: What the law says_.

\[2\] GOV.UK, _Workplace temperatures_.

\[3\] Health and Safety Executive, _Thermal comfort: the six basic factors_.

\[4\] Health and Safety Executive, _Temperature in the workplace: Heat stress_.

\[5\] Health and Safety Executive, _Managing workplace temperatures_.

\[6\] House of Commons Library, _Working in hot weather: What does the law say?_, June 2026.

\[7\] Trades Union Congress, _Employers must keep workers safe in the first heatwave of 2026_, June 2026.

\[8\] Climate Change Committee, _A Well-Adapted UK_, May 2026.

\[9\] NHS, _Heat exhaustion and heatstroke_.

\[10\] Met Office, _UK temperature records._

\[11\] CIPD, _Employers should consider flexibility and adjustments as temperatures soar_, May 2026.

GettyImages-1134027904 (1).jpg

Maximum workplace temperature: What employers need to know

Every year, the same pattern repeats across thousands of UK businesses. Demand climbs sharply for a few intense weeks, existing teams stretch to breaking point, and managers scramble to bring in extra hands at exactly the moment they have least time to do it properly. Shelves go unstocked, queues lengthen, and the temporary staff brought in to ease the pressure often leave before they've become useful.

The scale of seasonal hiring is considerable. For Christmas 2025 alone, [Tesco opened 28,500 temporary positions](https://www.networkrevolution.co.uk/christmas-brings-a-hiring-wave/) \[1\], while the John Lewis Partnership ran [its largest ever seasonal drive](https://www.retailgazette.co.uk/blog/2025/09/john-lewis-seasonal-roles/) at around 13,700 roles across John Lewis, Waitrose, and its distribution network \[2\]. These are the headline figures, but the same dynamic plays out in smaller businesses everywhere: the garden centre staffing up for spring, the seaside café doubling its team for August, the events company providing crew for thesummer festival.

Yet seasonal staffing is rarely treated as a discipline in its own right. Many businesses approach each peak as a one-off emergency rather than a predictable, recurring event that rewards planning. The result is rushed recruitment, thin onboarding, and a workforce that never quite reaches full productivity before the season ends.

It doesn't have to work this way. Businesses that forecast demand early, recruit ahead of the rush, and invest even modestly in onboarding consistently get more from their seasonal teams - and build a pool of proven people they can call on again. This article sets out how to manage seasonal workers effectively from forecasting through to the end of the season and beyond.

## Summary

*   Seasonal hiring is predictable, not exceptional - the businesses that plan months ahead consistently outperform those that wait until demand hits.
*   Forecasting from previous years' data lets you size your team accurately and recruit before the talent pool tightens.
*   Job-seeker competition for seasonal roles has intensified, with applicant interest up significantly year on year, so clear adverts and fast processes matter more than ever \[7\].
*   Effective onboarding is the single highest-return investment: structured induction can lift new-hire productivity by over 70% and retention by 82% \[4\].
*   Treating temporary staff as genuine team members - through buddies, check-ins, and recognition - drives both performance and the likelihood they'll return.
*   A returning seasonal worker needs far less ramp-up time, making your seasonal pool a cost-effective, ready-made talent pipeline.
*   Pay, flexibility, and a positive experience are the main levers for attracting and keeping seasonal staff in a competitive market.

## Why seasonal workforce planning matters more in 2026

The UK labour market has shifted in ways that make casual, last-minute seasonal hiring riskier than it once was. The reliable December boost that retail and hospitality used to count on has weakened: [small-business employment in these sectors contracted by 2%](https://employmenthero.com/uk/news/consequences-of-retail-hospitality-hiring-slump-2026/) in December 2025, with year-on-year growth in the sector falling from 13.5% the previous December to just 0.5% \[3\]. Summer hiring has shown a similar caution, with [employers slower to add seasonal headcount](https://www.hiringlab.org/uk/blog/2026/06/02/slow-summer-hiring-another-blow-for-young-workers/) than in previous years \[6\].

At the same time, demand for seasonal work from job-seekers has climbed. [Interest in seasonal roles](https://orgshakers.com/2025/12/03/seasonal-hiring-and-onboarding-how-to-make-temporary-teams-feel-permanent/) at the end of September 2025 was up 27% year on year and 50% above 2023 levels \[7\]. More applicants might sound like good news, but it also means more competition between employers for the best of them, and a larger volume of applications to sift through under time pressure.

There's a broader pattern worth noting too. As permanent recruitment has cooled, many organisations have leaned into flexible staffing: [contract and temporary recruitment grew by around 11%](https://ixceed-solutions.com/uk-hiring-trends-august-2025-contract-recruitment-rises-despite-permanent-hiring-slowdown/) year on year in August 2025, even as permanent hiring slowed \[9\]. Seasonal and temporary workers are becoming a more central part of how UK businesses manage fluctuating demand, not just a festive afterthought.

The practical implication is straightforward. Seasonal staffing deserves the same forward planning you'd give any significant operational commitment, much like the [workforce planning basics](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/workforce-planning-basics) that underpin any growing team. The businesses that treat it strategically - mapping demand early and building relationships with returning workers - are far better placed than those still hoping to fill gaps in the final fortnight.

## Forecasting demand and sizing your team

Good seasonal management starts well before the first advert goes out. The foundation is an honest forecast of what you'll actually need.

Start with your own history. Last year's sales data, footfall, transaction volumes, or order numbers tell you when your peak begins, how steep it is, and when it tapers off. Look at where things went wrong, too: the days you were understaffed, the shifts nobody wanted, the points where service slipped. These gaps are your planning priorities for the coming season.

Translate that demand into specific staffing needs rather than a vague sense that you'll "need more people." There are a few things worth considering.

*   **Volume**: How many additional people, and in which roles? Front-of-house, stockroom, delivery, and customer service may all scale at different rates.
*   **Timing**: When does each role need to start? Warehouse and logistics teams often need to be in place before the customer-facing peak, not alongside it.
*   **Shift patterns**: Which shifts are hardest to cover? Evenings, weekends, and bank holidays typically need the most attention and the strongest incentives.
*   **Lead time**: How long does it take you to recruit, check, and train someone to a useful standard? Work backwards from your peak to set a recruitment start date.

Retailers typically begin recruiting for Christmas in October, and [many larger employers open applications](https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/seasonal-hiring-drives-growth-in-uk-jobs-market/ as early as September \[8\]. For summer roles, the [planning window often runs from January through March](https://successknocks.com/summer-hiring-strategies-for-retail-hospitality/) \[5\]. The principle holds at any scale: the earlier you start, the wider the talent pool and the less you'll pay - in money or stress - to fill roles at the last minute. With the [time to hire in the UK](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/time-to-hire-in-the-uk) stretching across many sectors, building in that lead time is rarely wasted effort.

## Recruiting ahead of the rush

With a forecast in hand, the goal is to recruit efficiently while the pool is still deep. Three things make the biggest difference.

### Write adverts that are clear and specific

Seasonal applicants are often weighing several roles at once and skim quickly. State the essentials plainly: the dates of the contract, the hours and shift patterns, the pay, the location, and what the work actually involves. Vagueness costs you - both in unsuitable applicants and in good candidates who move on to a clearer listing. Be honest about the demands, too; overselling a role simply produces disappointed starters who leave early.

### Keep your process fast

In a competitive market, a slow recruitment process loses good people to quicker rivals. Streamline applications, batch your interviews, and make decisions promptly. Many large seasonal employers have moved to simplified, mobile-friendly applications precisely because speed and ease convert more candidates \[1\].

### Target the right talent pools

Seasonal work suits particular groups especially well - students on holiday, people seeking flexible hours, those wanting extra income around a specific period, and career-changers testing a new sector. Different channels reach different pools. Local social media groups, your own networks, colleges and universities, and word-of-mouth referrals from existing staff are often more effective and far cheaper than blanket job-board spend. Referrals carry an added advantage: people recommended by your current team tend to arrive with a realistic picture of the work and integrate faster - and a strong [employer brand](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/building-employer-brand) makes every one of these channels work harder.

One source frequently overlooked is your own past seasonal staff. People who worked a previous peak and performed well are the warmest leads you hav.

## Onboarding: The highest-return investment you'll make

It's tempting to cut corners on onboarding for someone who'll only be with you a few weeks. This is the most common and most costly mistake in seasonal staffing. The shorter the contract, the more important it is that people become productive quickly - and thin induction guarantees the opposite.

The evidence is striking. [Structured onboarding can improve new-hire productivity](https://workbright.com/blog/how-seasonal-worker-onboarding-streamlines-your-hiring-process/) by over 70% and retention by 82% \[4\]. Organisations with standardised onboarding processes achieve markedly higher retention and productivity from new joiners than those that leave people to find their own feet \[10\]. For a seasonal worker whose entire tenure might be six or eight weeks, the difference between productive on day three and productive on day twelve is enormous.

Effective seasonal onboarding doesn't require a lengthy programme. It requires structure and clarity, and the same principles set out in our [guide to employee onboarding](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/employers-guide-to-effective-employee-onboarding) apply just as much to temporary teams.

*   **Prepare before they arrive.** Have their equipment, logins, uniform, and workspace ready for day one. Nothing erodes early confidence like standing around waiting for access that should have been sorted in advance.
*   **Break the role into clear, digestible modules.** Rather than overwhelming people with everything at once, focus on the core competencies they need first and layer in the rest over the opening days.
*   **Assign a buddy.** Pairing each new starter with an experienced team member gives them someone to ask the small questions they'd never raise formally. [Buddy systems consistently improve early retention](https://www.sage.com/en-gb/blog/employee-onboarding-process/) and job satisfaction \[15\].
*   **Build in early check-ins.** Brief, regular conversations in the first days - even just fifteen minutes - let you catch confusion or skill gaps before they affect the operation, and signal that you're invested in their success.

A short, well-designed induction pays for itself many times over in the days of productive work it unlocks.

## Turning seasonal hires into a year-round asset

The end of the season is where most businesses stop thinking about their temporary staff - and where the biggest opportunity is quietly lost.

A seasonal worker who performed well represents enormous value beyond the weeks they've already given you. They know your systems, your culture, and your customers. You've effectively run a "try before you hire" assessment and seen exactly how they work. Should a permanent role open up, [a former seasonal employee can step into it](https://www.theperillogroup.com/2025/12/03/turning-holiday-hires-into-long-term-talent/) with far less ramp-up time than an external hire, and people who grow into a role this way tend to stay longer because they already know they enjoy the work \[13\]. [Promoting from your seasonal pool](https://dpistaffing.com/2025/12/26/retaining-seasonal-employees-after-the-holidays/) also cuts sourcing and onboarding costs significantly \[14\].

Even where there's no permanent vacancy, your seasonal pool is a ready-made talent pipeline for next year. A returning worker needs only light re-induction rather than full onboarding, which compresses your time-to-productivity and cuts recruitment costs at a stroke. [Some businesses have reported substantial increases in seasonal return rates](https://workbright.com/blog/5-reasons-to-use-temporary-worker-onboarding-software-for-seasonal-staff/) simply by keeping in touch and following up \[11\].

## Looking ahead

Seasonal demand is one of the few business pressures you can genuinely see coming. The peak arrives at roughly the same time every year, in roughly the same shape, and the data to plan for it sits in your own records. The difference between a chaotic season and a smooth one rarely comes down to luck or budget - it comes down to whether the work was treated as predictable and planned for accordingly.

Forecast early, recruit ahead of the rush, invest in onboarding even for short contracts, manage seasonal staff as the genuine team members they are, and protect the relationships with those who perform well. Do this consistently and the annual scramble gives way to something far more valuable: a dependable, repeatable way to meet your busiest periods with confidence.

_This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information is accurate at the time of writing but may be subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified professional._

\[1\] Network Revolution, _Christmas Brings a Hiring Wave - Tesco seeks 28,500 staff_, November 2025.

\[2\] Retail Gazette, _John Lewis Partnership launches 'biggest ever' seasonal recruitment drive for Christmas_, September 2025.

\[3\] Employment Hero, _Consequences of the UK retail & hospitality hiring slump_, January 2026.

\[4\] WorkBright, _How Seasonal Worker Onboarding Streamlines Your Hiring Process_, May 2025.

\[5\] Success Knocks, _Summer Hiring Strategies for Retail and Hospitality: Beat the Rush in 2026_, May 2026.

\[6\] Indeed Hiring Lab UK, _May 2026 UK Labour Market Update: Slow Summer Hiring_, June 2026.

\[7\] OrgShakers, _Seasonal Hiring and Onboarding: How to Make Temporary Teams Feel Permanent_, December 2025.

\[8\] Personnel Today, _Seasonal Hiring Trends in the UK: What to Expect_, 2025.

\[9\] ixceed Solutions, _UK Hiring Trends August 2025: Contract Recruitment Rises Despite Permanent Hiring Slowdown_, September 2025.

\[10\] WorkBright, _How Seasonal Worker Onboarding Streamlines Your Hiring Process_, May 2025.

\[11\] WorkBright, _Temporary Worker Onboarding Software for Seasonal Staff_, 2025.

\[12\] OrgShakers, _Seasonal Hiring and Onboarding_, December 2025.

\[13\] The Perillo Group, _Turning Holiday Hires Into Long-Term Talent_, December 2025.

\[14\] DPI Staffing, _Retaining Seasonal Employees After the Holidays_, December 2025.

\[15\] Sage Advice UK, _Employee Onboarding Process_, 2025.

iStock-501070858 (2).jpg

Managing seasonal workers: How to build a high-performing temporary team

Following the [first wave of reforms introduced in April 2026](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/employment-law-changes-in-april-2026-what-you-need-to-know), employers now face a further set of changes expected to take effect from October 2026. This second wave places greater emphasis on employer responsibilities - particularly around harassment prevention, trade union rights and workplace protections. 

With October fast approaching and several of the changes still subject to finalised regulations and codes of practice, businesses should begin reviewing their policies, procedures and management practices now rather than waiting for every detail to be confirmed. 

## Summary

- From October 2026, the Employment Rights Act 2025 introduces a second wave of reforms focused on harassment prevention, trade union rights and workplace protections. 
- The duty to prevent sexual harassment rises from "reasonable steps" to "all reasonable steps," and a new duty covers harassment by third parties. 
- Employers must give workers a standalone written statement on the right to join a trade union, and unions gain new workplace access rights (firms with fewer than 21 employees are exempt). 
- Tribunal time limits for most claims are set to rise from three to six months, "no earlier than" October 2026. 

## October 2026 changes

### Sexual harassment

The current duty on employers to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment in the course of employment is being strengthened. From October, this becomes a duty to take all reasonable steps - a higher and more proactive standard that will require employers to go further than simply having a policy in place. 

The government has the power to make regulations clarifying what "all reasonable steps" means in practice, but these are not expected until 2027 or 2028. In the meantime, the [EHRC's technical guidance on sexual harassment and harassment at work](https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/guidance/sexual-harassment-and-harassment-work-technical-guidance) provides the most useful practical benchmark for employers assessing whether their current measures are sufficient. 

### Third-party harassment

A new duty will require employers to take all reasonable steps to prevent harassment of their employees by third parties - meaning anyone other than the employer or a fellow employee, such as contractors, suppliers, clients, customers, service users, passengers, patients, members of the public and residents. This covers harassment related to all relevant protected characteristics: age, disability, gender reassignment, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation.  

Third-party harassment protections were removed from statute in 2013, so this represents a significant restoration of workplace rights. The "all reasonable steps" standard mirrors the strengthened duty introduced for sexual harassment (see above), and employers should consider both duties together when reviewing their harassment prevention measures. 

### Duty to inform workers of right to join a trade union

Employers will be required to inform their workers of their right to join a trade union. This must be provided as a standalone written statement - it cannot be incorporated into the written statement of particulars of employment (the Section 1 statement) or other standard onboarding documents. 

The statement must include: the functions of trade unions, a summary of workers' rights in relation to union membership, a list of any trade unions recognised by the employer, and a signpost to the relevant government website for further information. 

Regulations will set out the precise content of the statement, how it must be issued to both new and existing workers, and how frequently it must be reissued. The obligation to inform existing workers - not just new starters - means employers should not treat this as a one-off onboarding task. 

### Trade union right of access

Trade unions will have new rights to access workplaces - both physically and digitally (including, for example, the ability to communicate with workers via email or virtual meetings). 

To start this process, a union must make a written request to an employer seeking access. The employer then has 15 working days to issue a written response, followed by a negotiation period of 25 working days to allow for the parties to agree the terms of access. If no agreement is reached, the union has 55 working days from the date of the initial request to refer the matter to the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC), which has the power to impose access terms. 

**Please note** - employers with fewer than 21 employees are exempt from this regime. 

### Facilities and time off for trade union officials

Currently, employers who recognise a trade union must allow officials of that union to take paid time off during working hours to carry out trade union duties and undertake relevant training.  

The ERA strengthens this by introducing a new duty on employers to provide reasonable accommodation and facilities - such as meeting rooms or access to communication tools - where the representative requests this to carry out their duties. 

This new facilities duty applies to trade union officials, trade union learning representatives, and the newly created category of trade union equality representatives. 

### Enhanced protection from detriment

Workers who take part in protected industrial action will gain a new right not to be subjected to a detriment by their employer, where the sole or main purpose of that treatment is to prevent, deter or penalise them for doing so. This could include, for example, disciplinary action, financial penalties, or denial of career development opportunities - though the protection is not limited to these examples. 

### Employment tribunal time limits

No earlier than October 2026, the time limit for bringing most employment tribunal claims will increase from three months to six months. Note that breach of contract claims arising on termination of employment are excluded and will remain subject to a three-month limit. 

The "no earlier than" caveat means this change could slip beyond October 2026 - potentially into 2027 - so employers should monitor the confirmed implementation date. 

In practical terms, employers should review their record-keeping practices in light of this change. Documents and records relating to disciplinary processes, grievances and dismissals that were previously safe to dispose of will need to be retained for longer. 

### Tips and gratuities

Key changes to tipping legislation were scheduled to come into effect in October, but the indications are that this will be later in the year. These will require employers to consult with worker or trade union representatives before producing their first written tipping policy. Employers will also have to review the policy every three years and consult with the representatives when doing so. Finally, the employer will also need to provide workers with an anonymised summary of the views expressed during consultation.  

### Public sector outsourcing

Where a company takes on a public sector outsourcing contract, new measures under the ERA are intended to prevent the creation of a two-tier workforce. Workers employed directly by the contractor to deliver the outsourced service should not be treated less favourably in their terms and conditions than employees who transferred from the public authority under TUPE. The aim is to promote consistency in pay and employment terms across the workforce. 

## What should employers do now?

Although some of the changes will require further regulations and government guidance before they are fully implemented, employers should begin preparing now. Reviewing workplace policies, updating harassment procedures, assessing trade union processes and ensuring managers understand the new obligations will help organisations reduce legal risk and maintain compliance. 

### Further reading

For more information on the upcoming employment law changes, you may find the following articles helpful: 

- [Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) changes from April 2026](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/statutory-sick-pay-ssp-changes) 
- [Unfair dismissal changes 2027: The six-month qualifying period explained](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/unfair-dismissal-changes-2027)  
- [The Fair Work Agency: What this new enforcement body means for employers](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/the-fair-work-agency) 
- [Employment law changes in April 2026: What you need to know ](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/employment-law-changes-in-april-2026-what-you-need-to-know)

For the latest HR news and updates, visit our [News blog](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/page/1/). 

**Not sure what to prioritise before October?** Our free webinar on 16 September walks through the October and January changes, the practical steps to take now, and the risks of leaving policy reviews too late. [Register here](https://rbs.zoom.us/webinar/register/3317815412217/WN_19H9XUlMRfKnmcDbKdFYTQ).

_This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information is accurate at the time of writing but may be subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified professional._

Colleagues at a work meeting reading and discussing written legal changes 

news image (2).jpg

Employment Rights Act: October 2026 changes

Closing the disability employment gap alone could add an estimated [£17 billion a year](https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-commits-to-introducing-mandatory-ethnicity-and-disability-pay-gap-reporting-for-large-employers) to the UK economy \[1\]. That figure points to a wider truth: many organisations are not reaching, retaining, or making the most of the talent already available to them, often because of how their policies are designed rather than any lack of good intent.

Most employers want to treat their people fairly. Fair intentions do not always produce fair outcomes, though, because policy design can create barriers that have little to do with someone's ability to do the job. A recruitment process can assess confidence rather than capability. A working pattern can suit some employees better than others. A promotion route can be clear to some staff and unclear to others.

Inclusive workplace policies address these issues by designing systems that work for the widest possible range of people. The aim is not to lower standards, but to remove obstacles, so that recruitment, progression, and day-to-day working reflect what people can contribute. Done well, this is not only fairer but commercially stronger.

## Summary

*   Inclusion and diversity are related but different: diversity describes the make up of the workforce, while inclusion relates to whether everyone can be themselves, contribute, are valued and able to progress. Effective policies consider both \[9\].
*   Closing the disability employment gap could add an estimated £17 billion a year to the UK economy \[1\].
*   Employment gaps remain wide: in Q2 2025, 52.8% of working-age disabled people were in employment, compared with 82.5% of non-disabled people \[2\].
*   The legal foundation is the Equality Act 2010, which prohibits discrimination and requires reasonable adjustments for disabled employees \[3\].
*   New harassment duties arrive from 2026. Employers will need to take "all reasonable steps" to prevent harassment, including by third parties, from October 2026 \[4\]\[11\].
*   Pay gap reporting is expanding: voluntary gender pay and menopause action plans from April 2026, mandatory action plans for large employers expected from 2027, with ethnicity and disability pay gap reporting confirmed to follow \[5\]\[6\].
*   Inclusive recruitment focuses on essential skills, structured interviews, and accessible processes that assess genuine capability.
*   Many of the most effective adjustments cost little or nothing, such as clearer communication, flexible hours, and a quieter workspace / remote working.
*   Inclusion works best when it is shared across the organisation and the tone set by leadership, rather than treated as a task for the HR team alone \[8\].

## Inclusion vs diversity: What is the difference?

The two ideas are often used interchangeably, but they are not the same. Diversity describes the mix of people in an organisation, including differences in:

*   age
*   sex
*   race (including colour, ethnicity, nationality)
*   disability
*   pregnancy and maternity
*   religion
*   marriage and civil partnership
*   sexual orientation
*   gender reassignment.

Inclusion describes whether those people can take part fully, feel they belong, and have a genuine equality of opportunity. As the [CIPD notes](https://www.cipd.org/uk/knowledge/reports/inclusion-work/), hiring a diverse workforce does not guarantee that every employee has the same experience or opportunities \[9\].

An [inclusive policy](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/building-a-diverse-equal-and-inclusive-workplace) is one designed so that a wide range of people can succeed within it. This applies across the employee lifecycle, including how organisations advertise roles, communicate, manage performance, collaborate, decide pay and promotion, and handle complaints. A policy may be well-intentioned and still produce uneven outcomes if it is not designed with different needs or experiences in mind.

Inclusion does not mean lowering expectations or creating exceptions. It means reducing barriers that are unrelated to someone's ability to do the job and recognising and valuing people’s different contributions and perspectives, so that selection and progression can reflect merit and enrich workplaces.

## Why inclusive policies make commercial sense

The commercial argument now extends well beyond reputation. UK employers increasingly treat equality, diversity and inclusion as part of their wider strategy, with [57% of UK organisations](https://stribehq.com/resources/workplace-diversity-and-inclusion-statistics/) regarding it as a priority when recruiting \[7\]. This can affect talent attraction, as many candidates take it into account when considering an employer. Around [66% of British workers](https://stribehq.com/resources/workplace-diversity-and-inclusion-statistics/) say the acceptance and inclusion of employees from all backgrounds is important when they weigh up job opportunities \[7\].

The advantage of varied perspectives shows up in two places. Internally, it improves the quality of decisions and ideas: BCG's study of more than 1,700 companies found that those with above-average management diversity generated 19% more revenue from innovation than less diverse businesses \[12\], because people with different backgrounds approach a problem from angles a homogeneous team would miss. Externally, those same perspectives help an organisation understand the people it serves. Customers are not a single, uniform group, and a workforce that reflects that range is better placed to anticipate how products and services will land and to spot opportunities a narrower team would overlook - insight difficult to replicate through research alone.

Inclusion also shapes how an organisation is seen by the people it depends on. Investors, clients, partners, and prospective recruits increasingly weigh an employer's approach to equality and inclusion when they decide who to work with, which makes a credible commitment an asset across the full range of stakeholder relationships rather than a matter for recruitment alone.

There are links to retention and performance as well. The CIPD's research connects inclusive cultures with stronger engagement and retention, and notes that a diverse workforce may not stay with an organisation [where people do not feel valued](https://www.cipd.org/globalassets/media/knowledge/knowledge-hub/reports/building-inclusive-workplaces-report-sept-2019_tcm18-64154.pdf), included and respected \[8\]. Retention also has a clear cost dimension. When [employee replacement costs](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/how-much-does-it-cost-to-employ-someone) range from 50% to 200% of annual salary, improvements in retention can produce meaningful savings.

There is also a wider talent pool to consider. In Q2 2025, [52.8% of working-age disabled people](https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5901/cmselect/cmworpen/1227/report.html) were in employment, compared with 82.5% of non-disabled people \[2\]. The disability pay gap stands at [15.5%](https://www.tuc.org.uk/news/tuc-disability-pay-gap-means-disabled-workers-effectively-stop-earning-today), which equates to around £4,000 a year for the average disabled employee working full time, and is wider still for disabled women \[10\]. These figures suggest that skills and experience may be going unused where recruitment and working practices are not accessible.

## The legal context

Inclusive policies rest on a clear legal base. The [Equality Act 2010](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents) is the foundation, prohibiting discrimination, harassment, and victimisation across nine protected characteristics, and requiring employers to make [reasonable adjustments](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/reasonable-adjustments-in-the-workplace) for disabled employees \[3\]. That duty is anticipatory, so employers are expected to consider barriers in advance rather than waiting for a problem to arise. Many adjustments cost little or nothing, such as flexible hours, written instructions, or a quieter workspace.

These obligations are tightening. From October 2026, the [Employment Rights Act 2025](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/employment-rights-bill-roadmap-for-2025-2027) raises the duty to take "all reasonable steps" to prevent harassment [](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/sexual-harassment-legislation-a-roadmap-for-employers)and introduces employer liability for harassment by third parties such as customers, clients, and contractors. The third-party liability applies to all types of harassment, not only sexual harassment, where an employer cannot show it took all reasonable steps to prevent it \[4\]. Pay gap transparency is also expanding: voluntary action plans on gender pay and menopause support arrive in April 2026, with mandatory action plans expected for employers of 250 or more from 2027, and ethnicity and disability pay gap reporting confirmed to follow \[5\]\[6\]\[11\]. Smaller employers fall outside the mandatory thresholds for now, but the requirements are widening, and good data habits make any future obligations easier to meet.

The practical point for policy is that inclusion is moving from good practice towards legal expectation. Designing fair systems now is more straightforward than retrofitting them under a tighter regime later.

## Inclusive recruitment: Reaching and assessing talent fairly

Recruitment is often where inclusion is most easily supported or undermined, because barriers at this stage can filter out candidates before they have a chance to show what they can do.

When writing job descriptions, include only what is genuinely essential, as each additional requirement narrows the applicant pool. Phrases such as "excellent communicator" or "energetic self-starter" describe a personality type rather than a role requirement, and may indirectly disadvantage some candidates. Describe the actual task instead, for example "able to explain technical information clearly to non-specialist clients." Avoid language that signals a narrow group, as "recent graduate" can amount to age discrimination.

Inclusive selection focuses on capability rather than performance under unfamiliar pressure. Practical steps include:

*   providing interview questions in advance, so candidates are assessed on their reasoning rather than how quickly they think on the spot
*   offering work samples or task-based assessments alongside conversation
*   allowing candidates to request adjustments without disadvantage, and asking proactively whether any are needed
*   using structured interviews, where each candidate is asked the same core questions against agreed criteria
*   involving more than one person in shortlisting to reduce individual bias.

Structured approaches reduce the influence of unconscious bias and predict job performance more reliably than unstructured conversation.

It is also worth considering where roles are advertised and who they reach. Anonymising applications at the shortlisting stage and partnering with organisations that support under-represented groups both help widen the pool. Schemes such as [Disability Confident](https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/disability-confident-campaign) offer a structured framework for employers who want to improve how they recruit and retain disabled people.

## Building inclusion into everyday working

Recruitment brings people in. Day-to-day practices influence whether they stay and progress.

Flexibility is one of the most practical ways to support inclusion, and benefits disabled and [neurodivergent employees](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/neurodiversity-in-the-workplace), carers, parents, older workers, and those managing health conditions. The Employment Rights Act 2025 will strengthen [flexible working rights](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/flexible-working-how-the-law-is-changing) in 2027 by requiring employers to show that any refusal of a request is reasonable, in addition to relying on statutory grounds \[11\]. Review return-to-office arrangements with care, as fixed attendance requirements can disadvantage some disabled workers who benefit from remote or hybrid working.

Clear communication matters just as much. Specific instructions reduce ambiguity for everyone, and they are essential for employees who interpret language literally. Compare these two approaches:

**Unclear**: "Can you look at the report when you get a chance and let me know your thoughts?"

**Clear**: "Please review the draft report and send any changes by Tuesday at 2 PM, ahead of the client meeting on Wednesday."

Written confirmation after verbal discussions, agendas circulated in advance, and the option to contribute in writing as well as aloud all widen participation.

Pay, performance, and progression decisions should rest on clear, consistent criteria - but consistency alone does not guarantee fairness. A measure applied evenly to everyone can still disadvantage people whose circumstances it fails to account for. Disabled employees are the clearest example: a metric affected by the effects of a disability rather than performance needs to be examined and adjusted where it creates that disadvantage.

The CIPD suggests comparing [promotion rates](https://www.cipd.org/uk/knowledge/evidence-reviews/building-inclusive-workplaces/) between demographic groups to identify patterns that may need attention \[9\].

Employee networks, regular surveys, and feedback channels give people a route to raise issues and help shape policy. Encouraging feedback is widely seen as an effective way to support inclusion, with [63% of British workers](https://stribehq.com/resources/workplace-diversity-and-inclusion-statistics/) identifying it as the best approach \[7\]. The value comes from acting on what these channels reveal, rather than gathering the feedback alone.

## Where to start

A phased approach works well for employers wondering where to begin.

Start by reviewing existing systems. Examine recruitment, communication, performance, and pay processes for hidden barriers, using engagement surveys, focus groups, and workforce data to show where outcomes differ between groups.

Next, introduce low-cost changes and trial them. Clearer job adverts, structured interviews, advance agendas, accessible meeting practices, and consistent flexible working policies are inexpensive and make a noticeable difference. Run them with willing teams first, gather feedback, and refine.

Once changes prove effective, formalise them in policy, support them with manager training, and build them into leadership and performance frameworks so they no longer depend on individual champions. Prepare for the reporting duties ahead by capturing relevant data before it becomes mandatory.

Throughout, leadership behaviour matters alongside written policy. When senior people support inclusion visibly, treat adjustments as routine, and ask what works best for each person, the culture tends to follow. Inclusion is less a single project than a consistent way of working, and the organisations that treat it that way tend to recruit from a wider pool, keep people for longer, and meet their legal duties with less last-minute scramble.

_This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information is accurate at the time of writing but may be subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified professional._

\[1\] GOV.UK, Government commits to introducing mandatory ethnicity and disability pay gap reporting for large employers, March 2026.

\[2\] House of Commons Work and Pensions Committee, Employment support for disabled people: Disability at Work (ONS figures, Q2 2025), 2026.

\[3\] DavidsonMorris, Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: 2026 Employer Guide, February 2026.

\[4\] Penningtons Manches Cooper, Harassment and the Employment Rights Act 2025: what employers need to know, February 2026.

\[5\] Lewis Silkin, What's in the Employment Rights Act?, February 2026.

\[6\] Pinsent Masons, UK government to progress mandatory ethnicity and disability pay gap reporting, March 2026.

\[7\] Stribe, Diversity and inclusion statistics every workplace leader should know in 2026 (citing YouGov and Nigel Wright Group), November 2025.

\[8\] CIPD, Building inclusive workplaces: Assessing the evidence, 2019.

\[9\] CIPD, Inclusion at Work: executive summary, 2022.

\[10\] TUC, Disability pay gap means disabled workers effectively stop earning from today (15.5% gap, analysis of ONS figures), November 2025.

\[11\] ACAS, Employment Rights Act 2025.

Inclusive policies help organisations attract talent, retain staff, and meet their legal duties. With new harassment rules and pay gap reporting arriving across 2026 and 2027, this guide explains what inclusion involves and how to build it into everyday practice.

neurodiversity.jpg

Inclusive workplace policies: A practical guide for UK employers

The 2026 World Cup could cost employers around [$17 billion in lost productivity](https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20260602114727/en/World-Cup-Could-Cost-Employers-$17-Billion-in-Lost-Productivity-UKG-Says) worldwide, according to research published by workforce software firm UKG. The same study found that 37% of employees plan to adjust their work schedule around the tournament, and more than a quarter expect to miss work by arriving late, leaving early, or skipping a day entirely. \[1\]

For UK employers, the timing makes this particularly relevant. The tournament runs from 11 June to 19 July 2026, hosted across the United States, Canada, and Mexico, which means most matches fall in the UK evening or later. England open against Croatia on Wednesday 17 June at 9pm BST, play Ghana on Tuesday 23 June at 9pm, and finish the group stage against Panama on Saturday 27 June at 10pm \[2\]. If either England or Scotland progress, the knockout fixtures run later still, with some kick-offs scheduled for 1am, 2am, or beyond in UK time.

Late nights, and the temptation of a drink while watching, create a predictable pattern: lateness, tiredness, reduced productivity, and short-notice absence the morning after a big game \[3\]. This article sets out the main risks and the practical steps employers can take to manage them while keeping morale high.

## Summary

*   Most matches kick off late in UK time, so the main risk is next-day disruption: lateness, tiredness, and short-notice absence, rather than time off during the working day.
*   The disruption grows if the teams your staff follow progress, as knockout fixtures run into the early hours of UK mornings.
*   Plan staffing now. Review cover for popular fixtures, knockout games, and the days immediately after, particularly for client-facing and business-critical work.
*   Decide your annual leave approach early and communicate it, applying any limits on numbers off at once consistently and fairly.
*   Remind staff of your sickness absence and reporting policies before the tournament. Note that Statutory Sick Pay is now payable from day one of absence, which raises the cost of unplanned sickness.
*   Flexibility, used consistently, often works better than rigid enforcement. Adjusted start times or remote working after late games can reduce both absence and resentment.
*   Screening the highlights of matches or running sweepstakes can boost morale, provided participation is genuinely optional and non-followers are not excluded.
*   Apply conduct, dignity at work, and equal opportunities policies as normal. Football is not an excuse for harassment, discrimination, or exclusion.

## Why this tournament is different

Major sporting events usually raise the same questions for employers: how to handle holiday requests, manage productivity, and deal with absence. The 2026 World Cup carries an unusual twist because of where it is being held.

Because the tournament is hosted in North America, most fixtures take place outside normal UK working hours. On one hand, this reduces the pressure for time off during the working day, since fewer matches clash with it. On the other hand, late-evening and overnight kick-offs create a different problem: employees staying up to watch, then struggling the next morning. With both England and Scotland qualified, interest across UK workforces is likely to be high. The home nations won't be the only draw, either. This is the first 48-team World Cup, and many workplaces will include staff following Sweden, Czechia, Brazil, or other qualified sides, whose key fixtures may fall at different times again \[5\].

Hybrid and remote working adds another dimension. It can make it easier for someone to stay up through the night and attempt to work the following day, with predictable effects on focus and output. It also gives employers less direct visibility of how working hours are actually spent. None of this is a reason to clamp down, but it is a reason to set clear expectations in advance.

## Planning staffing and cover

The single most useful step is to look ahead at the fixture calendar and map it against your own busy periods and business-critical work. Identify the dates most likely to affect attendance: the group games your staff are most likely to follow, any knockout fixtures, and the working days immediately afterwards.

Review whether you have enough cover for client-facing work, phone lines, deadlines, shifts, site work, and any service that cannot simply pause. Where gaps appear, address them early through planned leave, temporary cover, or adjusted deadlines, rather than discovering the problem on the morning itself. Shift workers and rota-based teams need particular attention, as their hours may overlap directly with popular fixtures even when office-based staff are unaffected.

## Annual leave requests

Expect a rise in annual leave requests around key matches and the days after them. Decide your approach before the requests arrive, and make it clear to staff.

A first-come, first-served system is common and easy to explain, but apply it consistently. If you need to limit the number of people off at any one time to maintain cover, set that limit in advance and apply it to everyone on the same basis. Inconsistent decisions, where one team is granted leave freely and another refused, are a frequent source of resentment and, at worst, grievances.

It is also worth reminding employees that leave needs to be requested and approved in the normal way, and that approval depends on business needs. Communicating this early, ideally before the tournament begins, manages expectations and reduces friction when popular dates fill up.

## Sickness absence and "sickies"

The most commonly raised concern is the "sickie": an employee calling in sick the morning after a late game, whether through genuine tiredness, a hangover, or simply to watch the highlights. This is where a clear, well-communicated sickness absence policy earns its place.

Remind staff before the tournament of your sickness reporting procedures, the standards expected, and the consequences of unauthorised absence. Monitoring absence levels during the tournament, and noting any patterns that suggest a fixture-related spike, allows you to address issues fairly and on evidence rather than assumption.

A word of caution on judging which absences are "genuine". A hangover may be self-inflicted, but employers should avoid making assumptions about which illnesses count and which do not, as this can create inconsistency and unfairness. The better approach is to apply your policy evenly, distinguish carefully between someone who is genuinely unfit for work and someone whose absence appears not to be, and take proportionate action where there is a real concern. With [unfair dismissal](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/unfair-dismissal-changes-2027) protections changing, fair and documented process is worth getting right.

One change makes this more pressing in 2026. Recent [Statutory Sick Pay](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/statutory-sick-pay-ssp-changes) reforms mean that even a short absence can now trigger SSP from day one, so short-notice sickness after a late game costs employers more than it used to \[4\]. That raises the value of clear policies, accurate records, and consistent handling.

## Flexibility as an alternative to enforcement

Rigid enforcement is not the only option, and it is often not the most effective one. Where the nature of the work allows, a degree of planned flexibility can reduce both absence and ill-feeling.

Options worth considering include adjusted start times the morning after a late fixture, allowing affected staff to begin later and finish later, or to work from home where the role permits. Scheduling fewer early-morning meetings on the days after major games is a small change that takes pressure off. Some employers allow staff to use flexible or [flexible working](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/flexible-working-how-the-law-is-changing) arrangements during the tournament, provided output and cover are maintained.

The key, as with leave, is consistency. Flexibility offered to one group and withheld from another, without a clear operational reason, undermines trust. It also helps to be clear that flexibility is a two-way arrangement: it depends on staff maintaining their standards and not abusing the goodwill, which protects colleagues who have no interest in the football from carrying an unfair share of the load.

## Turning the tournament into a positive

Handled well, the World Cup can lift morale rather than drain productivity. Many employers choose to embrace it.

Screening selected matches or highlights in the workplace, or allowing staff to watch during breaks, can build a sense of occasion, particularly for fixtures that fall within or close to working hours. Sweepstakes, predictions leagues, themed lunches, or charity initiatives tied to the tournament can engage people across the organisation. Where employees watch a match during working time, you can reasonably ask them to make up the time, provided this is agreed in advance.

The important caveat is inclusion. Not everyone follows football, and any activity should be genuinely optional. Plan so that those who opt out are not left to cover a disproportionate share of the work, and that the workplace does not tip into pressure to take part. Done thoughtfully, these initiatives bring people together; done carelessly, they can alienate part of the workforce.

## Conduct, inclusion, and discrimination risks

Heightened emotion around international football can spill into behaviour that crosses a line. Before the tournament begins, remind staff that your usual standards still apply, including policies on dignity at work, bullying and harassment, equal opportunities, social media, and conduct.

The risks are real. Banter about national teams can shade into comments about nationality or ethnicity, which may amount to harassment or discrimination. Rivalry between supporters of different teams should not become a route to exclusion or intimidation. These are not reasons to suppress everyone's enthusiasm, but they are reasons to be clear that football provides no licence for offensive remarks or behaviour that makes colleagues uncomfortable.

This matters more than usual in 2026, as employer duties around harassment are tightening. Handling World Cup conduct well now also puts a workplace in a stronger position for those changes. For a fuller picture, see our guidance on [building an inclusive workplace](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/building-a-diverse-equal-and-inclusive-workplace).

## Preparing now

A short checklist for the coming weeks:

*   map the key fixtures against your busy periods, based on your knowledge of what national football teams your employees support, and identify where cover is at risk
*   decide and communicate your annual leave approach, including any limits on numbers off at once
*   remind staff of sickness reporting procedures and conduct standards before the first game
*   review your sickness absence policy in light of the day-one SSP change, and make sure records and handling are consistent
*   decide whether you will offer flexibility, screen matches, or run activities, and set the ground rules clearly
*   brief managers so that leave, flexibility, and absence are handled the same way across teams.

A clear, fair, and well-communicated approach lets employees enjoy the tournament while the business keeps running. Setting expectations now, rather than improvising on the morning after England's opening game, is the difference between a month of goodwill and a month of friction.

_This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information is accurate at the time of writing but may be subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified professional._

\[1\] UKG, World Cup Could Cost Employers $17 Billion in Lost Productivity, June 2026.

\[2\] FIFA / England Football, England FIFA World Cup 2026 match schedule, May 2026.

\[3\] Personnel Today, Employers urged to prepare for 'sickies' during World Cup, 2026.

\[4\] VWV, New statutory sick pay rules effective from 6 April 2026, April 2026.

\[5\] Brightmine, World Cup 2026: Employers' guide to workplace implications, April 2026.

GettyImages-1345117646 (1).jpg

World Cup 2026: How employers can manage absence and disruption

Men's Health Week, organised by the [Men's Health Forum](https://www.menshealthforum.org.uk/mhw), runs from 15 to 21 June 2026 \[1\]. For employers, it offers a useful focal point to review how well existing wellbeing provision reaches the men on their teams, and to identify changes that could improve engagement and outcomes year-round.

The data suggests this matters. Men experience mental and physical health conditions at broadly similar rates to women but tend to seek help less often. Around [75% of suicides registered in England and Wales in 2023 were male](https://www.matesinmind.org/training-and-resources/men-s-health-week-uk-15-21-june-2026), and suicide remains the leading cause of death for men under 50 in the UK \[2\]. Yet only around [36% of referrals to NHS Talking Therapies are men](https://vitahealthgroup.co.uk/health-hub/articles/mens-mental-health-month-2025/) \[3\], and just over half of men say they would consider seeing a GP about a mental health concern.

The workplace pattern follows a similar shape. In November 2025, the UK government announced the [first Men's Health Strategy for England](https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-11-19/debates/25111932000017/Men%E2%80%99SHealthStrategyForEngland), citing the impact of men's health on "families, workplaces and communities" \[4\]. Employers sit at a useful point of influence: a place where men spend a significant share of their adult life, where preventative information can reach them at scale, and where small adjustments to communication, manager training, and flexibility can support better engagement with health services.

This article sets out what recent UK research shows about men's health at work, where common gaps appear, and the practical steps employers can take.

## Summary

*   Men's Health Week 2026 runs from 15 to 21 June, providing employers with a focused window to review wellbeing provision and engagement among male staff \[1\].
*   Around 75% of suicide deaths in England and Wales are male, and suicide is the leading cause of death for men under 50 \[2\].
*   Men are less likely to access psychological therapies - only 36% of NHS Talking Therapies referrals are men \[3\].
*   UK Employee Assistance Programme data shows 56% of calls are made by women and just 29.5% by men, pointing to gendered patterns in engagement with workplace mental health support \[5\].
*   [Only 37% of eligible men have ever been invited for an NHS Health Check](https://www.healthwatch.co.uk/report/2025-11-05/mens-health-how-improve-health-outcomes-knowledge-and-behaviours); workplace information was a notable factor in encouraging younger and ethnic minority men to attend \[6\].
*   Presenteeism reached a post-pandemic high in 2025, reported by 38% of UK businesses, with poor mental wellbeing estimated to cost UK employers £42-£45 billion annually \[7\].
*   Sector matters: construction, agriculture, and the armed forces have elevated suicide rates among men, suggesting targeted support is more effective than generic provision \[8\].
*   Low-cost actions for employers include reviewing how visibly wellbeing support is communicated, signposting NHS Health Checks, offering paid time off for medical appointments, and training line managers to recognise early signs of distress.

## Why men's health at work tends to need separate consideration

Workplace wellbeing initiatives often perform unevenly across gender. Research from the UK Employee Assistance Professionals Association reports that [56% of calls to an Employee Assistance Programme (EAP) are made by women and only 29.5% by men](https://www.eapa.org.uk/why-dont-more-men-use-the-eap/), with the remainder unspecified \[5\]. The same pattern appears across NHS Talking Therapies and routine GP attendance. Mental Health UK reports that men are [significantly less likely to access psychological therapies](https://mentalhealth-uk.org/mens-mental-health/), and [50% of men have struggled with mental health difficulties at some point - yet fewer than half have sought medical advice](https://www.matesinmind.org/training-and-resources/men-s-health-week-uk-15-21-june-2026), with 37% saying they have actively hidden symptoms from those around them \[2\].

The reasons are well documented in research, including stigma, concern about career impact, and cultural expectations around self-reliance. For employers, the practical implication is that simply providing a wellbeing service does not guarantee it will be used equally across the workforce. Reviewing how services are communicated, who they reach, and whether engagement is monitored by gender can help identify where adjustments may be useful.

### The physical health picture

Mental health often dominates the conversation around men's wellbeing, but physical health follows a similar pattern. Men in the UK have a life expectancy around four years shorter than women, with much of the gap attributed to preventable conditions. Men tend to attend GP appointments less frequently than women and engage less consistently with preventative screening.

Healthwatch England's [June 2025 nationally representative poll of 3,575 men](https://www.healthwatch.co.uk/report/2025-11-05/mens-health-how-improve-health-outcomes-knowledge-and-behaviours) found that only 37% of eligible men had ever been invited for an NHS Health Check, although 92% of those who attended would go again, and 79% said they would attend screening if it were introduced routinely by the NHS \[6\]. The same research found that younger and ethnic minority men were particularly likely to be encouraged to attend through information shared at their workplace, suggesting employers can play a useful role in raising awareness of NHS preventative services.

## What current UK workplace data shows

The 2025 wellbeing picture for UK workers is mixed. The [Mental Health UK Burnout Report 2025](https://mhfaengland.org/mhfa-centre/blog/how-do-we-tackle-presenteeism-in-the-workplace/) found that around 9 in 10 UK workers reported high or extreme levels of stress in the past year \[7\]. Presenteeism - working when unwell or beyond contracted hours - was reported by 38% of UK businesses in 2025, the highest level recorded since that survey began.

Poor mental wellbeing is estimated to cost UK employers between [£42 billion and £45 billion annually](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/developing-employee-wellbeing-initiatives-in-the-workplace), primarily through presenteeism, sickness absence, and turnover \[9\]. The CIPD's [2025 Health and Wellbeing at Work report](https://www.cipd.org/uk/knowledge/reports/health-well-being-work/) found that just over half of employees feel their organisation is supportive of mental health, with many feeling underserved, and over two-thirds saying their line manager is open and approachable on mental health issues - a useful indicator of where workplace support tends to begin in practice \[10\].

### Sector-specific considerations

Certain sectors carry elevated risk for the men who work in them. Research summarised by [Mental Health First Aid Course](https://www.mentalhealthfirstaidcourse.co.uk/blog/mens-mental-health-statistics) suggests construction workers face suicide rates approximately 3.7 times higher than the general population, with agriculture, farming, and the armed forces also showing raised rates \[8\]. Contributing factors commonly cited include long hours, physical isolation, occupational cultures emphasising self-reliance, and reduced access to support in rural or operational settings.

For employers in these sectors, generic wellbeing communications may be less effective than targeted approaches. Industry-specific charities and partnerships can provide sector-relevant support.

*   **Construction**: [Lighthouse Construction Industry Charity](https://www.lighthouseclub.org/) operates a 24/7 helpline and on-site wellbeing services.
*   **Construction and trades**: [Mates in Mind](https://www.matesinmind.org/) provides workplace mental health programmes designed around construction sector culture and shift patterns.
*   **Agriculture**: The Royal Agricultural Benevolent Institution (RABI) and the Farm Safety Foundation (Yellow Wellies) offer support specifically for farming communities.
*   **Armed forces and veterans**: Combat Stress and SSAFA provide specialist mental health support.

## Practical actions for employers

The actions below are intended as options to consider rather than a prescriptive list. The most appropriate combination will depend on workforce size, sector, existing provision, and the gaps identified through internal review.

### Review how visibly support is communicated

Wellbeing services tend to perform better when they are easy to find. A useful starting point is to audit how a new starter or existing employee would access mental health support today: how many clicks from the intranet homepage, whether information appears in routine communications such as payslips or team channels, and whether the language used in promotional material is likely to resonate with employees who don't currently engage.

Crisis lines, [Employee Assistance Programme](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/unlock-your-employees-potential-with-mentors-new-employee-assistance-programme) details, and signposting to NHS Talking Therapies can usefully appear in multiple locations rather than only within wellbeing-specific resources. Communications that reference health in routine business contexts - induction, monthly team meetings, manager one-to-ones - can help reduce the sense that raising a concern requires waiting for an awareness week.

### Signpost the NHS Health Check

NHS Health Checks are free for adults aged 40-74 in England and screen for early signs of heart disease, diabetes, kidney disease, and stroke. Healthwatch's research suggests workplace information is one of the more effective ways to encourage younger and ethnic minority men to attend \[6\].

Practical options include:

*   including NHS Health Check information in induction packs, internal newsletters, and Men's Health Week communications
*    offering paid time off for the appointment, which Healthwatch identified as a common barrier
*   working with occupational health providers to run on-site health screening days, where workforce size makes this viable
*   promoting other preventative information, including testicular cancer self-checks for younger men and prostate cancer awareness for men over 50.

### Train line managers to recognise early signs

Mental health concerns are often disclosed first to line managers. CIPD research indicates that over two-thirds of employees see their line manager as open and approachable on mental health issues, but training varies considerably across organisations \[10\]. Manager training that includes how distress may present differently - for example, irritability, withdrawal, working excessive hours, or increased alcohol use - can support earlier intervention.

Accredited training options in the UK include:

*   **[MHFA England's Mental Health First Aid (MHFAider) course](https://mhfaengland.org/individuals/adult/mhfa/)**: two-day course covering recognition, conversation, and signposting skills
*   **[MHFA England's Mental Health Skills for Managers course](https://mhfaengland.org/individuals/adult/mental-health-skills-for-managers/)**: shorter format focused specifically on line manager responsibilities
*   **[Mates in Mind training programmes](https://www.matesinmind.org/training-and-resources/mental-health-and-wellbeing-training)**: workplace-focused programmes, particularly suited to construction and trades
*   **free awareness resources**: many providers, including the [Men's Health Forum](https://www.menshealthforum.org.uk/), [Mind](https://www.mind.org.uk/), and [Samaritans](https://www.samaritans.org/), offer free posters, conversation guides, and toolkits employers can use to supplement formal training.

### Review flexibility around appointments

Healthwatch's 2025 research suggests inflexibility around appointment times is a common reason men give for not attending GP visits or Health Checks \[6\]. Routine appointments tend to fall during working hours, which can be a barrier for staff in shift-based, customer-facing, or site-based roles.

Reviewing whether existing policies clearly allow paid time off for medical appointments - including mental health appointments - can help reduce this barrier. The same principle applies to bereavement leave, paternity leave, and care-related leave, where take-up among eligible male employees can be lower than entitlement suggests.

## Support beyond Men's Health Week

Men's Health Week 2026 provides a focused window for awareness activity, but the underlying work tends to be year-round. Single-week campaigns can usefully launch sustained activity - manager training, policy reviews, communication audits - rather than acting as a standalone intervention.

The most effective combination will depend on the organisation, but the principle is consistent: provision that is visible, accessible, and supported by trained managers tends to perform better than provision that exists on paper but is rarely used. For employers reviewing their wellbeing offer in advance of June 2026, Men's Health Week offers a helpful prompt to consider what's working, what could be improved, and which small changes might make the biggest practical difference.

_This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information is accurate at the time of writing but may be subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified professional._

\[1\] Men's Health Forum, _Men's Health Week 2026_, 2026.

\[2\] Mates in Mind, _Men's Health Week UK: 15-21 June 2026 resources_, 2026.

\[3\] Vita Health Group, _Men's Mental Health Month 2025_, November 2025.

\[4\] UK Parliament Hansard, _Men's Health Strategy for England debate_, 19 November 2025.

\[5\] UK Employee Assistance Professionals Association (EAPA UK), _Why don't more men use the EAP?_.

\[6\] Healthwatch England, _Men's Health: How to improve health outcomes, knowledge and behaviours_, November 2025.

\[7\] Mental Health First Aid England, _How do we tackle presenteeism in the workplace?_, June 2025.

\[8\] Mental Health First Aid Course, _Men's Mental Health Statistics UK_, April 2026.

\[9\] NatWest Mentor, _Developing employee wellbeing initiatives in the workplace_, 2025.

\[10\] CIPD, _Health and Wellbeing at Work Report 2025_.

GettyImages-1298301724 (2).jpg

Men's Health Week 2026: How employers can support the men on their teams

iStock-1397365547 (1).jpg

Exit interviews: Getting useful insights from departing employees

iStock-498941586 (1).jpg

Time to hire in the UK: How long recruitment really takes by industry and role type

A senior team member quietly takes a fortnight off citing a "chest infection" and returns looking thinner and more tired than before. A high performer's output dips for the third quarter running, but no one feels able to ask why. A long-serving colleague resigns without notice, citing only "personal reasons" in their exit interview.

These patterns rarely indicate the problems they appear to be. More often, they signal employees navigating poor mental health in environments that haven't given them the tools, language, or permission to ask for help.

Mental Health Awareness Week 2026 takes place from Monday 11 to Sunday 17 May, with the Mental Health Foundation setting the theme as **Action** \[1\]. The framing is deliberate: awareness of mental health is now widespread, but the gap between knowing something matters and doing something about it remains the central workplace challenge.

The numbers behind the campaign make the case sharper. The Health and Safety Executive's most recent figures, published in November 2025, show that [964,000 workers in Great Britain are suffering from work-related stress, depression or anxiety](https://press.hse.gov.uk/2025/11/20/hse-publishes-annual-workplace-health-and-safety-statistics/) - a 24% increase on the previous year and the highest level since records began in 2001 \[2\]. Mental health conditions now account for 52% of all work-related ill health and 62% of working days lost.

## Summary

*   Mental Health Awareness Week 2026 runs from 11 to 17 May, with the Mental Health Foundation's theme set as **Action** - moving beyond conversation into practical workplace change \[1\].
*   Work-related stress, depression and anxiety reached a record 964,000 cases in 2024/25, accounting for 22.1 million lost working days \[2\].
*   Poor mental health costs UK employers an estimated £51 billion annually, with presenteeism (£24bn) the largest component \[3\].
*   The CIPD's 2025 Health and Wellbeing at Work survey reported sickness absence at 9.4 days per employee - the highest level in over 15 years \[4\].
*   Manager capability is decisive: only 45% of UK managers have been trained to hold mental health conversations, yet training reduces employee desire to quit from 35% to 18% \[5\].
*   The most effective employers treat the week as a launch point for year-round practice, not a standalone campaign.

## What the 2026 theme means for employers

The Mental Health Foundation has run Mental Health Awareness Week for twenty-five years, and the 2026 theme reflects a noticeable shift in tone. Previous years have focused on community (2025), movement, loneliness, and kindness - all framing devices that invite reflection. **Action** is more directive, asking individuals, communities, and organisations to identify one specific change and follow through.

For workplaces, the Mental Health Foundation is encouraging employers to focus on conditions that prevent poor mental health rather than only responding once problems arise \[1\]. This matters because the prevailing model in many UK workplaces remains reactive: signposting Employee Assistance Programmes when someone is already struggling, rather than examining whether workload, management practice, or job design are creating the strain in the first place.

## The scale of the workplace challenge

The HSE's November 2025 figures provide the clearest current picture of how work-related mental health conditions are distributed across the UK economy.

*   Stress, depression or anxiety accounted for 52% of all work-related ill health in 2024/25 \[2\].
*   An estimated 22.1 million working days were lost to these conditions - almost a third higher than the previous year \[2\].
*   Rates for women were approximately 25% higher than for men, with pressure peaking for those aged 25-34.
*   Public administration, human health and social work, and education recorded the highest sectoral rates.

The cost picture is similarly stark. Deloitte's most recent UK research estimates poor mental health costs employers around [£51 billion per year](https://www.deloitte.com/uk/en/about/press-room/poor-mental-health-costs-uk-employers-51-billion-a-year-for-employees.html), with presenteeism (£24bn) the largest single component, followed by staff turnover and absenteeism \[3\]. The CIPD's 2025 Health and Wellbeing at Work survey reported [average sickness absence of 9.4 days per employee per year](https://www.cipd.org/uk/about/press-releases/workplace-absence-soars-nearly-two-working-weeks-each-year) - the highest level in more than fifteen years and a sharp rise from 7.8 days in 2023 \[4\].

Where mental health challenges drive extended absence, the management response often determines whether employees return successfully or disengage further - a separate set of considerations covered in our guidance on [supporting employees during long-term sickness](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/supporting-employees-during-long-term-sickness) and [reasonable adjustments](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/reasonable-adjustments-in-the-workplace).

## Why managers sit at the centre of the response

Research consistently identifies the line manager relationship as the most influential single factor in workplace mental health. Recent figures suggest [nearly 70% of employees say their manager affects their mental health as much as their partner does](https://mhfaengland.org/mhfa-centre/blog/workplace-mental-health-statistics-2026/) - more than doctors (51%) or therapists (41%) \[5\].

Yet the same data shows the gap between this influence and the support managers themselves receive. Only 38% of UK organisation leaders talk openly about mental health, only 45% of managers have been trained to have mental health conversations, and just 51% of employees believe their manager is equipped to offer support \[5\]. Where training is provided, the impact is measurable: manager confidence in supporting team members rises by 53%, and employee desire to quit falls from 35% to 18%.

For Mental Health Awareness Week 2026, the most useful action many organisations could take is also one of the most overlooked: equipping the people who manage others with practical conversation skills, then giving them permission to use them. A manager who can recognise signs of struggle, listen without rushing to solve, and signpost confidently to internal or external support is doing the work the awareness week is asking for.

## Four practical actions for the week

Mental Health Awareness Week works best when it functions as a launch point rather than a standalone event. The following actions are deliberately scaled to be deliverable by small and medium employers without specialist budgets.

### 1\. Run a workload audit before you run a wellbeing event

Before adding wellbeing initiatives, examine whether workload itself is the issue. The HSE's [Management Standards](https://www.hse.gov.uk/stress/standards/) identify six areas of work design that affect stress: demands, control, support, relationships, role clarity, and change \[6\]. A short anonymous pulse survey or structured one-to-one round can reveal whether deadlines, role ambiguity, or organisational change are the underlying drivers.

### 2\. Audit your Employee Assistance Programme communications

Many employers fund an EAP that staff have either forgotten about or never knew existed. The week is a useful prompt to refresh communications: clarify what the EAP covers, confirm confidentiality, and reduce the friction of access. Some providers offer 24/7 telephone counselling, structured therapy sessions, financial advice, and bereavement support - all underused when the route to access is unclear. For employers without current provision, an [Employee Assistance Programme](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/unlock-your-employees-potential-with-mentors-new-employee-assistance-programme) is worth exploring as part of a broader wellbeing approach.

### 3\. Train the right group of managers properly

A single group of well-trained managers achieves more than a generic all-staff webinar. [Mental Health First Aid England](https://mhfaengland.org/) offers accredited two-day MHFAider courses, while Mental Health UK and Mind run shorter manager-focused conversation training. Pick a tier that fits your budget and commit to refresher sessions. Training without follow-through fades within months.

### 4\. Embed one routine that outlasts the awareness week

The week's value lies in what continues afterwards. A monthly wellbeing check-in question added to existing one-to-ones. A standing fortnightly "no meetings" afternoon. A reminder in the leaver process to ask about wellbeing factors in resignation. One embedded routine creates more cumulative impact than ten one-off events. For employers building a more structured year-round approach, our guidance on [developing employee wellbeing initiatives in the workplace](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/developing-employee-wellbeing-initiatives-in-the-workplace) sets out the foundations.

## Recognising the limits of awareness

The Mental Health Foundation's choice of theme reflects a hard-won recognition: awareness without structural change risks frustration. Employees who hear leadership talk about wellbeing whilst experiencing unmanageable workloads, unsupportive line management, or unclear role expectations often feel less safe disclosing concerns, not more.

Recent data illustrates this tension clearly. The Mental Health UK Burnout Report 2025 found that 21% of UK workers had needed time off due to stress-related poor mental health, with the steepest increases among those aged 18-44 \[7\]. Yet [only 13-14% of employees feel comfortable discussing their mental health at work](https://newleafhealth.co.uk/blog/key-workplace-mental-health-statistics/), and 35% report having experienced stigma or discrimination after disclosing \[8\].

Closing this gap is not a campaign-week task. It involves leadership behaviour over time, manager capability, fair workload distribution, and systems that make it easier to ask for help than to mask. Mental Health Awareness Week 2026 is a useful prompt to begin - but the organisations that benefit most are those that treat the week as a checkpoint in a longer programme, not the programme itself.

## A starting point, not a finish line

The shift from awareness to action marks a maturing of the conversation about workplace mental health. The data is unambiguous: pressure on UK workers is rising, the cost to employers is substantial, and the interventions that work are well-evidenced. What the 2026 theme asks for is not more research, more posters, or more talk - it is for employers to identify one thing they can change and to take action to change it.

For some, that will be training a group of managers. For others, it will be auditing workload. For others still, it will be reviewing whether their EAP is genuinely accessible or merely listed in the staff handbook. The action doesn't need to be ambitious to be meaningful - it just needs to be specific, have a clear owner, and be followed through.

_This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information is accurate at the time of writing but may be subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified professional._

\[1\] Mental Health Foundation, _Mental Health Awareness Week_, 2026.

\[2\] Health and Safety Executive, _HSE publishes annual workplace health and safety statistics_, November 2025.

\[3\] Deloitte, _Poor mental health costs UK employers £51 billion a year_, 2024.

\[4\] CIPD, _Health and Wellbeing at Work Survey_, 2025.

\[5\] MHFA England, _Key workplace mental health statistics for 2026_, December 2025.

\[6\] Health and Safety Executive, _Tackling work-related stress using the Management Standards approach_, 2025.

\[7\] Mental Health UK, _Burnout Report 2025_, 2025.

\[8\] New Leaf Health, _Key workplace mental health statistics_, 2026.

GettyImages-1160667165 (2).jpg

Mental Health Awareness Week 2026: Turning awareness into action

Every year on 28 April, the International Labour Organization (ILO) marks World Day for Health and Safety at Work, an international awareness campaign encouraging employers to prevent workplace accidents and occupational ill health \[1\]. For businesses, the day provides a practical prompt to review existing health and safety practices and identify areas for improvement.

In Great Britain, the most recent data highlights the scale of the challenge. An estimated 1.9 million workers suffered from work-related ill health in 2024/25, while 680,000 sustained a non-fatal injury \[2\]. Together, these accounted for 40.1 million lost working days, at an estimated cost of £22.9 billion annually \[2\]. Stress, depression and anxiety remain the single largest category of work-related ill health, affecting 964,000 workers \[3\].

World Day offers an opportunity for employers of all sizes to assess risks, act on them, and create conditions where people can work safely and sustainably.

## Summary

*   World Day for Health and Safety at Work takes place on 28 April each year, coordinated by the ILO to promote the prevention of workplace accidents and ill health \[1\].
*   The 2026 theme focuses on healthy psychosocial working environments, highlighting how workload, communication, support, and job design affect both wellbeing and safety outcomes \[4\].
*   In Great Britain, 1.9 million workers reported work-related ill health in 2024/25, with stress, depression and anxiety accounting for 964,000 of those cases \[2\]\[3\].
*   Work-related ill health and injuries cost an estimated £22.9 billion annually \[2\].
*   Employers can use the day to review risk assessments, hold safety conversations with teams, and identify practical improvements that don't require large budgets.
*   The HSE's Working Minds campaign and free stress risk assessment tools provide a structured starting point for businesses of all sizes \[5\].

## What is World Day for Health and Safety at Work?

The ILO began observing World Day for Health and Safety at Work in 2003 as part of its global strategy on occupational safety and health \[1\]. Each year carries a different theme designed to draw attention to emerging or persistent workplace risks. Previous themes have covered topics including digitalisation, climate change, and the role of social dialogue in building safety cultures.

The day serves a dual purpose. Internationally, it raises the political profile of occupational safety and health. At an organisational level, it provides a reason for employers to review their practices, engage staff in safety conversations, and address risks that may have gone unexamined.

It's worth noting that 28 April also coincides with Workers' Memorial Day, which commemorates those who have been injured or suffered illness through their work. For employers, the date carries both a reflective and a forward-looking purpose: acknowledging the human cost of unsafe or unhealthy work, and committing to preventing it.

## The 2026 theme: Healthy psychosocial working environments

This year, the ILO's theme centres on the [psychosocial working environment](https://www.ilo.org/topics-and-sectors/safety-and-health-work/world-day-safety-and-health-work-2026) \[4\]. This refers to the way work is designed, organised, and managed, and how those factors shape day-to-day working conditions.

Psychosocial risks include excessive workload, unrealistic deadlines, lack of autonomy, poor management support, unclear roles, and badly communicated change. When these factors are left unmanaged, they become workplace hazards in much the same way that a trailing cable or a missing guardrail would be. They increase the likelihood of errors, accidents, and long-term ill health.

The [HSE identifies six areas](https://www.hse.gov.uk/stress/risk-assessment.htm) of work design that can affect stress levels:

*   demands
*   control
*   support
*   relationships
*   role
*   change.

**Demands** become a risk when workloads exceed what someone can reasonably deliver within their contracted hours, when deadlines are routinely unrealistic, or when the emotional demands of a role go unacknowledged. **Control** matters because employees who have little say over how they do their work, when they take breaks, or how their day is structured experience measurably higher stress levels. **Support** from managers and colleagues acts as a buffer; without it, even manageable workloads become overwhelming.

**Relationships** at work affect safety directly. Bullying, harassment, and interpersonal conflict don't just cause distress. They create distraction, reduce communication, and erode the trust that safe working depends on. **Role** clarity is equally important: employees who aren't sure what's expected of them, or whose responsibilities conflict, make more errors. And poorly communicated **change**, whether organisational restructures, new systems, or shifts in leadership, creates uncertainty that compounds existing pressures.

The 2026 theme is a recognition that workplace safety has evolved beyond hard hats and hazard signs. The conditions that cause psychological harm need to be assessed and managed with the same rigour as physical risks.

## Where things stand in the UK

The Health and Safety Executive's [annual statistics for 2024/25](https://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/overview.htm) provide a useful benchmark for employers reviewing their own performance \[2\].

An estimated 1.9 million workers suffered from work-related ill health during the year. Of those, [964,000 reported stress, depression or anxiety](https://www.hse.gov.uk/Statistics/assets/docs/stress.pdf) caused or made worse by work, making it the most common form of occupational ill health by a significant margin \[3\]. The rate of self-reported work-related mental ill health has been climbing since before the pandemic and has accelerated in the years since \[3\]. Female workers report rates around 25% higher than male colleagues \[3\].

Non-fatal injuries affected an estimated 680,000 workers, with slips, trips and falls remaining the most common cause across all sectors \[2\]. The accommodation and food services industry recorded the highest injury rate \[2\].

The combined cost of workplace injuries and new cases of work-related ill health stands at an estimated £22.9 billion annually \[2\]. Poor mental wellbeing alone [costs UK employers between £42 billion and £45 billion](https://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/explore-mental-health/statistics/mental-health-work-statistics) a year through presenteeism, sickness absence, and staff turnover \[6\]. Evidence from Deloitte suggests [employers see a return of approximately £5.30 for every £1 invested](https://www.deloitte.com/uk/en/services/consulting/research/mental-health-and-employers-refreshing-the-case-for-investment.html) in mental health support \[7\].

These figures illustrate why World Day matters as more than a calendar event. The scale of work-related ill health represents a significant operational cost for businesses, and much of it is preventable through better job design, clearer communication, and more consistent management practices.

## How to mark the day in your workplace

World Day for Health and Safety at Work doesn't require a large-scale event. For most businesses, particularly smaller ones, the most valuable thing you can do is use the date as a trigger for practical action.

*   **Review your risk assessments.** Check whether your existing assessments cover psychosocial risks alongside physical ones. If your risk assessment addresses fire exits and manual handling but says nothing about workload, communication, or management support, it's incomplete. The HSE provides [free templates and example assessments](https://www.hse.gov.uk/stress/risk-assessment.htm) for work-related stress \[5\].
*   **Hold a team conversation.** Toolbox talks, team meetings, or structured one-to-ones give employees an opportunity to raise concerns about working conditions. Keep it practical: What's working well? What's causing unnecessary pressure? What one thing could we change?
*   **Check your environment.** Walk through your workplace with fresh eyes. Are workstations set up properly? Is lighting adequate? Are quiet spaces available for focused work? Are emergency procedures clearly displayed and understood? Small environmental improvements often cost very little.
*   **Signpost existing resources.** Many employees don't know what support is already available to them. Use the day to highlight accessibility features in existing software, your [Employee Assistance Programme](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/employee-assistance-programme/) if you have one, flexible working options, and any relevant training opportunities.
*   **Recognise good practice.** If teams or individuals have contributed to a safer or healthier working environment, acknowledge it. Recognition reinforces the behaviours you want to see and signals that health and safety is valued, not just required.

## Making it count

World Day for Health and Safety at Work is one day. The conditions that lead to 22.1 million lost working days exist across all the others. The value of 28 April lies not in marking a date but in using it as a catalyst - to have a conversation you've been putting off, to review a process that hasn't been updated since before the pandemic, or to ask your team a question you haven't asked before.

For smaller businesses especially, the gap between awareness and action can feel wide. But the evidence suggests that the most effective interventions are rarely the most expensive. Clearer communication, visible leadership, manageable workloads, and a culture where raising concerns is normal rather than exceptional - these cost very little to implement and can materially improve both [employee wellbeing](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/developing-employee-wellbeing-initiatives-in-the-workplace) and business performance.

The question isn't whether your business can afford to invest in psychosocial safety. Given the costs of inaction, the more pressing question is whether it can afford not to.

_This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information is accurate at the time of writing but may be subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified professional._

\[1\] United Nations, _World Day for Safety and Health at Work_.

\[2\] HSE, _Key figures for Great Britain 2024 to 2025_, November 2025.

\[3\] HSE, _Work-related stress, depression or anxiety statistics in Great Britain, 2025_, November 2025.

\[4\] ILO, _World Day for Safety and Health at Work 2026: Healthy psychosocial working environments_.

\[5\] HSE, _Working Minds campaign and stress risk assessment guidance_.

\[6\] Mental Health Foundation, _Mental health at work: statistics_.

\[7\] Deloitte, _Mental health and employers: refreshing the case for investment_, 2020.

GettyImages-585283345 (1).jpg

World Day for Health and Safety at Work 2026

From 1st January 2027, employees will be entitled to bring an unfair dismissal claim after just six months of continuous service - down from the current two-year threshold. For HR professionals and business owners, this is an important development to plan for now rather than later. Although the change takes effect at the start of 2027, it will apply to existing employees, meaning workforce planning, performance management, and documentation practices will need to adapt well in advance. 
 
## Summary

- From 1 January 2027, the qualifying period for unfair dismissal protection reduces from two years to six months. 
- The change is retrospective - any employee with at least six months' service by 31 December 2026 gains protection automatically on 1 January 2027. 
- Employers can no longer rely on the two-year buffer when managing performance, conduct, or cultural fit in the early stages of employment. 
- A fair reason and fair procedure will be required for any dismissal once an employee hits the six-month mark. 
- Compensatory awards for unfair dismissal will be uncapped. 
- Probationary periods and statutory unfair dismissal rights are legally separate - extending a probationary period does not delay an employee's rights. 
- Employers may wish to adopt a short probationary period with structured check-ins throughout, and a formal review before the probationary period ends. 
- HR policies, contracts, and offer letters that reference the two-year threshold must be updated before 31 December 2026. 
- Line managers need targeted training on the new timelines and fair performance management practices. 
- Organisations that invest in clear expectations, regular feedback, and consistent documentation from day one will be best placed to manage risk under the new rules. 

## The current position

Under the existing rules, employees must complete two years' continuous service before they can bring a standard unfair dismissal claim. This two-year threshold remains in force until 31 December 2026. 

## When does the new unfair dismissal rule come into force?  

On 1 January 2027, the qualifying period for ordinary unfair dismissal protection reduces from two years to six months. This means employees will be entitled to the full protections of unfair dismissal law - including the right to a fair reason for dismissal and a fair procedure - much earlier in their employment. 

## Who gains unfair dismissal rights on 1 January 2027?

The change will apply retrospectively to existing employees. This means that any employee who has already accumulated at least six months’ service by 31 December 2026 will gain unfair dismissal rights automatically on 1 January 2027, without needing to reach the two-year threshold. 

The practical impact is wider than many employers may initially assume. 

- An employee hired on 1 July 2026 will have exactly six months' service by 31 December 2026 and will qualify on 1 January 2027. 
- An employee hired on 1 October 2026 will reach six months' service on 1 April 2027 and will qualify from that date. 
- An employee hired on 1 March 2025 will have over 22 months' service by 1 January 2027 - well beyond the new threshold - and will qualify immediately. 
- An employee hired on 1 March 2026 will have ten months' service by 31 December 2026 and will qualify on 1 January 2027.  

In short: any employee that started employment before 1st July 2026 will have at least six months' service by the 31st December 2026 and will automatically qualify for unfair dismissal protection on 1st January 2027. 

**Quick reference: When do employees qualify?**

<table>
  <thead>
    <tr>
      <th>Start date</th>
      <th>Service by 31 Dec 2026</th>
      <th>Gains rights</th>
    </tr>
  </thead>
  <tbody>
    <tr>
      <td>1 July 2026</td>
      <td>6 months</td>
      <td>1 January 2027</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1 March 2026</td>
      <td>10 months</td>
      <td>1 January 2027</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1 March 2025</td>
      <td>22 months</td>
      <td>1 January 2027</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>1 October 2026</td>
      <td>3 months</td>
      <td>1 April 2027</td>
    </tr>
  </tbody>
</table>

## What the new rules mean in practice

The changes place a greater premium on good people management from day one of employment. The current two-year qualifying period effectively meant that dismissal decisions in the first two years carried lower legal risk. That buffer will soon be significantly reduced.  

HR teams and line managers will need to ensure that robust and documented processes are in place before the rule changes take effect. Here are some key actions to consider before the end of 2026. 

- Audit your current workforce. Identify employees who will cross the six-month threshold before or on 1 January 2027. This will help you plan any ongoing performance conversations with appropriate care and documentation. 

- Review and update your probationary period framework. With unfair dismissal rights arising at six months, probationary reviews and documentation take on added significance. Ensure that performance concerns are identified, communicated, and recorded within the probationary period. 

- Update HR policies and employment contracts. Any documents that reference the two-year qualifying period - including offer letters, handbooks, and contracts - will need to be revised. This should be completed before 31 December 2026. 

- Brief your line managers. Many managers are unaware of the current two-year rule, let alone the incoming change. Targeted training on the new timelines and on fair performance management practices is essential. 

## Do the new unfair dismissal qualifying rules apply to employees in their probationary period

A question many employers will face is what happens when an employee is still in their probationary period when the January 2027 rules take effect. The answer is that probationary periods and statutory unfair dismissal rights are legally separate - one does not govern the other. There is no legal requirement to put in place probationary periods, these are useful for employers but not essential. 

From 1 January 2027, an employee will gain unfair dismissal protection at six months’ continuous service regardless of whether they are still within their probationary period. If an employer's standard probationary period runs for 12 months, for example, an employee will have full statutory protection six months before their probationary period ends. Extending a probationary period does not delay the accrual of these rights; the statutory position will always overrule contractual probationary periods. 

If dismissal is being considered during the probationary period and the employee has accrued more than six months’ qualifying service from 1 January 2027, employers should seek legal advice before proceeding. They should also ensure that a documented record of discussions and formal meetings is maintained, as this will be essential in defending any subsequent unfair dismissal claim. 

## Removal of the cap on compensatory awards

The compensatory award for ordinary unfair dismissal will become uncapped from 1 January 2027, removing the current limit of either 52 weeks' gross pay or the statutory maximum - whichever is lower. This is one of the most significant commercial changes for employers, substantially increasing potential financial exposure and likely driving up settlement values and tribunal litigation.  

## Final thoughts 

The reduction in the qualifying period is part of a [broader programme of employment law reform under the Employment Rights Act 2025](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/employment-law-changes-in-april-2026-what-you-need-to-know). The stated aim is to provide workers with greater security and protection from the early stages of employment, but for employers it represents a fundamental shift in how employment risk is managed. 

In practical terms, the change brings forward the point at which dismissal decisions become legally scrutinised. What was previously a relatively low-risk period for addressing performance or capability will now require a more structured, evidence-based approach within the first six months of employment. The margin for informal decision-making is significantly reduced. 

Employers should therefore view this not simply as a legal update, but as an operational one. Organisations that rely on informal probationary periods, delayed feedback, or lightly documented decision-making will be more exposed under the new regime. Conversely, businesses that implement clear expectations during onboarding, regular performance discussions, and consistent documentation from day one will be better positioned to manage risk and achieve fair dismissal outcomes. 

Although January 2027 may seem distant, the retrospective nature of the change means its impact will be felt immediately. Employers who wait until late 2026 to prepare may find themselves managing a workforce where a significant proportion of employees have already acquired protection. 

The most effective response is early preparation. Reviewing probationary frameworks, upskilling managers, and embedding consistent performance management practices now will ensure that, when the new rules take effect, they do so within a system that is already aligned to the higher standard expected. 

## Further reading

For more information on the upcoming employment law changes, you may find the following articles helpful: 

[Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) changes from April 2026 ](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/statutory-sick-pay-ssp-changes)

[The Fair Work Agency: What this new enforcement body means for employers. ](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/the-fair-work-agency)

[Employment law changes in April 2026: What you need to know ](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/employment-law-changes-in-april-2026-what-you-need-to-know)

For the latest HR news and updates, visit our [News blog](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/). 

_This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information is accurate at the time of writing but may be subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified professional._



news image (1).jpg

Unfair dismissal changes 2027: The six-month qualifying period explained  

Replacing an employee earning £30,000 can cost a business as much as £60,000, factoring in lost productivity, recruitment expenses, and the time it takes a new hire to reach full effectiveness. For senior or specialist roles, total replacement costs can reach [150% to 200% of annual salary](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/how-much-does-it-cost-to-employ-someone). Yet what constitutes a concerning turnover rate varies enormously between sectors. A hospitality business and a manufacturer may both lose staff each year, but the rate at which this happens, the reasons behind it, and the financial impact differ significantly.

This guide sets out the latest available UK turnover benchmarks by industry, explains how different sources measure turnover, and covers practical steps employers can take to improve retention.

## Summary

*   The UK average annual employee turnover rate is approximately 15%, based on [CIPD employer survey data from spring 2025](https://www.cipd.org/en/knowledge/reports/labour-market-outlook/) \[1\].
*   Hospitality remains the highest-turnover sector. RotaCloud's 2024 employer data placed it at 38.7%, rising to 47% in bars and clubs \[3\].
*   Manufacturing turnover fell to 10.85% in 2024, its lowest level in at least a decade, with voluntary turnover at just 6.24% \[4\].
*   NHS hospital and community health services recorded a 10.1% leaver rate in the year to September 2024, the lowest since the pandemic \[5\].
*   Approximately 34% of UK workers say they are considering leaving their current role in 2026 \[6\].
*   Rising employer National Insurance contributions have affected hiring and retention across the economy, with hospitality and care sectors reporting the greatest cost impact \[7\].
*   Leadership quality is one of the strongest predictors of whether employees choose to stay, outweighing the influence of direct line managers \[8\].

## How turnover is measured

Turnover rate is calculated as the number of employees who leave over a given period, divided by the average headcount, expressed as a percentage.

**Turnover rate = (Total leavers ÷ Average number employed) × 100**

Different sources measure this in different ways, which explains why published figures for the same sector can vary considerably. When reviewing the industry figures below, it is worth noting which source each benchmark draws from, as the employer-reported and population-level figures can differ substantially.

## Turnover benchmarks by industry

Detailed industry-by-industry turnover benchmarks are not published annually in the UK. The most comprehensive cross-sector source is the CIPD's analysis of the [ONS Annual Population Survey](https://www.cipd.org/uk/views-and-insights/thought-leadership/cipd-voice/benchmarking-employee-turnover/), where 2022-23 is the latest full period available \[9\]. More recent sector-specific data exists from RotaCloud (2024), Make UK (2024), and NHS England (year to September 2024). The contextual analysis on labour market conditions draws from CIPD Labour Market Outlook reports published throughout 2025 and into early 2026.

This means the industry breakdown in the table below represents the most recent data available rather than a snapshot from 2026. The figures remain the most widely used benchmarks for UK employers, but they should be read alongside the more current contextual data in later sections of this article.

| Industry | Turnover rate | Source and period |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Hospitality (accommodation and food services) | 52% | CIPD/ONS APS, 2022-23 |
| Hospitality and catering (employer-reported) | 38.7% | RotaCloud, 2024 |
| — Bars and clubs | 47% | RotaCloud, 2024 |
| — Quick-service restaurants | 43.2% | RotaCloud, 2024 |
| — Restaurants and cafés | 39.1% | RotaCloud, 2024 |
| Agriculture, forestry and fishing | 45.3% | CIPD/ONS APS, 2022-23 |
| Wholesale, retail and repair of vehicles | 41.6% | CIPD/ONS APS, 2022-23 |
| Health and social work | 35.7% | CIPD/ONS APS, 2022-23 |
| Information and communication | 35.2% | CIPD/ONS APS, 2022-23 |
| Construction | 35.1% | CIPD/ONS APS, 2022-23 |
| Education | 33.7% | CIPD/ONS APS, 2022-23 |
| Manufacturing (population-level) | 31.7% | CIPD/ONS APS, 2022-23 |
| Manufacturing (employer-reported) | 10.85% | Make UK, 2024 |
| Professional, scientific and technical | 29.5% | CIPD/ONS APS, 2022-23 |
| Financial and insurance activities | 26.9% | CIPD/ONS APS, 2022-23 |
| Public administration and defence | 24.5% | CIPD/ONS APS, 2022-23 |
| NHS hospital and community health services | 10.1% | NHS England, year to Sept 2024 |

<br>

The CIPD/ONS APS figures capture total churn, including moves to new employers and exits from work entirely. Employer-reported figures from RotaCloud, Make UK, and NHS England tend to be lower as they measure departures from a specific organisation only.

## Sector analysis

### Hospitality

Hospitality records the highest turnover of any UK sector across all data sources. The CIPD's population-level measure places it at approximately 52% \[9\], whilst RotaCloud's 2024 employer data shows [38.7% across hospitality and catering](https://retailtimes.co.uk/hospitality-and-catering-employees-were-most-likely-to-quit-their-job-in-2024/) \[3\], rising to 47% in bars and clubs \[3\].

The sector's workforce profile contributes to these figures: a high proportion of lower-paid, shift-based roles, younger age demographics, and transferable skills that make moving between employers straightforward. The CIPD notes that where skills are more transferable and training costs are lower, higher churn is less financially damaging per departure than in sectors requiring longer training periods \[9\].

In 2025 and into 2026, rising employment costs have added further pressure. [Half of hospitality employers](https://www.cipd.org/en/about/press-releases/private-sector-hiring-record-low-summer-2025-labour-market-outlook/) reported that the April 2025 NICs and National Living Wage increases raised their costs to a large extent \[7\]. Many have responded by reducing staff hours or raising prices \[7\]. However, recruitment pressures in the sector have eased. By winter 2025/26, [55% of hospitality employers](https://www.cipd.org/globalassets/media/knowledge/knowledge-hub/reports/2026-pdfs/9094-lmo-winter-2025-26-report-web.pdf) reported not anticipating problems filling vacancies in the following six months \[10\], partly because pay increases have made the sector more competitive.

### Retail

Retail sits just below hospitality in most turnover rankings. The CIPD's population-level data places wholesale, retail, and repair of vehicles at [around 42%](https://www.hrdatahub.com/blog/employee-turnover-by-industry) \[9\], though employer-reported figures tend to be lower. Seasonal hiring patterns contribute to the headline number, as temporary staff taken on for peak trading periods inflate annual calculations.

Recruitment pressures have also eased here. The CIPD's winter 2025/26 data showed that 64% of retail employers did not anticipate problems filling vacancies in the near term \[10\].

For retail employers, it is worth separating turnover among seasonal and entry-level staff from turnover among experienced team members. The former may be largely structural; the latter is more likely to indicate issues worth investigating.

### Health and social care

Healthcare turnover differs significantly between the NHS and private social care. NHS hospital and community health services recorded a [10.1% leaver rate](https://www.england.nhs.uk/2025/03/staff-leaving-the-nhs-among-lowest-in-over-a-decade/) in the 12 months to September 2024. This was the lowest since the pandemic and the second-lowest since 2010 \[5\]. NHS England's People Promise retention programme contributed to this improvement through initiatives including flexible working, team-based rostering, and staff listening sessions. Organisations in the pilot saw leaver rates fall by an average of 11.8% \[5\].

Social care faces more persistent challenges. 62% of care and social work employers anticipated problems filling vacancies in the months ahead \[10\]. Changes to immigration rules, including the closure of the Social Care Worker visa route for new overseas applicants and a raised skills threshold for Skilled Worker visas, have reduced a significant source of recruits \[7\].

### Manufacturing

Manufacturing currently records some of the lowest employer-reported turnover figures in the UK. Make UK's Labour Turnover Report 2025 found that overall turnover in the sector was 10.85% in 2024, down from 16.12% in 2023 and 20.75% in 2022 \[4\]. Voluntary turnover, excluding redundancies, fell to just 6.24%, with retirement now the primary reason for departures \[4\].

| Year | Manufacturing turnover rate |
| --- | --- |
| 2022 | 20.75% |
| 2023 | 16.12% |
| 2024 | 10.85% |

<br>

This decline partly reflects a cooling labour market in which fewer external opportunities encourage employees to stay. It also reflects an ageing workforce. Whilst the low headline rate is positive from a retention perspective, it presents a knowledge-transfer challenge as experienced employees retire and take specialist skills with them.

### Education

The CIPD's population-level data places education at approximately 34% churn \[9\], though this encompasses a wide range of roles and institution types.

The sector faces notable structural pressures heading into 2026. Higher education institutions are contending with falling international student numbers and financial difficulties \[10\]. The CIPD's winter 2025/26 data recorded a net employment balance of −15 in non-compulsory education and −24 specifically in higher education, indicating that more employers expect to reduce headcount than increase it \[10\]. Some turnover in the sector is therefore currently involuntary, driven by redundancies and recruitment freezes rather than employees choosing to leave.

### Financial and professional services

Financial and insurance activities sit at approximately 27% on the CIPD's population-level measure, with professional, scientific, and technical activities at around 30% \[9\]. Higher salaries, older workforce profiles, and structured career pathways generally support retention in these sectors. However, the commercial impact of losing experienced staff can be significant where client relationships and institutional knowledge are concentrated in individuals.

### Public administration and defence

Public administration and defence records the lowest turnover in the CIPD's industry breakdown at approximately 25% \[9\]. Job security, defined-benefit pensions, and structured progression contribute to this.

However, the public sector workforce is actively contracting. The CIPD's winter 2025/26 outlook showed a net employment balance of −11 \[10\], with civil service entrants decreasing by more than 30% between March 2024 and March 2025 \[10\]. Voluntary exit schemes and recruitment freezes across government departments mean that whilst turnover appears low, the sector is not actively replacing many of those who leave.

## What's influencing turnover in 2025-2026

### Rising employment costs

The April 2025 increase to employer National Insurance contributions, from 13.8% to 15% with a lower earnings threshold, has affected hiring and retention practices across sectors. 84% of UK organisations reported increased employment costs as a result, and 36% cited NICs as the single largest cost pressure of the past year \[7\].

Employer responses have varied by sector:

| Response | Most prevalent in |
| --- | --- |
| Rising prices | Retail (68% of employers), hospitality (59%) [7] |
| Reducing hours worked by staff | Hospitality [7] |
| Reducing recruitment or making redundancies | One in three employers across sectors [7] |
| Absorbing costs through lower profits | 22% of employers overall [7] |

<br>

These responses can create secondary retention effects. Reduced hours affect employee earnings, fewer colleagues increase workload on those who remain, and hiring freezes limit career progression opportunities. These all feature among commonly cited reasons employees give for leaving.

### A cooling but restless labour market

The CIPD's net employment balance, the difference between employers expecting to increase and those expecting to decrease headcount, fell to +9 in summer 2025, near its lowest level outside of the pandemic \[7\]. By winter 2025/26 it sat at a similar level \[10\]. Vacancies across the UK fell to [721,000](https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/uklabourmarket/latest) in the December 2025 to February 2026 period, below pre-pandemic levels \[11\].

In this context, fewer employees may act on dissatisfaction by leaving. However, that dissatisfaction does not disappear. Approximately 34% of UK workers say they are considering leaving their current role in 2026 \[6\]. Culture Amp's analysis of 10 million UK employee responses found that 23% planned to leave in the short term, a 3% increase on 2023 \[8\]. Ravio's 2026 Compensation Trends Report supports this picture, finding that [UK attrition rose](https://ravio.com/blog/employee-retention-trends) to 19% in 2025, up 11% on the previous year and above the European average of 17.4% \[2\].

Where employees stay despite wanting to leave, the result tends to be lower engagement, reduced productivity, and increased sickness absence.

### The role of leadership

Culture Amp's data identified leadership quality as one of the strongest predictors of employee commitment to stay, outweighing direct line management \[8\].

| Leadership and management quality | Employee commitment to stay |
| --- | --- |
| Strong leader + strong manager | 94% |
| Good manager + poor leader | 35% |
| Poor leader + poor manager | 19% |

<br>

This suggests that [retention strategies](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/employee-retention-strategies) focused on senior leadership capability, such as the ability to set direction, build trust, and communicate purpose, may be more effective than those targeted solely at line manager development.

### Career progression as a retention driver

Ravio's survey of People and Reward leaders found that 82% cited lack of clarity around career progression and promotion paths as their top retention challenge, ranking higher than compensation issues (61%) \[2\]. Employees who cannot see where they are going within an organisation are more likely to look elsewhere. Clear levelling frameworks, defined competencies at each level, and regular development conversations all help address this.

## Practical steps to improve retention

*   **Segment your turnover data**. A headline turnover figure provides limited insight on its own. Breaking the data down by department, role level, tenure length, and whether departures are voluntary or involuntary helps identify where specific issues exist. High turnover among employees in their first six months may indicate onboarding problems, whilst departures concentrated among three-to-five-year employees may point to limited progression opportunities.
*   **Conduct structured exit interviews**. Asking departing employees what would have made them stay, and looking for patterns across responses, can reveal systemic issues. If multiple employees in the same period cite similar concerns, that pattern is likely to be more useful than any single data point.
*   **Benchmark against relevant comparators**. Comparing your business to the appropriate sector benchmark provides a more accurate picture than using the national average alone. A hospitality business with 30% turnover is performing well against the sector norm; a manufacturer with the same figure would be significantly above average. The tables above can serve as a starting point.
*   **Invest in onboarding**. Early departures represent the worst return on recruitment investment. [Effective onboarding](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/employers-guide-to-effective-employee-onboarding) can improve retention by up to 82% and productivity by over 70%. Practical steps include assigning onboarding buddies, scheduling regular check-ins during the first 90 days, and setting clear objectives with defined milestones.
*   **Review pay and flexibility**. With median basic pay awards at 3% across all sectors \[10\] and inflation running above that level for much of 2025, real-terms pay has been under pressure. Reviewing pay against current market rates for your sector and region is an important part of any retention strategy. Where roles allow, offering flexibility over hours, location, or shift patterns also supports retention. The NHS's improvements were partly driven by giving staff greater control over their rotas \[5\], a relatively low-cost adjustment with measurable impact.
*   **Create clear progression pathways**. Given that 82% of People and Reward leaders identified unclear career progression as their top retention challenge \[2\], defining what progression looks like within your organisation is worth prioritising. This includes clear role levels with defined competencies, regular development conversations, and visible pathways that employees can work towards.
*   **Develop leadership capability**. Given the evidence on leadership's influence on retention, investing in senior leaders' ability to communicate direction, recognise contributions, and [create a sense of purpose is likely to improve retention](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/employee-engagement-strategies) outcomes across the organisation. Regular coaching conversations, protected time for people management, and feedback skills development all contribute.

## Using these benchmarks effectively

Turnover benchmarks are most useful when treated as reference points rather than targets. Consistently tracking your own turnover over time, segmenting it by meaningful categories, and comparing it to the most relevant sector data allows you to identify trends early and respond accordingly.

It is also worth noting that very low turnover is not always a positive indicator. It can suggest limited progression opportunities, difficulty addressing underperformance, or a lack of new perspectives entering the business. The aim is a rate that reflects healthy workforce movement for your sector and circumstances.

_This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information is accurate at the time of writing but may be subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified professional._

\[1\] CIPD, _Labour Market Outlook - Spring 2025_, May 2025.

\[2\] Ravio, _2026 Compensation Trends Report_, October 2025.

\[3\] RotaCloud, 2024 staff turnover data, reported via _Retail Times_, April 2025.

\[4\] Make UK, _Labour Turnover Report 2025_, May 2025.

\[5\] NHS England, _Staff Leaving the NHS Among Lowest in Over a Decade_, March 2025.

\[6\] Stribe, _20 Employee Retention Statistics and Figures 2026 (UK)_, December 2025.

\[7\] CIPD, _Labour Market Outlook - Summer 2025_, August 2025.

\[8\] Culture Amp, _Predicted attrition data from 10 million UK employees_, December 2024.

\[9\] CIPD, _Benchmarking Employee Turnover: What Are the Latest Trends and Insights?_, 2024; based on ONS Annual Population Survey, 2022-23.

\[10\] CIPD, _Labour Market Outlook - Winter 2025/26_, February 2026.

\[11\] ONS, _Labour Market Overview, UK_, March 2026.

GettyImages-1887449050 (1).jpg

Staff turnover rates by industry UK: 2026 benchmarks

The scale of workplace absence is hard to ignore. Absence levels have risen significantly in recent years, and with new statutory sick pay reforms now in force from April 2026, pressure on employers has increased. Businesses without a structured approach to managing long-term sickness face a growing set of risks, such as productivity loss and difficulty maintaining quality standards.

What the evidence shows, however, is that early, genuine support doesn’t just improve the chances of a successful return to work, it builds trust with employees. 

## Summary 

*   [Over 2.8 million working-age people in the UK are economically inactive due to long-term sickness](https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotinwork/economicinactivity) \[1\], with mental health now the [leading driver of absences lasting four weeks or more](https://www.cipd.org/uk/knowledge/reports/health-well-being-work/) \[2\]. 
*   Average sickness absence has risen to 9.4 days per employee per year - up from 5.8 days before the pandemic \[2\]. 
*   Since 6 April 2026, [](https://www.acas.org.uk/checking-sick-pay/statutory-sick-pay-ssp)[statutory sick pay has been payable from day one of sickness](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/statutory-sick-pay-ssp-changes), the three-day waiting period has been removed, and the lower earnings limit no longer applies for SSP qualifying purposes, extending eligibility to an estimated 1.3 million additional workers \[4\]. 
*   Employers have a legal duty under the Equality Act 2010 to make reasonable adjustments where a long-term health condition qualifies as a disability. No formal diagnosis is required \[5\]. 
*   The government's [Keep Britain Working Review](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/keep-britain-working-review-final-report) (November 2025) calls for a shared-responsibility model between employers, employees, and health services, with early intervention at the centre of its philosophy \[6\]. 
*   Practical steps - regular contact, occupational health referrals, phased returns, flexible working, and clear documentation - cost relatively little but significantly improve outcomes. 

## The scale of the problem 

Office for National Statistics data shows that 2.81 million people of working age were economically inactive due to long-term sickness in the August to October 2025 period \[1\] - nearly three quarters of a million more than the equivalent period before the pandemic. Long-term sickness has been the single largest reason for economic inactivity since late 2021, overtaking caring responsibilities and early retirement. 

Within the workplace itself, the picture is equally stark. The CIPD's Health and Wellbeing at Work report (2025) found that employees took an average of 9.4 sick days per year in 2024, up from 7.8 in 2023 and 5.8 pre-pandemic \[2\]. Mental health was cited as the leading cause of long-term absence by 41% of employers surveyed, followed by musculoskeletal conditions (31%) and other long-term health conditions (30%). Across the NHS workforce in England, anxiety, stress, and depression alone accounted for around 31% of all sickness absence and over 708,000 full-time equivalent days lost in a single month \[3\]. Heavy workloads were identified as the top driver of stress-related absence, with 64% of organisations reporting some stress-related sickness in the previous year. Mentor's own advisers see this reflected in call volumes: around one in five enquiries from clients relate to managing employee absence due to illness, with mental health conditions featuring prominently. 

For small businesses, even a single long-term absence can create significant operational strain. Covering the absent employee's workload - whether through temporary staff, overtime, or redistribution - adds cost whilst the business continues to pay statutory or occupational sick pay. [Employee replacement costs range from 50% to 200% of annual salary](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/how-much-does-it-cost-to-employ-someone), making staff retention through effective absence management far more cost-effective than allowing skilled employees to leave the workforce. 

## Statutory sick pay changes from April 2026 

The [Employment Rights Act 2025](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/employment-rights-bill-roadmap-for-2025-2027) introduces the most substantial reforms to statutory sick pay (SSP) since 1983, with changes taking effect from 6 April 2026 \[4\]. Three changes are particularly significant for employers managing long-term sickness. 

First, the **three-day waiting period is abolished**. SSP is payable from the first qualifying day of sickness absence, increasing cost exposure on short absences and removing the previous buffer that filtered out brief illnesses \[4\]. 

Second, the **lower earnings limit has been removed entirely for purposes of SSP**. Employees no longer need to earn a minimum weekly amount to qualify, extending SSP eligibility to an estimated 1.3 million additional workers - predominantly part-time, lower-paid, and variable-hours staff \[4\]. 

Third, the **SSP calculation method changes**. Rather than a flat weekly rate alone, SSP is paid at the lower of £123.25 per week (2026 SSP rate) or 80% of the employee's average weekly earnings, calculated over the [eight-week reference period before the absence began](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/rates-and-thresholds-for-employers-2026-to-2027) \[7\]. For employees already receiving SSP before 6 April 2026, transitional protections apply: they continue receiving the uprated flat rate for the duration of their continuous absence \[4\]. 

## SSP at a glance: before and after April 2026 

|  | Before 6 April 2026 | From 6 April 2026 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Waiting period | 3 qualifying days (unpaid) | None - payable from day one |
| Earnings threshold | Must earn at least £125/week (lower earnings limit) | No minimum - all employees eligible |
| Weekly rate | Flat rate of £118.75 | Lower of £123.25 or 80% of average weekly earnings |
| Rate calculation | N/A - single flat rate | Based on 8-week reference period before absence |
| Maximum entitlement | 28 weeks | 28 weeks (unchanged) |
| Linked absences | Absences within 8 weeks treated as one period | Absences within 8 weeks treated as one period (unchanged) |

<br>

These reforms have immediate practical implications. Payroll systems need updating, sickness absence policies require revision to remove references to waiting days and earnings thresholds, and any occupational sick pay schemes that mirror SSP rules should be reviewed for alignment. 

Important to note: an employee's statutory sick pay running out does not end the employment relationship, nor does it give the employer an automatic right to dismiss. The contract of employment continues, and the employer's duty of care - including the obligation to consider reasonable adjustments - remains in force regardless of whether SSP is still being paid. 

## The Keep Britain Working Review 

In November 2025, the government published the Keep Britain Working Review, led by Sir Charlie Mayfield \[6\]. The review estimates the cost of health-related economic inactivity to the state at £212 billion per year and identifies three persistent problems: a culture of fear around discussing health at work, a lack of effective support systems at the interface between work and health, and structural barriers faced by disabled people. 

At its centre is the concept of a "Healthy Working Lifecycle" - a framework covering prevention, early intervention, stay-in-work support, return-to-work planning, and long-term retention. The review recommends that employers adopt a Workplace Health Provision service: an external, non-clinical case management model designed to guide managers and employees through structured absence and return-to-work plans \[6\]. 

The review also highlights that fit notes, as currently designed, often serve to take the employer out of the loop rather than encouraging collaboration. Reform of the fit note system forms part of the longer-term recommendations, though systemic changes are expected to take several years to implement. 

For employers, the immediate takeaway is clear: early, consistent engagement with absent employees - rather than waiting for a fit note or SSP expiry - produces better outcomes for both parties. 

## Practical steps for managing long-term sickness 

### Maintain regular contact 

One of the most common mistakes employers make during long-term absence is losing contact with the employee. Uncertainty about what to say, concern about intruding, or assumptions that the employee will "come back when they're ready" often lead to prolonged silence that damages the employment relationship and delays return. 

Agree a communication plan early. Regular welfare contact with the absent employee is part of the employer's duty of care as well as effective absence management. This ensures the business has up-to-date information about the absence and allows both parties to discuss next steps. The employer should set a reasonable frequency and format for contact with the employee, typically through scheduled welfare calls or meetings. Employee preferences should be considered, though they should not override the employer's need for regular, meaningful communication. Only where an employee is too unwell to engage directly should written alternatives be considered, and even then the arrangement should be kept under review.

### Seek occupational health input early 

Where an absence extends beyond a few weeks or involves a condition likely to be long-term, referring the employee for an occupational health assessment can provide expert, objective guidance. An occupational health professional can advise on likely recovery timescales, recommend [reasonable adjustments](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/reasonable-adjustments-in-the-workplace), and assess whether the employee is fit for modified duties. 

Access to Work grants, funded by the UK government, may cover the cost of workplace assessments, specialist equipment, support workers, and coaching for employees with disabilities or long-term health conditions. Grants of [up to £69,260 per year](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/access-to-work-factsheet/access-to-work-factsheet-for-customers) may be available and do not require repayment \[8\]. 

### Plan phased returns and reasonable adjustments 

A phased return - where the employee gradually increases their hours or responsibilities over a defined period - is one of the most effective tools for supporting return to work after a long period of absence. It reduces the psychological burden of returning to full capacity immediately and allows both employer and employee to assess how the phased return is progressing. 

Reasonable adjustments might include [flexible working hours](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/flexible-working-rules-are-employers-up-to-speed), modified duties, changes to the physical workspace, additional breaks, or temporary reallocation of certain tasks. Many effective adjustments cost nothing: written instructions rather than verbal briefings, predictable scheduling, regular one-to-one check-ins, or a quieter workstation. 

Where the employee's condition constitutes a disability under the Equality Act 2010, the duty to make reasonable adjustments is a legal requirement, not an optional gesture of goodwill \[5\]. 

### Document everything 

Thorough documentation protects both parties. Record all welfare meetings, agreed actions, medical advice received, adjustments made, and communications. If the situation eventually progresses to a capability dismissal, an employment tribunal will assess whether the employer followed a fair process - and gaps in documentation are difficult to defend. 

Keep notes factual. Where formal meetings take place, provide the employee with a written summary and an opportunity to comment or correct the record. 

## Long-term absence management: a step-by-step checklist 

*   **Week 1**: Make initial welfare contact. Confirm the employee understands their sick pay entitlement and absence reporting requirements. Record the expected return date if known. 
*   **Weeks 2-4**: Maintain regular contact at the agreed frequency. If the absence is likely to extend beyond four weeks, consider an occupational health referral. Review whether any immediate adjustments could facilitate an earlier return. 
*   **Month 2**: Obtain occupational health advice on the employee’s condition, recommended adjustments, and fitness for modified duties. Hold a formal welfare meeting to discuss findings and agree next steps. Begin exploring phased return options. 
*   **Month 3+**: Review progress against the return-to-work plan. If no return is foreseeable, consider whether alternative roles exist within the organisation. Seek legal or specialist HR advice before starting any formal capability process. 
*   **Throughout**: Document every meeting, decision, and communication. Ensure the employee has access to any [employee assistance programme](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/unlock-your-employees-potential-with-mentors-new-employee-assistance-programme) or mental health support available. 

## The legal framework 

### Equality Act 2010 

A person has a disability under the [Equality Act 2010](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/6) if they have a physical or mental impairment that has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities \[5\]. "Long-term" means lasting, or likely to last, at least 12 months. Crucially, no formal diagnosis is required - tribunals assess impact on daily activities if no treatment was given and recurring conditions may qualify if the effects are substantial when active. 

Once an employer knows, or ought reasonably to know, that an employee may have a disability, the duty to make reasonable adjustments applies \[9\]. Failure to comply can result in significant financial penalties. The [average disability discrimination award in 2023/24 was £44,483](https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/tribunals-statistics-quarterly-april-to-june-2024) \[10\], with a maximum recorded penalty of [£4.6 million in a 2024 case involving ADHD and PTSD](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-68612551) \[11\]. 

### Dismissal as a last resort 

If, after exhausting reasonable adjustments, alternative work and return-to-work options, the employee remains unable to perform their role, dismissal on grounds of capability may be lawful - provided the employer can demonstrate a fair and thorough process and can demonstrate the reason why dismissal is reasonable in the circumstances. This includes obtaining up-to-date medical evidence, considering alternative roles within the organisation, consulting with the employee at every stage, and following the ACAS Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures. Tribunals can [increase compensation awards by up to 25%](https://www.mfmac.com/insights/employment/25-acas-code-uplifts-correct-as-eat-endorses-four-step-guidance/) where employers unreasonably fail to follow the Code \[12\]. 

Every situation is different. An employee with cancer, for example, is automatically considered disabled from the point of diagnosis under the Equality Act 2010, regardless of the severity of symptoms. Seeking specialist HR or legal advice before initiating any dismissal process is essential. 

### Building a proactive absence culture 

The most effective approach to long-term sickness is one that begins well before the absence does. Organisations that invest in [employee wellbeing initiatives](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/developing-employee-wellbeing-initiatives-in-the-workplace), train managers to have early and supportive conversations about health, and build flexibility into working patterns tend to experience shorter absences and higher return rates. The CIPD's 2025 data supports this: 39% of organisations that invest in wellbeing initiatives report reduced sickness absence, alongside improvements in engagement and performance. Where employers trained managers to support staff with mental ill health, 73% reported that managers felt confident having sensitive conversations and signposting to support, compared with 57% where no training was provided. \[2\]

Small, consistent actions - a welfare call in the first week of absence, a written return-to-work plan with clear milestones - signal to employees that they are valued and that the organisation is invested in their recovery. These measures also build the kind of documented, supportive process that withstands legal scrutiny if the situation deteriorates. 

Long-term sickness will remain a feature of working life. The employers who manage it well are not those who avoid it, but those who respond to it with structure, empathy, and a genuine commitment to keeping people in work. 

_This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information is accurate at the time of writing but may be subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified professional._ 

\[1\] ONS, Economic inactivity by reason (seasonally adjusted), August-October 2025.   

\[2\] CIPD/Simplyhealth, _Health and Wellbeing at Work Report_, September 2025. 

\[3\] NHS England Digital, _NHS Sickness Absence Rates_, 2025.   

\[4\] ACAS, _Statutory Sick Pay_, updated for Employment Rights Act 2025 changes (effective 6 April 2026).   

\[5\] ACAS, _What disability means by law_.   

\[6\] GOV.UK, _Keep Britain Working Review: Final Report_, November 2025.   

\[7\] GOV.UK, _Rates and Thresholds for Employers 2026 to 2027_.   

\[8\] GOV.UK, _Access to Work Factsheet for Customers_.   

\[9\] ACAS, _Reasonable Adjustments: Disability at Work_.   

\[10\] GOV.UK, _Tribunals Statistics Quarterly: April to June 2024_.

\[11\] BBC, _Hammersmith and Fulham Council boss speaks out over £4.6m pay-out_, March 2024.

\[12\] MFMAC, _25% ACAS Code Uplifts Endorsed - Employment Tribunal Guidance_, 2024.

Photo of a return to work meeting between manager and employee

image.dim.full.bus-insights-photo-return-to-work-meeting-1164x535-hero.jpg

Supporting employees during long-term sickness

The assumption that employees simply want more pay and more flexibility turns out to be only half the story - and for younger workers, not even that.

Our research, surveying 2,000 UK employees in July 2025, reveals a workforce whose priorities are shifting rapidly and diverging sharply across generations. Work-life balance still dominates overall, but Gen Z is rewriting the terms of what ambition looks like. Meanwhile, social media is reshaping how employees feel about their careers in ways that most employers have yet to fully reckon with.

## Summary

*   Work-life balance is the top career priority for 73% of UK employees overall, but only 59% of Gen Z rank it highly - the lowest of any generation.
*   Gen Z is significantly more focused on career progression (36%) and purpose (41%) than older colleagues, with financial considerations a close second driver (40%).
*   Feeling heard and valued drives motivation for 94% of Gen Z - higher than any other generation in the study.
*   65% of employees say their work motivations have shifted in the past five years, driven by getting older, financial concerns, and a desire for purpose.
*   More than a third of employees (35%) are open to new job opportunities, with one in ten actively looking.
*   Nearly half of UK workers (44%) feel pressured to build a personal brand online, and 46% say social media has influenced how they feel about their career or workplace.
*   Employers who design people strategies around these shifts - rather than reacting to them - are better placed to retain talent across all age groups.

## Work-life balance over wealth

When UK employees are asked what matters most in their careers, work-life balance comes out on top by a significant margin. Nearly three quarters (73%) cite it as a key career factor, compared to just 29% who prioritise wealth. Job satisfaction (56%) and positive relationships with colleagues (31%) also rank well ahead of salary, pointing to a workforce that places growing weight on non-monetary factors.

But that overall picture conceals a workforce in motion. Nearly two thirds of employees (65%) say their work motivations have shifted in the past five years. The most common drivers of that shift are getting older (35%), financial concerns (33%), and a growing desire for purpose (27%). This isn't a story about a stable workforce with settled expectations. It's a story about employees who are actively re-evaluating what they want - and who are increasingly open to finding it elsewhere. More than a third (35%) are currently open to new job opportunities, with one in ten actively seeking them.

For employers, that level of latent movement is a retention risk that goes well beyond pay. Paul Buck, Business Partner, Employment Law and HR Consultant at Mentor, puts it directly:

>_"Most organisations are adapting, but often reactively rather than strategically. Policies around flexible working, wellbeing, and later-life career planning tend to lag behind employee expectations. The pace of demographic and cultural change means that many employers risk falling behind unless they embed support for purpose, financial resilience, and ageing workforces into their core people strategy."_

## Gen Z: Career first, personal life second

The headline finding about Gen Z cuts against a widespread assumption. The generation frequently described as prioritising balance and boundaries turns out to be considerably more career-focused than their predecessors.

Only 59% of Gen Z rank work-life balance as a career priority - compared to the 73% average across all generations. What they prioritise instead is progression and purpose. More than a third (36%) consider career growth important, against just 10% of Gen X and 4% of Boomers. Purpose and impact tops the list of what has driven their career choices over the past five years (41%), closely followed by financial and economic considerations (40%).

Social awareness also plays a stronger role in how Gen Z approaches work. One in five say an increased awareness of social issues has influenced their work motivations, compared to 8% of Gen X and 9% of Boomers. This generation is not disengaged - they are highly engaged, on their own terms.

What those terms require is recognition. Feeling heard and valued drives motivation for 94% of Gen Z, the highest proportion of any generation surveyed. Lucy Coombs, Senior Employment Law and HR Business Partner at Mentor, draws out the practical implication:

>_"The key to engaging different generations at work is to be mindful of the mix of team and motivators - involving younger people who are developing and bringing them into teams with older, more experienced workers, and recognising, valuing and encouraging skill and behaviour development equally from all perspectives."_

The risk for employers is treating Gen Z's ambition as a management challenge rather than an asset. An employee who wants rapid progression and clear development pathways is not difficult to retain - provided the organisation can offer what they're looking for. The difficulty is that most traditional performance and development frameworks were not designed with this cohort in mind.

## The social media effect

Beyond generational differences in priorities, the research identifies a newer and less well-understood pressure: the growing influence of social media on how employees feel about their work.

Nearly half of UK workers (44%) say they feel pressured to build a personal brand online. This pressure is creating real friction: one in five (20%) feel forced to engage with others online even when they don't have time, while 19% feel they must constantly create content, share career updates, and network. For many employees, the boundary between professional life and online performance has effectively disappeared.

The influence is especially pronounced among younger workers. Nearly three quarters of Gen Z (73%) and 61% of Millennials report that social media trends and topics have influenced how they feel about their career or workplace, compared to lower rates among older generations. Several specific trends are having the most measurable impact on how people feel about their jobs:

*   **Quiet quitting** (doing the bare minimum and setting work-life boundaries) - 13%
*   **Sunday scaries** (anxiety about the upcoming work week) - 13%
*   **Digital nomads** (working remotely while travelling) - 12%
*   **Workfluencer** (sharing work-related content on social media) - 11%

The significance for employers extends beyond individual wellbeing. Social media shapes how organisations are perceived as places to work - not through official employer branding, but through what current and former employees share publicly. Paul Buck explains:

>_"Social media amplifies both positive and negative employee experiences, meaning organisations are judged not only by official branding but by what current and former staff share online. Employers should recognise this by investing in authentic employer branding, clear communication of values, and workplace practices that genuinely reflect the culture they promote - otherwise, the gap between perception and reality will quickly undermine trust and retention."_

The practical implication is that employer brand is no longer a communications function. It is the lived experience of employees, rendered visible and searchable. Organisations that treat culture as a marketing exercise rather than an operational reality are increasingly exposed.

## What employers can do

The research points to three practical areas where employer action is most likely to have impact across all age groups.

1.  **Redesign development frameworks around progression, not tenure.** Gen Z's focus on career growth requires clear, frequent, and meaningful pathways - not annual reviews tied to time served. Employers who can articulate what development looks like in the first one, two, and five years of a role are significantly better placed to retain this cohort.
2.  **Treat purpose as an operational priority, not a communications one.** The finding that purpose and impact tops Gen Z's list of career drivers - above pay - is a signal that employees want to understand how their work connects to something larger. This is not primarily a branding challenge. It is a question of how roles are designed, how teams are briefed, and how managers communicate context and impact day to day.
3.  **Acknowledge the social media dimension of your employer brand.** If nearly half of your workforce feels pressured by personal branding expectations and almost half say social media has influenced how they feel about their job, this is a material people issue - not a marketing one. Authentic communication, genuine flexibility, and workplace practices that can withstand public scrutiny are the only sustainable response.

_This article draws on Mentor's survey of 2,000 UK employed adults, conducted between 23rd and 29th July 2025 by panel provider OnePoll. Generational definitions used: Gen Z (born after 1996), Millennials (born 1981-1996), Gen X (born 1965-1980), Boomers (born 1946-1964)._

_This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information is accurate at the time of writing but may be subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified professional._

employee_retention_strategies.jpg

What do UK employees actually want from work?

Employment law in 2026 is set to undergo one of the most significant rounds of legislative reform seen in many years. The scale and scope of the upcoming changes - driven by the Employment Rights Act 2025 - mean that organisations of all sizes will need to take a more proactive approach to reviewing policies, updating procedures, and ensuring compliance. 

Our employment law experts recently hosted a free webinar exploring the upcoming legislative changes, including a live Q&A. [The recording is now available here](https://lnkd.in/eF_xGpDw).

Read on to learn what these changes mean for employers and how your business can begin preparing.  

## April 2026 changes

### Day-one rights to paternity and parental leave

Entitlement to both [paternity and parental leave](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/supporting-employees-taking-family-leave) will no longer depend on an employee having accrued a specific period of qualifying service - employees will be entitled to these rights from their first day of employment. Please note - as of 18th February 2026, employees who don't yet have qualifying service for paternity leave can notify employers of their baby's due date with only 28 days' notice instead of the usual 15 weeks.

### Ability to take paternity leave following shared parental leave

The restriction preventing employees from taking paternity leave following shared parental leave will be removed.   

### Bereaved partner’s paternity leave

Eligible employees will have a day one right to take leave if the child’s primary carer dies within 52 weeks of the child’s birth or adoption placement, and they have a qualifying relationship with the child or the primary carer.

Employees can take one period of leave, which must be taken within the first 52 weeks following the birth or placement.

### Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) - removing previous barriers to entitlement

[SSP will become payable from day one of sickness absence](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/statutory-sick-pay-ssp-changes) (employees will no longer be required to serve three waiting days before SSP becomes payable). In addition to this, the lower earnings limit that determined whether an employee was eligible to receive SSP will no longer apply. All employees, regardless of how much they earn, will be entitled to SSP from the first day of absence.  

SSP will be paid at the lower of:

- 80% of the employee’s average weekly earnings, or
- the statutory weekly rate, which will rise to £123.25 per week for the 2026/27 tax year.

This is a shift from the flat-rate system and is intended to ensure sick pay better reflects an employee’s actual income while still capping employer liability.

### Sexual harassment becomes a protected disclosure in its own right

Currently, an employee may be protected as a whistleblower if they report sexual harassment, but this is not absolute. Under the new rules, the act of reporting sexual harassment will be specifically considered as a protected disclosure on its own, subject to the existing conditions for all types of whistleblowing complaints. 

### Increase to protective award in collective redundancy

Employees that are subject to a collective redundancy process are entitled to be compensated if their employer did not comply with legal requirements known as “collective consultation”. The compensation awarded is referred to as a “protective award” and is currently set at 90 days’ pay per employee. This will be increased to 180 days. This is intended to strengthen the deterrent against employers failing to follow consultation rules. 

### New duty to keep "adequate" holiday records
 
Employers will be required to keep "adequate" records demonstrating compliance with workers' paid annual leave entitlements under the Working Time Regulations 1998. Records must cover leave taken, carried-forward leave, holiday pay calculations, and any payments in lieu, and must be retained for six years. This applies to all eligible workers, including irregular hours and part-year workers. Failure to comply is a criminal offence punishable by fine, with enforcement ultimately expected to sit with the incoming [Fair Work Agency](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/the-fair-work-agency).

### Creation of the Fair Work Agency

A new enforcement body will be created called the [Fair Work Agency] ('the Agency'). It will have a wide array of responsibility and powers including enforcing wages owed to employees (for example, enforcing minimum wage and holiday pay), raising employment tribunal claims on behalf of employees in certain circumstances, obtaining documents and entering business premises for inspections. Detailed regulations setting out their powers are awaited and it will take some time for the Agency to become fully operational.    

### Statutory trade union recognition (amendment to threshold)

 The current position for a trade union that wants to be recognised by an employer for the purposes of collective bargaining on behalf of the workers in a bargaining unit, is that, where the employer refuses to recognise it, it must make an application to the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC) and must be able to show the CAC that at least 10% of the workers in the bargaining area are members of the union. The Employment Rights Act 2025 introduces the possibility that the 10% threshold could be amended through secondary legislation to anywhere between 2% and 10% in the future. 

The Employment Rights Act 2025 further removes the requirement at the application stage for a trade union to demonstrate that there is likely to be majority support for recognition and also removes the 40% support threshold from recognition ballots. 

### Electronic balloting

The Government is committed to introducing secure electronic balloting for statutory trade union ballots, replacing the postal ballot system that has been in use for decades. This reform aims to make the balloting process faster, more secure, and more accessible to employees. 

### Umbrella companies

New rules will affect businesses that use umbrella companies or other third-party labour providers.

Responsibility for making sure PAYE is correctly applied will sit with the agency or end client, even where the worker is employed by an umbrella company.

## Further changes ahead

There will be a raft of [further changes in October 2026 and in 2027](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/employment-rights-bill-roadmap-for-2025-2027). These include: 

### Harassment prevention

Employers face a duty to take "all reasonable steps" to [prevent sexual harassment](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/sexual-harassment-legislation-a-roadmap-for-employers), and to protect workers from harassment of any kind, including harassment by third parties such as customers and clients.

### Fire and rehire restricted

Making it significantly harder for employers to change contracts by dismissal and re-engagement.

### Union rights

Employers must inform staff of their right to join a union, with easier union recognition processes.

### Employment tribunal claims

Time limit for raising employment tribunal claims extends from three to six months.

### Unfair dismissal claims

The qualifying period of employment required to bring a claim for unfair dismissal will be reduced from two years to six months, with the change taking effect from 1 January 2027. This means employees joining from July 2026 onwards are likely to fall within scope. In addition, the cap on compensatory awards (currently the lower of 52 weeks' pay or £118,223) will also be removed.

## What employers should be doing now

The changes taking effect from April 2026 represent a fundamental shift in UK employment law, significantly expanding employee rights and strengthening enforcement. For employers, this is not simply a matter of updating contracts at the last minute. The scale of reform under the Employment Rights Act 2025 means organisations will need to plan early, review existing policies and procedures, and embed compliance into day-to-day operations. 

Key priorities should include understanding the detailed changes, reviewing family-leave policies to reflect new day-one entitlements, updating sickness absence rules and SSP entitlement, and strengthening whistleblowing and anti-harassment frameworks to manage increased legal risk. Employers involved in restructuring or redundancy exercises should also reassess consultation processes and timings given the doubling of protective awards. 

The creation of the Fair Work Agency, alongside expanded union rights and enforcement powers, signals a more proactive regulatory environment. Employers should expect greater scrutiny, faster enforcement action, and fewer procedural barriers for employees bringing claims.  

Employers who act now by auditing policies, training managers, and seeking specialist advice will be far better placed to adapt smoothly, avoid costly disputes, and maintain compliant and resilient workplaces as the new legal framework takes effect.

## Further reading

For more information on the upcoming employment law changes, you may find the following articles helpful:

- [Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) changes from April 2026](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/statutory-sick-pay-ssp-changes)
- [The Fair Work Agency](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/the-fair-work-agency): What this new enforcement body means for employers.

For the latest HR news and updates, visit our [News blog](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/).

_Dates reflected in this article detail the Government’s intentions at the time of publication and may be subject to change. This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information is accurate at the time of writing but may be subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified professional._



Colleagues reading and discussing legal updates

news image.jpg

Employment law changes in April 2026: What you need to know 

Your best employee hands in their notice on a Friday afternoon. By Monday, you're scrambling to cover their workload, briefing a recruitment agency, and realising you have no idea how long the role will take to fill - or whether you even need a like-for-like replacement. Three months and several thousand pounds later, the new hire isn't working out.

This cycle is more common than most business owners realise. The [Recruitment and Employment Confederation (REC)](https://www.rec.uk.com/our-view/news/press-releases/hiring-mistakes-are-costing-uk-businesses-billions-each-year-rec) reports that 85% of HR decision-makers admit their organisation has made a bad hire - and a third believe those mistakes cost nothing \[1\]. Yet the REC's own analysis shows that a poor hire on a £42,000 salary generates losses exceeding £132,000 when you factor in wasted training, lost productivity, and increased turnover across the wider team.

Workforce planning doesn't eliminate hiring risk entirely, but it replaces reactive scrambling with informed decisions. And in a labour market where [UK job postings remain 19% below pre-pandemic levels](https://www.hiringlab.org/uk/blog/2025/12/09/indeed-2026-uk-jobs-hiring-trends-report/) and one in three employers have slowed hiring due to rising employment costs \[2\]\[3\], getting the timing and shape of your team right has never mattered more.

## Summary

*   Workforce planning means anticipating your staffing needs before gaps become crises - assessing what skills you have, what you'll need, and how to bridge the difference.
*   The UK skills shortage costs businesses billions annually, with 62% of organisations currently facing skills gaps \[4\]\[5\].
*   Small businesses are disproportionately affected: vacancies fell most sharply among firms with 1-49 employees in the past year \[6\].
*   A structured approach starts with understanding your current team, mapping future needs against business goals, and identifying where gaps will emerge.
*   Upskilling existing staff is often more cost-effective than external recruitment, yet employer investment in training has declined by 19% per employee in real terms since 2011 \[7\].
*   Workforce planning isn't a one-off exercise. Regular reviews - ideally quarterly - keep your plan aligned with changing conditions.
*   Even a basic workforce plan is better than none: only 19% of organisations have a written skills plan \[5\].

## What workforce planning actually means

Workforce planning is the process of making sure your business has the right people, with the right skills, in the right roles, at the right time. For a small business, that might sound like corporate jargon - but in practice, it's the difference between hiring because you've thought it through and hiring because someone just left and you're panicking.

At its core, workforce planning requires you to consider two key questions.

*   What does your team look like now - their skills, capacity, and how they spend their time?
*   What will your business need over the next six to twelve months, and beyond?

The gap between those two is where the real decisions happen. Sometimes the answer is recruitment. Often it's redeploying existing people, investing in training, restructuring responsibilities, or recognising that a full-time hire isn't what you need at all - a contractor, freelancer, or part-time role might serve better.

## Why it matters now

The UK labour market in early 2026 presents a particular set of pressures for small businesses. [Vacancies have fallen to 726,000](https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9366/) - below pre-pandemic levels - and the sharpest declines have hit businesses with fewer than 50 employees \[6\]. At the same time, [the number of payrolled employees dropped by 121,000](https://www.dua.co.uk/how-labour-market-trends-are-affecting-hiring-pay-and-strategy/) between December 2024 and December 2025 \[8\]. Employers are cautious, and for good reason: rising National Insurance contributions, minimum wage increases, [increasing employment related costs](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/statutory-sick-pay-ssp-changes), and broader economic uncertainty have made [every hire a higher-stakes decision](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/how-much-does-it-cost-to-employ-someone).

Against this backdrop, the [Open University's Business Barometer (2024)](https://www.open.ac.uk/blogs/news/business-law/business/new-ou-report-reveals-financial-cost-of-the-skills-shortage/) found that 62% of UK organisations are currently experiencing skills shortages \[5\]. Among those affected, 68% report increased workload on existing staff, 49% face reduced output, and 38% see decreased profitability. Yet only 19% have implemented a written skills plan to address the problem.

For small businesses, the mismatch is especially acute. You can't absorb the impact of a vacant role across a large team. When one person leaves or underperforms, the effects are immediate and visible - in delayed projects, missed opportunities, and pressure on the people who remain.

## How to build a basic workforce plan

You don't need specialist software or an HR department to start workforce planning. What you need is a clear picture of where you are, where you're going, and what stands between the two.

### Map your current workforce

**Start by documenting what you already have.** For each team member, note their role, core skills, any secondary skills they bring, and roughly how their time is allocated. This doesn't need to be a formal skills audit - a spreadsheet or even a written list works perfectly well for a small team.

**Look for patterns.** Are certain skills concentrated in one person, creating a single point of failure? Are there responsibilities that have drifted away from their original role holder? Is anyone consistently overloaded while others have capacity?

This exercise often reveals that **your team's actual skill set differs significantly from what's written in their job descriptions**. Someone hired for administration might be running your social media. A technician might be doing informal project management. Understanding the real picture - not the theoretical one - is the starting point for everything that follows.

A basic workforce audit for each team member might capture:

*   current role title and reporting line
*   primary responsibilities (what they were hired to do)
*   actual day-to-day tasks (what they spend most of their time on)
*   core skills and any secondary or informal skills
*   skills gaps or development needs they've identified
*   approximate time allocation across key activities
*   whether anyone else in the team could cover their core tasks.

Even a simple record like this, reviewed across the whole team, will highlight dependencies, imbalances, and opportunities that aren't visible from day-to-day management alone.

### Connect staffing to business goals

Workforce planning only works when it's anchored to where your business is heading. If you're planning to launch a new product line, enter a new market, or scale up operations, the staffing implications need to be part of that conversation from the start - not an afterthought once the strategy is already in motion.

Ask yourself what capabilities you'll need to deliver on your goals over the next twelve months. Consider which of those capabilities already exist in your team, which could be developed through training, and which will require bringing in new people.

Be specific. "We need more support" isn't a workforce plan. Instead, you can say: "We need someone who can manage our accounting software and process invoices independently by September, because our current finance person is moving to a three-day week".

### Identify and close the gaps

Once you've mapped your current team against future needs, the gaps become visible. For each gap, consider the full range of options before defaulting to recruitment.

*   **Upskilling existing staff** is frequently the most cost-effective approach, yet [employer investment in training has declined significantly](https://www.cipd.org/uk/views-and-insights/thought-leadership/insight/skills-boost-growth/) - down 19% per employee in real terms between 2011 and 2022 \[7\]. Investing in the people you already have builds loyalty, reduces recruitment costs, and develops institutional knowledge that no external hire can replicate. Cross-training team members in each other's core tasks also reduces your vulnerability when someone is absent or leaves.
*   **Restructuring roles** can unlock capacity without adding headcount. If your analysis shows that a skilled employee is spending significant time on tasks below their capability, redistributing that work - through delegation, automation, or reassigning responsibilities - may free up the expertise you need without a new hire.
*   **Flexible resourcing** suits many small businesses better than permanent recruitment. Contractors, freelancers, and part-time staff can provide specialist skills for defined periods without long-term salary commitments. This approach works particularly well for project-based needs, seasonal demand, or skills you'll need intensively for a few months but not permanently.
*   **Recruitment** remains the right answer when you need a permanent increase in capacity or a skill set that doesn't exist in your current team and can't be feasibly developed. But [when you do recruit](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/how-to-employ-someone), a workforce plan means you're hiring with clear purpose, defined requirements, and realistic timelines - not scrambling to fill a gap you didn't see coming. The [average cost of hiring an employee in the UK is £6,125](https://standout-cv.com/stats/recruitment-statistics-uk) \[9\], making each recruitment decision one worth getting right.

### Comparing your options

| Approach | Typical cost | Best suited to |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Upskilling existing staff | Low-medium (training fees, protected learning time) | Filling emerging skill gaps; building resilience; retaining institutional knowledge |
| Restructuring roles | Low (management time to redesign and communicate) | Freeing up skilled capacity; correcting role drift; improving efficiency |
| Flexible resourcing (contractors, freelancers, part-time) | Medium (day rates or hourly fees; no long-term commitment) | Project-based needs; seasonal demand; specialist skills needed temporarily |
| Permanent recruitment | High (avg. £6,125 per hire [9], plus onboarding and ramp-up time) | Sustained capacity increase; roles central to long-term strategy |

The right option depends on the nature of the gap, your budget, and how quickly the need will materialise. In many cases, a combination of approaches works best - for example, upskilling a current team member whilst engaging a contractor to bridge the gap during their training period.

## Common mistakes to avoid

*   **Hiring for today's crisis, not tomorrow's needs.** Reactive hiring solves the immediate problem but often creates a new one - a role that doesn't evolve with the business, or a hire who's perfect for last month's challenge but wrong for next quarter's. Workforce planning shifts your focus from "who do we need right now?" to "who do we need right now _and_ six months from now?"
*   **Ignoring** [**retention**](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/employee-retention-strategies) **as part of the plan.** The CIPD reports that 35% of employees leave their employer every year on average \[9\]. If you're only planning for growth without accounting for attrition, your workforce plan will always be playing catch-up. Factor in realistic turnover rates, identify flight risks, and invest in keeping the people whose departure would hurt most - through [development opportunities](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/best-practices-for-effective-employee-development), [flexible working](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/flexible-working-rules-are-employers-up-to-speed), competitive pay, and [genuine engagement](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/employee-engagement-strategies).
*   **Treating workforce planning as a one-off.** A plan written in January and never revisited is barely better than no plan at all. Business conditions shift, people's circumstances change, and new opportunities emerge. Review your workforce plan quarterly at minimum, and update it whenever a significant change occurs - a resignation, a new client, a shift in strategy.
*   **Overlooking succession risk.** In a small business, key-person dependency is one of the biggest operational risks you face. If your top salesperson, lead developer, or only qualified technician left tomorrow, how long would it take to recover? Workforce planning should identify these vulnerabilities and put mitigation in place - whether that's cross-training, documentation, or developing internal candidates.

## Getting started

The gap between having no workforce plan and having a basic one is small in effort but significant in impact. You don't need a complex framework. Start with three steps: document what you have, define what you'll need, and decide how you'll bridge the gap. Write it down, even if it's a single page. Review it regularly.

In a market where skills shortages affect the majority of UK employers and hiring mistakes cost far more than most businesses realise, the businesses that plan their workforce deliberately will be the ones best positioned to grow sustainably, retain their best people, and weather the disruptions ahead.

_This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information is accurate at the time of writing but may be subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified professional._

\[1\] Recruitment and Employment Confederation (REC), _Perfect Match: Making the right hire and the cost of getting it wrong_.

\[2\] Indeed Hiring Lab, _2026 UK Jobs & Hiring Trends Report_, December 2025.

\[3\] Robert Walters, _UK Salary Survey_, 2025.

\[4\] The Open University, _Business Barometer_, 2022.

\[5\] The Open University, _Business Barometer_, 2024.

\[6\] ONS, _Vacancies and Jobs in the UK_, February 2026.

\[7\] New Economics Foundation, _Employer Investment in Skills_, 2023.

\[8\] DUA, _How Labour Market Trends Are Affecting Hiring, Pay and Strategy_, February 2026.

\[9\] StandOut CV, _UK Recruitment Statistics_, 2026.

shutterstock_1517113610 (1).jpg

Workforce planning basics: How to build the right team at the right time

Coming into force on 6 April 2026, changes to SSP will likely affect every employer in the UK, but the impact will be felt most acutely by small and medium-sized businesses, particularly those employing part-time, low-paid, or casual workers.

## What are the changes to SSP?

| Rule | Before 6 April 2026 | From 6 April 2026 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Waiting days | First 3 days unpaid | No waiting days – SSP from day 1 |
| Lower Earnings Limit | Must earn at least £125/week | No earnings threshold – all workers eligible |
| Payment rate | Flat rate: £118.75/week | Lower of 80% average weekly earnings or £123.25 flat rate |
| Phased returns | SSP not payable on partial-work days | SSP payable on absent days during phased return |

<br>

### 1. SSP will become a ‘day one’ entitlement

From 6 April 2026, the waiting period will be removed and SSP will be payable from the first qualifying day of sickness absence.

For employers, this means:

- any qualifying sickness absence will trigger an SSP payment immediately
- short absences that previously did not attract SSP will now result in a payment
- absence reporting procedures may need tightening to ensure sickness is recorded promptly.

### 2. The Lower Earnings Limit will be removed

The earnings threshold that was previously used to assess if an employee qualified for SSP will be removed, meaning all eligible employees will be entitled to SSP regardless of income.

This change will extend coverage to many workers who were previously excluded, including part-time staff, lower-paid employees and some casual or variable-hours workers.

Estimates suggest around 1.3 million additional workers may become eligible for SSP because of this change [1].

### 3. A revised SSP calculation

SSP will be paid at the lower of:

- 80% of the employee’s average weekly earnings, or
- the statutory weekly rate, which will rise to £123.25 per week for the 2026/27 tax year.

This is a shift from the flat-rate system and is intended to ensure sick pay better reflects an employee’s actual income while still capping employer liability.

### 4. Phased returns to work

This is a change that many employers may not have considered. Under current rules, SSP only becomes payable from the fourth consecutive day of sickness absence - the first three days are unpaid waiting days. In practice, this means that employees on a phased return will often not qualify for SSP on their days off, because the pattern of part-time attendance typically breaks the run of consecutive sick days needed to maintain entitlement.

From April 2026, this changes. Because waiting days are removed and incapacity is assessed on a day-by-day basis, SSP will be payable for each day an employee is absent due to sickness during a phased return - even if they are attending work on other days. For example, an employee who normally works five days a week but returns on three days a week following a period of illness would be entitled to SSP for the two days they are not yet able to attend.

### 5. Transitional protections for ongoing absences

Employees who were already receiving SSP before 6 April 2026 and who would receive a lower amount under the new rules (because 80% of their average weekly earnings is less than the previous flat rate) will be protected by transitional arrangements. 

These employees will continue to receive the updated flat rate of £123.25 until:

- they either return to work; or
- they exhaust their 28-week SSP entitlement; or
- their contract ends; or
- they begin receiving statutory maternity pay or maternity allowance.

Employees who are currently serving their waiting days on 6 April will become entitled to SSP from that date. Employees earning below the current LEL who are off sick on or after 6 April will become eligible for SSP under the new rules.

### 6. Fair Work Agency enforcement

April 2026 also sees the establishment of the [Fair Work Agency](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/the-fair-work-agency) (FWA), a new enforcement body created under the Employment Rights Act 2025. Once operational, the FWA will have powers to enforce SSP payments - meaning non-compliance will carry greater risk than it does today.

Employers should ensure that their payroll processes are accurate and that SSP is being paid correctly and promptly.

## What does this mean for employers?

While the policy intention is to improve financial security for workers, employers should be aware of several practical implications.

### Increased SSP costs

Two aspects of the reform may increase employer costs.

- Paying SSP from day one rather than day four.
- More employees becoming eligible for SSP due to the removal of the earnings threshold.

Employers should assess the financial impact of these changes. The government estimates the reforms will cost employers approximately £450 million annually - around £15 per employee [1].

### Policy and payroll updates

Employers should review their existing documentation and systems to ensure they reflect the new rules. In particular:

- [employee handbook](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/news/drafting-an-employee-handbook-what-employers-need-to-know) and sickness absence policies referencing waiting days may need updating.
- employment contracts should be reviewed for outdated SSP wording
- payroll systems will need to calculate SSP under the new rules.

### Absence reporting procedures

Employers should consider their approach to short-term absence management. Without the deterrent of unpaid waiting days, they may wish to strengthen their absence management procedures or consider an [Employee Assistance Programme](https://www.natwestmentor.co.uk/employee-assistance-programme/?campaign=cm8911b5k000108joeh800swe) (EAP).

Training line managers on the updated rules, especially around phased returns and what triggers SSP entitlement, is also recommended.

## Final thoughts

The April 2026 SSP reforms represent one of the most significant changes to the UK sick pay framework in decades. By introducing day-one entitlement and expanding eligibility, the government aims to provide greater financial security for workers when they are unwell.

For employers, however, the reforms also mean higher compliance requirements, potential cost increases, and the need to update policies and payroll processes.

Preparing now will help ensure businesses remain compliant while continuing to manage absence effectively.

## Frequently Asked Questions

### Do the new SSP rules apply to all employers, regardless of size?

Yes. The changes apply to all UK employers. However, the impact will be felt most by small and medium-sized businesses, particularly those with part-time, low-paid, or variable-hours staff.

### How do I calculate 80% of an employee’s average weekly earnings?

Average weekly earnings (AWE) are typically calculated using the employee’s earnings in the eight weeks prior to the first day of sickness. Your payroll software should be updated to handle this automatically - if you’re unsure, speak to your payroll provider or take specialist advice.

### What if an employee earns more than £123.25 per week - does the flat rate still apply?

Yes. SSP from 6 April is always paid at the lower of 80% of AWE or £123.25 per week. So higher earners will receive the flat rate, while lower earners receive the earnings-based amount.

### Will I need to update employment contracts?

Any contracts referencing waiting days or the Lower Earnings Limit should be reviewed and updated to reflect the new rules.

### What happens if an employee is already off sick when the changes come into force?

Transitional protections apply - covered in detail in section 5 above. 

### Will employees have to prove their sickness if SSP is now due from day one?

The rules around self-certification for the first week of sickness absence remain the same. The only change is that SSP is now payable from day one.

### In respect of the SSP change, does the employee still have to be off for the 4 days to be eligible for SSP payment from day one?**

No, the waiting days will not apply anymore. Eligibility will be from day one of sickness absence even if the absence lasts for less than 4 days.

### What is the Fair Work Agency and should I be concerned?

The Fair Work Agency (FWA) is a new enforcement body with powers to pursue SSP non-compliance. Its creation signals that the government intends to take enforcement more seriously - so accurate payroll records and prompt SSP payments will be essential going forward.

### Can an employer insist an employee provide a fit note from a doctor when they are claiming SSP?

No, an employee can self-certify for the first 7 calendar days of sickness. Thereafter a fit note is required if the employee remains unwell. 
<br>

_This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information is accurate at the time of writing but may be subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified professional._

[1] UK Government, Employment Rights Act 2025 Economic Analysis, January 2026. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/695d3ebfbd1c076f787e7399/employment-rights-act-2025-economic-analysis.pdf


The latest industry news