FAQs - September 2026

Last reviewed: 15.09.2026

  1. What changes has Acas proposed making to its Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures?

  2. Will the new trade union right of access apply to all employers? 

  3. Can a training cost clawback clause be an unreasonable restraint of trade?

  4. Is the Government still planning to consult on changes to employment status?

  5. What did the Supreme Court conclude as regards part-time discrimination in Augustine v Data Cars Limited?

Q&As

1. What changes has Acas proposed making to its Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures?

As flagged in question 2 of our HR and Employment Law FAQs August 2026, a consultation is currently underway on a new draft Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures (the “revised Code”), which Acas published in July. Our Policy Team is preparing a response to this consultation – which will close on 23 September 2026 – and is keen to hear your views on the proposals. If you would like to contribute, please email our Policy Team. 

The existing Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures (which was last fully revised in 2009) is a statutory code setting out the minimum steps and standards that should be followed in respect of disciplinary and grievance matters at work. The Code must be taken into account if a case to which it is relevant reaches an employment tribunal, and tribunals may adjust any awards made in relevant cases by up to 25% for unreasonable failure to comply with any provision of the Code.

At the outset, it is worth noting that the revised Code doesn’t refer to the significant changes to the unfair dismissal regime under the Employment Rights Act 2025 and the greater role probationary periods will play. Nor does it address the increasing use of artificial intelligence, particularly in relation to employee grievances. Make UK will raise both of these matters in its response to the consultation. 

It will take time for Acas to finalise the revised Code following the consultation. At this stage, though, there are some interesting points for employers to note about the proposals. In particular, the revised Code:

  • indicates there will be much more focus on informal resolution of workplace disputes (in relation to both disciplinary and grievance issues). It makes clear that efforts should be made to resolve concerns informally at an early stage, before moving to formal action. That said, it acknowledges that an informal approach will not be appropriate in every situation;
     
  • states that if a worker asks to be accompanied at an informal meeting, or an investigation meeting, where the statutory right does not apply, it is good practice for the employer to consider this, taking into account that allowing the companion could help resolve the issue;
     
  • proposes replacing the term “employee” with “worker” in most instances, so that the Code would apply more broadly in the workplace, although the 25% tribunal award adjustment would still only apply to employees and workers would remain unable to bring claims like unfair dismissal requiring employee status based on failures to follow the Code; and
     
  • includes a new section on suspensions, which makes clear that suspension during disciplinary investigations should only be used if it is “necessary” (and provides guidance on how this would be assessed). 

Acas also intends to review and update its non-statutory guidance on disciplinary and grievance procedures. 

If you are a Make UK subscriber, you can speak to your regular adviser for further guidance on disciplinary and grievance related issues and/or access further information in our Employment Law & HR Resources.

If you are not a Make UK subscriber, you can contact us for further support on this topic or to access our resources. Please click here for information on how we can help your business. 

2. Will the new trade union right of access apply to all employers?

The new statutory right under the Employment Rights Act 2025 for certified independent trade unions to access workplaces will apply only to employers with a company-wide headcount of 21 or more workers (i.e. those with fewer than 21 workers will be exempt). This threshold mirrors that used in the statutory union recognition scheme. 

For further details, see our recent article on key points employers need to know about trade union access rights.

We are offering courses for both non-unionised employers and unionised employers, covering the new right of union access and wider employee relations issues (see Prepare your business for new trade union access rights for further details).

Note that the new union right of access forms just one element of the reforms under the Employment Rights Act; to read about other changes, see our Employment Rights Act Knowledge Base. 

We will be exploring all the key changes under the Employment Rights Act at our Autumn Employment Law Updates. To book your place, click here. You can also click here for information on how we can help your business.

3. Can a training cost clawback clause be an unreasonable restraint of trade?

Yes, this point was explored recently by the Court of Appeal in the case of Geeks v Watts. Mr Watts joined Geeks as a trainee engineer on a starting salary of £18,000 per year. His training contract required him to repay £8,108 of training costs if his employment ended for any reason other than redundancy (with the debt reducing on a monthly basis after he had been employed for one year). Mr Watts resigned after eight months, and Geeks claimed for the full amount of the training costs. 

We will explore the decision the Court of Appeal reached in this case as part of our Autumn Employment Law Updates. To book your place, click here.

4. Is the Government still planning to consult on changes to employment status?

We understand that the Government is still intending to consult on proposed changes to the rules around employment status. In Next Steps to Make Work Pay, published in 2024, the Government stated that it intended to consult on moving towards a single status of “worker” (i.e. a simpler framework that differentiates between only “workers” and the genuinely “self-employed”, merging the current classifications of “worker” and “employee”). However, given that we don't currently have any timetable for the consultation, and that any reforms in this area would constitute a fundamental change to the employment law and tax landscape, it seems likely that any changes would take years to implement in practice. 

If you are a Make UK subscriber, you can speak to your regular adviser for further guidance about employment status and access information in our Employment Law & HR Resources.

If you are not a Make UK subscriber, see here for more information on our subscription, consultancy and training services. 

5. What did the Supreme Court conclude as regards part-time discrimination in Augustine v Data Cars Limited?

In Augustine v Data Cars Limited, the Supreme Court confirmed that a worker can claim discrimination on the grounds of their part-time worker status if being part-time is an effective reason for the less favourable treatment; it does not have to be the only reason.

In this case, the worker was a part-time taxi driver. All taxi drivers had to pay a fixed fee to access the employer’s booking system, regardless of whether they worked full or part-time hours. The worker claimed that the fixed fee was less favourable treatment as it effectively meant that he paid a higher fee per hour than a full-time worker.

Previous case law had been divided as to whether, to establish part-time worker discrimination, the worker’s part-time status had to be the sole cause of the less favourable treatment or whether a broader approach should apply. The Supreme Court has now clarified matters with its decision that part-time worker status need only be an effective cause of the treatment. This means that it does not matter if other reasons also played a part in the less favourable treatment (in this case, for example, the employer’s need to make money from the arrangement).

In the light of this case, employers should consider whether apparently neutral arrangements (such as fixed charges) place part-time workers at a disadvantage compared with comparable full-time workers. 

If you are a Make UK subscriber, you can speak to your regular adviser for further guidance on discrimination related issues and/or access further information in our Employment Law & HR Resources.

If you are not a Make UK subscriber, you can contact us for further support on this topic or to access our resources. Please click here for information on how we can help your business.