Share this
by Georgie Walsh on May 19, 2026
The first phase of the Employment Rights Act 2025 came into force on the 6th of April, bringing with it a set of changes many HR teams have spent the past year preparing for.
Now those employment law changes are live, the focus shifts from policy updates to day-to-day reality. How do these reforms actually play out in practice? And where are organisations most likely to feel the pressure first?
Across the UK, the employment law changes affect everything from sick pay and family leave to redundancy exposure and whistleblowing protections. While each change is manageable in isolation, together they introduce a more fundamental shift in how HR and employee relations teams need to operate - with more day-to-day HR situations having the potential to quickly become employee relations issues.
The HR press is increasingly talking about a 'fear of recruiting' and a growing reluctance to address poor performance, driven by the rising financial risks of getting things wrong. The good news is that with the right governance and case management tools in place, organisations can build back the confidence to make sound workforce decisions. That's something Workpro's HR case management software is specifically designed to support.
This article sets out exactly what changed on April 6th, what the immediate operational implications are for HR teams, and where the gaps are most likely to appear.
The UK Employment Law Changes That Came Into Force on 6 April 2026
The April 2026 changes span several areas, and while not all are headline-grabbing, each has practical implications for how HR teams manage cases, documentation, and risk. Here are five of the most notable changes.
1. Statutory Sick Pay From Day One
Two significant changes to Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) came into force simultaneously.
The three waiting days - the period at the start of a sickness absence during which SSP was not payable - have been abolished, meaning SSP is now payable from the first day of absence. At the same time, the lower earnings limit, which previously disqualified employees earning below a set threshold from SSP eligibility, has been removed. Employees earning below the limit will receive SSP at 80% of their average weekly earnings, rather than the flat rate.
In practical terms, a broader group of employees are now eligible for SSP from day one, increasing the cost of short-term absence.
For organisations that offer enhanced company sick pay (CSP), this may also create internal pressure to align policies more closely with the new statutory position. As those differences become more visible, some organisations may need to review how their sick pay policies are structured and applied, potentially increasing overall absence-related costs.
For HR teams, the more immediate impact is operational. Absence management processes (such as attendance systems) need to be robust from the outset, and informal approaches like chasing managers for updates or relying on email chains become harder to justify when entitlement begins immediately. Where processes are inconsistent or rely on manual intervention, the risk of delays or errors in applying entitlement increases - particularly as expectations around timeliness and accuracy rise.
2. Paternity Leave and Unpaid Parental Leave as Day-One Rights
Previously, employees needed 26 weeks' continuous service to qualify for statutory paternity leave, and one year's service for unpaid parental leave. Both are now day-one rights.
The practical implication is straightforward but easy to underestimate: new starters may request paternity or parental leave very early in their employment, potentially during an induction period or even a probationary review. HR teams need to be ready for that.
Policies that still reference qualifying service periods will need to be updated, but the greater challenge lies in application. Line managers must understand how to handle requests appropriately, and decisions need to be recorded in a way that reflects the new legal position.
This change also connects directly to what’s coming next. When the qualifying period for unfair dismissal reduces to six months in January 2027, decisions made during probation - including how leave is handled - will carry greater legal weight.
3. Redundancy Protective Awards Doubled
One of the more financially significant employment law changes in 2026 is the doubling of the maximum protective award for failure to comply with collective redundancy consultation obligations - from 90 to 180 days' full pay per affected employee.
For organisations that are restructuring, or considering it, this materially changes the risk calculation. Non-compliance - whether through inadequate consultation, failure to elect representatives correctly, or insufficient disclosure - now carries significantly greater potential liability. And critically, the financial exposure is per employee affected, not capped at an organisational level.
Any organisation contemplating redundancies that fall within the collective consultation threshold (20 or more employees at one establishment within 90 days) needs robust, documented processes that demonstrate how decisions were reached.
4. Whistleblowing Protections Extended to Sexual Harassment Disclosures
Sexual harassment disclosures are now explicitly recognised under whistleblowing legislation. This means that employees raising concerns about sexual harassment are entitled to the full set of whistleblowing protections, including protection from detriment and dismissal.
For HR teams, this adds a new dimension to how sexual harassment complaints are categorised and handled. What might previously have been managed as a grievance or disciplinary matter may now also engage whistleblowing obligations, and so accurate categorisation becomes critical.
So too does the ability to evidence how a case was handled and how conclusions were reached. As scrutiny increases, organisations will need to demonstrate that concerns were managed consistently and in line with the appropriate framework.
5. Holiday Pay Record-Keeping Becomes a Legal Requirement
From 6th April 2026, employers are required to create and maintain adequate records demonstrating compliance with holiday leave and pay rules. Those records must be retained for six years, and failure to comply is now a criminal offence.
This is a significant shift. Record-keeping that was previously considered ‘good practice’ is now a legal requirement with a defined retention period and a criminal sanction for non-compliance. Organisations relying on fragmented systems like spreadsheets, local records, or manual tracking will need to consider whether those approaches can produce a coherent and defensible audit trail if required.
Where The Process Gaps Are Most Likely To Appear
The employment law changes UK businesses are now operating under share a common thread: they raise expectations around documentation, consistency, and speed of response. For many HR teams, the difficulty isn’t understanding the legislation; it’s applying it consistently in the day-to-day reality of managing people.
That’s where the gaps tend to show up.
Early-stage decisions - absence, leave requests, performance concerns - are often handled quickly by line managers, with limited central oversight. Where guidance is unclear or applied differently across teams, inconsistencies can creep in.
Those inconsistencies become harder to manage when the records don’t hold together. If information is spread across inboxes, spreadsheets, or individual systems, it’s difficult to piece together what happened or to demonstrate that similar situations have been handled consistently.
Visibility plays into this, too. Without a clear view across employee relations activity, patterns are also easy to miss. Issues often only become visible once they escalate, by which point they are more complex and harder to resolve.
None of this will feel unfamiliar. These are the kinds of challenges most HR teams have always had to manage. What has changed, though, is the context around them. As expectations rise, the margin for inconsistency narrows - and the consequences of getting it wrong become much more tangible.
This Is the First Phase, Not the Last
The April 2026 changes are the beginning of a phased rollout, not the end point.
Later in 2026, extended tribunal time limits and increased third-party harassment liability come into force. In January 2027, the unfair dismissal qualifying period drops to six months and the compensation cap is removed entirely. Further changes to flexible working, zero-hours contracts, and redundancy processes are expected beyond that.
With that in mind, now is the perfect moment to get ahead. Organisations that use this window to strengthen processes, improve governance, and tighten documentation will be far better placed when the next phase arrives.
How Workpro Supports HR Teams Through These Changes
Employment law changes in 2026 require HR teams to manage cases consistently, document decisions clearly, and demonstrate compliance when required. Workpro’s HR case management software is designed to support exactly that.
Cases are captured centrally, regardless of how they come in, and managed through structured, configurable workflows that reflect your internal processes. Alerts, reminders, and task ownership ensure nothing is missed, while built-in templates and document management keep records consistent and easy to maintain.
Every action, decision, and communication is recorded within a single case record, creating a clear audit trail that stands up to scrutiny. At the same time, reporting and dashboards provide visibility across all employee relations activity, making it easier to identify patterns, monitor performance, and address issues early.
As the Employment Rights Act continues to roll out, having that level of structure and visibility in place allows HR teams to stay in control - not just of individual cases, but of risk across the wider organisation. In a more complex and higher-risk environment, that level of control also gives organisations greater confidence in how they manage absence, support line managers, and make informed workforce decisions.
