by Stephen Simpson, Brightmine Principle editor – Employment Law and Compliance
The progress of the Employment Rights Bill through Parliament has stalled, as it continues to flit between the House of Lords and the House of Commons before it receives Royal Assent and becomes an Act of Parliament.
Parliamentary “ping-pong” delays Royal Assent
More than a year since it was first introduced in Parliament, the Employment Rights Bill has still not completed its 12th and final parliamentary stage: Royal Assent. This is where the Bill finally becomes an Act of Parliament.
A year is an unusually long time for a Bill to become an Act of Parliament, reflecting the scope and complexity – and the controversial nature – of elements of the legislation.
The penultimate “consideration of amendments” stage has been particularly tortuous, as the Bill has entered what is known as Parliamentary “ping-pong”.
“Ping-pong” is the process whereby a Bill goes back and forth between the House of Lords and the House of Commons, to iron out any remaining points of disagreement between the Houses.
“The Employment Rights Bill represents the most significant overhaul of UK employment law in decades, with significant implications for HR. The reforms aim to create fairer, more secure workplaces, but they also introduce compliance complexity and cost pressures, particularly for organisations that have historically operated at the statutory minimum. HR teams will need to rewrite policies, ensure managers are trained, and reconfigure payroll systems and budgets. Preparing now is essential to avoid disruption and ensure a smooth transition.”
– Victoria Burrow, Brightmine HR & Compliance Centre Head of Content
What are the sticking points?
On 17 November 2025, the Employment Rights Bill was back in the House of Lords during the “consideration of amendments” stage. The House of Lords rejected key elements of the Bill, which must now go back to the House of Commons as Parliamentary ping-pong continues.
The scrapping of the qualifying period for unfair dismissal, introduction of the right to guaranteed hours for zero and low hours workers, and removal of the 50% turnout threshold for industrial action ballots have proven to be the three most divisive issues during the ping-pong between the House of Lords and the House of Commons.
Removal of qualifying period for unfair dismissal
The Government proposed the removal of the two-year qualifying service period for claiming unfair dismissal and the introduction of an “initial period of employment” (often referred to as the “statutory probation period”).
During this initial period of employment, there would be “a lighter-touch process for employers to follow to dismiss an employee who is not right for the job”.
In other words, protection against unfair dismissal would become a day-one right but employers would be allowed to follow a less onerous procedure to dismiss an employee during this statutory probation period.
However, the House of Lords’ counter-proposal was a reduction in the qualifying service period to claim unfair dismissal from two years to six months.
(According to Brightmine’s Probationary period research 2025, most employers – six in 10 – use a six-month probationary period.)
“The new duty to take all reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment raises the bar from the previous standard, which was introduced only very recently – the duty on employers to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment. Many employers have to date managed to take only one or two steps to prevent sexual harassment due to other competing demands. It will be interesting to see how much room the Government gives employers to interpret what ‘all reasonable steps’ will look like in their context, given the diverse industries and employer sizes where risk and operational capacity vary widely.”
– Bar Huberman, Brightmine, HR & Compliance Centre Content Manager
Introduction of right to guaranteed hours for zero and low hours workers
The Government proposed that workers on zero hours contracts, or contracts providing for a low number of guaranteed hours, be given the right to receive an offer to move to a guaranteed hours contract that reflects the hours they have regularly worked over a particular reference period.
However, the House of Lords’ counter-proposal was that, instead of being required to offer guaranteed hours after the reference period, employers would have to notify workers of their right to receive that offer.
Under the House of Lords proposal:
- if the worker does not respond or asks for the offer to be made, only then would the employer have to make the offer of guaranteed hours; and
- the worker could ask at any time not to receive any future notices.
“There are provisions in the Employment Rights Bill to enable the Government to introduce legislation that requires large employers to develop and publish an ‘equality action plan’ showing the steps that they are taking to advance equality of opportunity between men and women. That includes requiring employers to set out how they are addressing the gender pay gap and supporting employees going through the menopause. In theory, that sounds great. However, as always with gender pay gap reporting, the problems will be enforcement and whether employers are implementing anything in practice that will improve gender pay disparities.”
– Stephen Simpson, Brightmine HR & Compliance Centre Principal Editor
Removal of 50% turnout threshold for industrial action ballots
Among the raft of reforms to industrial relations law, the Government proposed the removal of the 50% turnout threshold of union members for industrial action ballots to be valid.
However, the House of Lords’ counter-proposal was that this 50% turnout threshold for industrial action would be maintained.
What happens next?
House of Lords continues to frustrate House of Commons
Although it is rare, it is possible for the House of Lords to continue to reject elements of a Bill, leading to a stalemate. Normally, both the House of Lords and the House of Commons must agree on the wording before a Bill can receive Royal Assent and become an Act of Parliament.
There is a convention that the House of Lords will eventually yield to the House of Commons, since the Commons represents the democratically elected Government. The Government could compromise and agree to the Lords’ suggested amendments, although this seems unlikely because the Employment Rights Bill is a flagship piece of legislation and the removal of the qualifying period for unfair dismissal was a manifesto pledge.
There is an infrequently invoked mechanism in the Parliament Act 1911 that would allow the House of Commons to pass the Bill despite the Lords’ objections. However, invoking the Parliament Act 1911 would further delay the progress of the legislation.
Government consultations well underway
It is estimated that the Employment Rights Bill will introduce more than 30 major employment law changes.
Even after the Bill receives Royal Assent, many of these measures will need public consultation followed by secondary legislation to flesh out the details.
The Government has previously consulted on proposals to:
- strengthen statutory sick pay;
- strengthen remedies against abuse of rules on collective redundancy and fire and rehire;
- apply the zero and low hours workers measures to agency workers; and
- create a modern framework for industrial relations.
These four consultations opened on 21 October 2024 and closed in early December 2024.
“The Employment Rights Bill is described by the Government as both ‘pro-business’ and ‘pro-worker’. It will be interesting to see if, and how, that balance is struck as the reforms unfold. I’m particularly intrigued about how dismissals during an ‘initial period of employment’ will operate in the context of the removal of the two-year qualifying period for unfair dismissal in 2027. Could this ‘lighter touch’ process introduce a raft of complexities for employers to the dismissal process?”
– Laura Merrylees, Brightmine, HR & Compliance Centre Senior Legal Editor
On 23 October 2025, the Government opened four consultations covering proposals for:
- a new right of union access to the workplace (closes on 18 December 2025);
- a new duty to inform workers of their right to join a trade union (closes on 18 December 2025);
- enhanced dismissal protections for pregnant women and new mothers (closes on 15 January 2026); and
- the introduction of statutory bereavement leave, including for pregnancy loss (closes on 15 January 2026).
Timetable for implementation of individual measures
Since the latest ping-pong stage (on 17 November 2025), the Government has not updated its roadmap timetable (originally published on 1 July 2025), which set out its approach to the implementation of individual measures in the Bill.
In the roadmap, the Government stated that the changes will take effect in phases, with common commencement dates of 6 April and 1 October. This means that the major changes are still expected to take effect on 6 April 2026.
“The introduction of a lighter-touch dismissal procedure during probation brings back memories of the statutory dismissal procedure that was rightly abolished in 2009 and the compliance challenge that this created for employers. With an already overburdened tribunal system, and the Employment Rights Bill introducing several new causes of action, it will be interesting to see how tribunals will cope and what changes will be needed to ensure that they can operate effectively.”
– Zeba Sayed, Brightmine HR & Compliance Centre Senior Legal Editor
While the Government appears to want to stick to its original timetable, time is running out in 2025 for the Employment Rights Bill to receive Royal Assent. Parliament is in recess after 18 December 2025 and does not return until 5 January 2026.
The Government roadmap sets out the following implementation schedule – more details on each of the proposals are available in Brightmine HR & Compliance Centre’s own legal timetable.
“The Employment Rights Bill is more than just a new law; it marks a big change in how we think about work. What stands out to me about this Bill is how the psychological contract between employers and employees is being reshaped to include more fairness, certainty and trust. The Bill is responding to recent changes in society, like how people’s expectations have shifted after the pandemic, younger generations’ different views on work and the growing dislike for insecure jobs. The law may change overnight, but workplace culture takes longer to catch up, especially in sectors where unpredictability has been normalised. This Bill will be a test not only of whether organisations follow the law, but also of their values.”
– Lilia Dangi, Brightmine, HR & Compliance Centre Legal Editor
You may also be interested in…
About the author
Stephen Simpson
Principal editor – Employment Law and Compliance, Brightmine
Stephen is a principal editor who has worked on the Brightmine employment law and leading practice resources for over 20 years. After growing up in Northern Ireland in the 1980s, he trained as a solicitor in England in the 1990s but soon moved into legal publishing. He was among the first recruits to Brightmine in the year before it was launched as XpertHR in 2002.
Stephen has worked on a wide range of employment law and leading practice resources, including overseeing the creation and expansion of the HR templates resource types (Policies and procedures, Letters and forms, and Contract clauses). He has written up over 1,000 reports on employment law cases and created practical guidance on a range of HR issues for the Commentary & insights tool. He also had a stint working on Personnel Today.
Connect with Stephen on LinkedIn.
Start your free trial today
Register today to gain free 7-day access to the Brightmine HR & Compliance Centre and stay up to date, compliant and save valuable time