News 📰
Government launches four consultations on Employment Rights Bill reforms
The Government has launched four consultations in relation to four new rights and protections that may be introduced by the Employment Rights Bill. The consultation seeks view on the following areas:
- Implementation of the new right for trade unions to access workplace
Under the bill, this proposal aims to give trade unions the right to access work places to 'meet, support, represent, recruit, or organise workers, or to facilitate collective bargaining'.
The accompanying consultation invites views on the practical implementation of these rights, including the procedures that unions must follow to request access and the obligations placed on employers to respond. The Central Arbitration Committee (CAC) will be tasked with assessing various factors to determine whether access should be granted, the conditions under which it may occur, and the appropriate level of financial penalties for breaches of access agreements.
This consultation closes on 18 December 2025.
- New duty on employers to inform workers of their right to join a trade union
The proposed Employment Rights Bill introduces a new obligation for employers to provide workers with a written statement informing them of their right to join a trade union. This statement must be issued at the commencement of employment and at other designated intervals.
The government’s consultation seeks feedback on the appropriate format and content of this statement, as well as the frequency with which it should be reissued throughout the employment relationship.
This consultation also closes on 18 December 2025.
- The enhanced protection from dismissal for pregnant workers and new mothers
The proposed legislation introduces enhanced protections against dismissal for pregnant employees, those on maternity leave, and new mothers returning to work. Under these measures, it would be unlawful to dismiss individuals in these categories for a period of at least six months following their return to work, except in defined circumstances.
The consultation invites views on whether the existing potentially fair grounds for dismissal - namely conduct, capability, redundancy, statutory restriction, and “some other substantial reason” - should continue to apply to pregnant women and new mothers in their current form, or whether modifications are needed to reflect their protected status.
This consultation closes on 15 January 2026.
- The new 'day one' right to bereavement leave
The Employment Rights Bill proposes a new ‘day one’ entitlement to unpaid bereavement leave for employees who experience the loss of a loved one, including pregnancy loss prior to 24 weeks.
The associated consultation seeks input on key aspects of the policy, such as eligibility criteria, the timing and duration of bereavement leave, and procedural matters including notice requirements and the type of evidence that may be required to support a leave request.
This consultation also closes on 15 January 2026.
Calls for evidence on unpaid internship ends
The Department for Business and Trade recently concluded a call for evidence concerning unpaid internships, volunteering, and other forms of work experience, with a particular emphasis on how these arrangements interact with National Minimum Wage (NMW) legislation.
The government has reaffirmed its commitment to prohibiting unpaid internships, except where they are part of a recognised educational or training programme. The overarching aim is to eliminate exploitative practices and ensure fair treatment for individuals undertaking work experience.
This call for evidence officially closed on 9 October 2025, and responses will inform future policy and potential legislative reform. The government's official response is expected in early 2026.
NDA changes now in force (from Oct 1, 2025)
As of 1 October 2025, amendments to the Victims and Courts Bill have come into force, making it unequivocally clear that non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) cannot be enforced in a way that prevents victims or direct witnesses of crime from reporting criminal conduct to the police or speaking openly about their experiences.
The reforms ensure that NDAs can no longer be used to silence individuals or conceal criminal behaviour. Victims are now legally protected when disclosing information to any person, for any purpose, including to family, friends, employers, journalists, and support services (without fear of breaching confidentiality clauses).
Action for Employers: Employers should urgently review existing NDAs, particularly those embedded in settlement agreements or employment contracts, to ensure they comply with the new legal framework. It is also advisable to update internal policies.
Case Law Update 📢
AB v Grafters Group Ltd (t/a CSI Catering Services International) [2025] EAT 126
To establish vicarious liability for an employer in cases involving wrongful acts by employees, those acts must have occurred "in the course of employment." In this case, the claimant alleged that she was sexually harassed by a colleague during a car journey to work.
The Employment Tribunal initially accepted that harassment had taken place but concluded that the employer was not vicariously liable. It reasoned that the incident occurred outside working hours, away from the workplace, and the lift was not arranged or endorsed by the employer, therefore, the respondent’s actions were not considered to be within the scope of his employment.
The claimant appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT), which overturned the original decision. The EAT held that the phrase "in the course of employment" should be interpreted broadly. It found that the journey to work, although informal, could still be sufficiently connected to the employment relationship to establish liability.
This case highlights that employer responsibility for harassment may extend beyond conventional work settings and formal arrangements. It underscores the importance of employers implementing robust sexual harassment policies and providing comprehensive training to staff to try to prevent and address such conduct effectively. We would also recommend that employers undertake (and keep under review) a bespoke sexual harassment risk assessment.
Since October 2024, employers have been under a duty to take reasonable steps to stamp out sexual harassment in the workplace. We are still seeing lots of employers without any policies/training arrangements/risk assessments. When the new Bill is enacted, it is expected that the duty will be extended so that employers must take all reasonable steps to stamp out sexual harassment. That one small word – all – is going to make a big difference and employers need to get on top of this duty sooner rather than later. If they don’t then they face the risk of having increased numbers of tribunal claims being made against them, the possibility of a tribunal judgment being published that confirms that they discriminated against an employee for failure to comply with their duty (with corresponding reputational damage), and financial consequences in terms of having to pay increased compensation awards and associated legal fees.
Leicester City Council v Parmar [2025] EWCA Civ 952
The Court of Appeal (CA) affirmed the findings of both the Employment Tribunal and the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) that the claimant, Mrs Parmar, had been directly discriminated against on the basis of race.
Mrs Parmar, a British citizen of Indian heritage, had worked for Leicester City Council for over three decades. She alleged that her manager had demonstrated a pattern of discriminatory conduct towards Asian employees, including subjecting her to disciplinary proceedings that were not applied to white colleagues in comparable circumstances. Her employment was terminated in April 2022.
The Employment Tribunal concluded that the Council had failed to provide credible evidence to support the allegations against Mrs Parmar and had not offered any legitimate, non-discriminatory justification for her treatment. It also identified a broader pattern of disproportionate disciplinary action against Asian staff. These findings were upheld by the EAT and CA.
This case serves as a reminder to employers of the critical importance of applying disciplinary procedures fairly and consistently across all employees. Disparities in treatment can give rise to inferences of unlawful discrimination, exposing organisations to significant legal risk and reputational damage.