This week, Sam provides an overview of the Employment Rights Act, including the Government’s recent changes to the proposed timeline. From updates coming into effect this April through to January 2027, we break down what’s changing and when - so you know exactly what to expect and how to prepare.

Key Changes:

6th April 2026

• Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) -Removal of Lower Earning Limit and the 3 unpaid ‘waiting days’, SSP paid from day one.
• Paternity & Parental Leave - Paternity leave and unpaid parental leave becomes a day one right.
• Collective Redundancies - Maximum protective award increasing from 90 to 180 days’ pay per affected employee.
• Bereaved Partners’ Paternity Leave - (non-MWP measure) will enable bereaved fathers and partners to take up to 52 weeks of paternity leave if the mother or primary adopter dies within the first year of the child’s life.

October 2026

• Preventing Sexual Harassment - Employers must take all reasonable steps to prevent harassment (not just ‘reasonable’).
• Third-Party Harassment - Employers will be liable for harassment by third parties unless they can show they took reasonable steps to prevent it.
• Tribunal Time Limits - The time limit for bringing Employment Tribunal claims will double from 3 months to 6 months.

January 2027

• Unfair Dismissal Rights - Amendment of the qualifying period from 2 years to 6 months and the compensation cap will be removed.
• Fire & Rehire - Dismissal automatically unfair where linked to restricted variations (e.g. pay/hours/pensions).
• Action Plans of Gender Equality.
• Enhanced dismissal protection for pregnant workers.
• Further regulation of umbrella companies.
• Collective redundancy change in the collective consultation threshold.
• Further guidance on flexible working.
• Right to guaranteed hours.

Seminars & Events:

https://www.chadwicklawrence.co.uk/seminars/business-services-seminars/

Contact Us:

BoxHR@chadlaw.co.uk

SamPawson@chadlaw.co.uk

NilsODonoghue@chadlaw.co.uk

LinkedIn: ⁠⁠⁠www.linkedin.com/company/employment-law-chadwick-lawrence-llp/

Chapters:

(⁠⁠00:00⁠⁠) Introduction

(⁠⁠01:17) April 2026 Changes

(⁠⁠02:07) October 2026 Changes

(⁠⁠03:10) January 2027 Changes

In this episode, Nils explains the role of the defence case statement in criminal litigation, outlining its key purpose and why precision in drafting is so important. Sam explores a recent Employment Tribunal decision involving direct discrimination against male police officers, and discusses how organisations can promote inclusion through positive action without creating legal risk.

Key Takeaways:

• The defence case statement in criminal litigation outlines the defendant's strategy and requests for evidence.
• A well-measured defence is more effective than a broad one.
• Recent ET case found male officers were unlawfully discriminated against when removed to rebalance gender representation.
• Good intentions around diversity do not justify decisions based on protected characteristics.
• Risk that employers may retreat from EDI due to fear of claims, as employee rights awareness increases.
• EDI policies remain important and can evidence reasonable steps to prevent discrimination.
• Employers should avoid positive discrimination, carry out impact assessments, and document objective, consistent decision-making.

Seminars & Events:

https://www.chadwicklawrence.co.uk/seminars/business-services-seminars/

Contact Us:

BoxHR@chadlaw.co.uk

SamPawson@chadlaw.co.uk

NilsODonoghue@chadlaw.co.uk

LinkedIn: ⁠⁠⁠www.linkedin.com/company/employment-law-chadwick-lawrence-llp/

Chapters:

(⁠⁠00:00⁠⁠) Introduction

(⁠⁠01:07) What's in Your Inbox?

(⁠⁠01:18) The Defence Case Statement in Criminal Litigation

(⁠⁠06:52) EDI in Practice: Promoting Inclusion Without Creating Legal Risk

(13:40) Out the Office!

Welcome back to the first episode of The Legal Alternative in 2026! Sam & Nils debate the government's decision to drop the mandatory digital ID scheme to work in the UK. They also discuss a case involving misgendering and disability discrimination, highlighting the challenges of competing characteristics.

Key Takeaways:

• The government has dropped the mandatory digital ID scheme to work in the UK.
• Digital ID was seen as a tool to deter illegal working.
• The tribunal found in favour of the claimant in the misgendering case.
• While this case does not diminish the need to protect transgender employees from harassment, it highlights the importance of employers taking a balanced, evidence-based approach to ensure their responses are both reasonable and proportionate.
• If a disability is raised as a possible explanation, it should be genuinely investigated, documented and reflected in the outcome, with appropriate use of occupational health or other external resources where appropriate.
• Less discriminatory alternatives (e.g. mediation or reasonable adjustments) should be considered before disciplinary action.

Seminars & Events:

https://www.chadwicklawrence.co.uk/seminars/business-services-seminars/

Contact Us:

BoxHR@chadlaw.co.uk

SamPawson@chadlaw.co.uk

NilsODonoghue@chadlaw.co.uk

LinkedIn: ⁠⁠⁠www.linkedin.com/company/employment-law-chadwick-lawrence-llp/

Chapters:

(⁠⁠00:00⁠⁠) Introduction

(⁠⁠00:42) What's in Your Inbox?

(⁠⁠01:10) Government Drops Plans for Mandatory Digital ID to Work in UK

(⁠⁠03:55) Employee Who Misgendered Transgender Colleague Wins Disability Claim

(12:27) Out the Office!