Thank you for reading HR compliance kit

^{Legislation book}^|^{HR supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

What's new in this edition?

Trade union reforms

A raft of trade union and industrial action reforms are now in force under the Employment Rights Act 2025. We summarise what’s changed and what employers need to know.

READ NOW

Fire and rehire consultations

The Government has opened consultation on proposed restrictions to “fire and rehire”. We outline what’s being considered and what to watch for next.

READ NOW

This month's case law

A Court of Appeal decision has clarified when employers may be liable for a dismissal influenced by a co-worker. We explore what it means and why it matters for you.

READ NOW

A raft of changes came into force in February 2026 which will make it significantly easier and quicker for to organise industrial Action.

Industrial Action mandates, for ballots opened from today, will also now be for 12 months (rather than six).

18 February 2026 marks the commencement of a significant package of industrial action reforms under the Employment Rights Act 2025, making it materially easier and quicker for trade unions to organise lawful industrial action.

For ballots opening from today, industrial action mandates will also extend to 12 months (up from six).

On 5 January 2026, the first set of commencement regulations were made, bringing provisions into force on 6 January, 18 February and 6 April 2026. This note summarises the key industrial action changes taking effect today. Further reforms are expected later in the year.

On 5 January 2026, the first set of commencement regulations were made, bringing provisions into force on 6 January, 18 February and 6 April 2026.

Although further reforms are expected later in the year, we've summarised the key industrial action changes taking effect today.

Expert support navigating industrial action reform

Keep compliant with fast‑moving industrial law. Moorepay’s ERA services provide real‑time guidance and advice on strikes, ballots, and employee relations risk.

FIND OUT MORE

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

Trade Union reforms

^Status:^{In effect}

Key provisions effective from 18 February 2026

1. Abolition of the 40% support threshold in certain important public services

The additional requirement for at least 40% support of those entitled to vote is repealed.

Applies to ballots opening on or after 18 February 2026
A ballot 'opens' on the first day a voting paper is sent to any person entitled to vote

2. Repeal of 2016 picketing supervision requirements

The statutory requirement to appoint a picketing supervisor (and related obligations) is removed.

Applies to picketing taking place on or after 18 February 2026
Example: where picketing runs from 17–19 February 2026, a supervisor is required on 17 February only

3. Reduced information requirements for ballot notices to employers

Ballot notices no longer need to include:

Numbers of employees in each category or at each workplace, or
Explanations of how those figures were calculated

Under the new regime, ballot notices must include only:

A list of the categories of employees being balloted

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

^Status:^{In effect}

A list of the workplaces concerned and the total number of employees involved

The requirement for the notice to be received at least seven days before the ballot opens remains unchanged.

Transitional position

The change applies to ballot notices received by the employer on or after 18 February 2026. For example:
- Ballot opens 20 February 2026 → notice must be given by 13 February → old rules apply
- Ballot opens 2 March 2026 → notice given on 23 February → new rules apply
- Ballot opens 25 February 2026 → notice given on 18 February → new rules apply
  (earlier notice would trigger the old rules)

Continue reading →

4. Reduced information on ballot voting papers

Ballot papers now need only ask members whether they support:

Strike action
Action short of a strike

There is no longer a requirement to include:

A summary of the dispute
Anticipated timing of the action
Details of the type of action short of strike.

Transitional position

Applies to ballots opening on or after 18 February 2026

Exception: where a sample ballot paper was provided to the employer before 18 February 2026, the old information requirements continue to apply to that ballot.

5. Reduced notice period for industrial action

The minimum notice period for industrial action is reduced from 14 days to 10 days, and unions are also no longer required to specify:

The number of employees in each category expected to take part in the action
Applies to industrial action notices received on or after 18 February 2026
Notices received on or before 17 February 2026 remain subject to the old rules, even if the action itself takes place later

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

^Status:^{In effect}

6. Extension of industrial action mandates to 12 months

The mandate period following a successful ballot is extended from six months to 12 months.

Applies only to ballots opening on or after 18 February 2026
Existing six-month mandates are not automatically extended; a fresh ballot would be required

7. Strengthened protection against dismissal

Protections for employees dismissed for taking part in protected industrial action are strengthened, with dismissal now treated as automatically unfair regardless of the timing of the dismissal in relation to participation in the action.

The ever-changing Employment Rights Bill has now received Royal Assent.

After clearing the House of Lords on 16 December 2025, it received Royal Assent on 18 December 2025 and became law as the Employment Rights Act 2025.

Having faced strong opposition, the Government stepped back from its original day-one unfair dismissal proposal.

Instead, the qualifying period has been set at six months, with the Government committed to introducing this from January 2027 (currently expected from 1 January 2027).

Many parts of the Act will still rely on secondary legislation. One controversial area that remains in the plan is the removal of the cap on unfair dismissal compensation.

In response to concerns, the Government has committed to publishing an impact assessment before implementing this part of the Act, so the timing of this change still carries some uncertainty.

We’ll keep this section updated as the detail develops, including any consultations, secondary legislation and confirmed commencement dates. In the meantime, it’s worth keeping an eye on what’s due to change first, and what may still shift before it’s implemented.

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

The Employment Rights Act 2025

^Status:^{In effect}

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

Early Conciliation period doubles

The maximum period for ACAS Early Conciliation is now double – it has increased from 6 weeks to 12 weeks for notifications made on or after 1 December 2025.

The maximum period for ACAS Early Conciliation has now doubled – it has increased from six weeks to 12 weeks for notifications made on or after 1 December 2025.

It's doubled due to both ACAS and the Tribunals experiencing significant workloads and back logs.

At Moorepay, we've also received several Early Conciliation matters where the respondents have been notified a day or two before the end of the six-week period, or even after the certificate had been issued.

And we're seeing preliminary hearings scheduled for February and March 2027, with some final hearings not being scheduled until 2029.

The extension is therefore designed to reduce this pressure and back log by allowing more time to resolve issues before litigation.

But views are mixed, with many saying this will just delay the inevitable and employers will have a longer period of uncertainty while anticipating a claim – potentially a period of nine months before a claim is received.

This subject is covered in more detail in our recent article.

^Status:^{In effect}

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

HR1 forms go fully digital

From 1 December 2025, employers must submit the HR1 (advance notification of redundancies) form online.

This form is required when an employer proposes to dismiss 20 or more employees within 90 days at one establishment. Online submission is now mandatory. Paper and email submissions are no longer accepted and all HR1 notifications must be completed via the GOV.UK digital portal.

Differences in the new form

No requirement to provide occupational group breakdowns.
A new redundancy reason: “Change in supply chain/loss of supply chain contract.”
Future consultation start dates cannot be entered; only current or past dates can be entered.

Practical considerations

No autosave: the form times out after 90 minutes, so employers need to gather all information before starting the process.
No retrieval: once submitted, the form cannot be retrieved – so employers should print or save the summary page for their records, and so they can give them to employee representatives.

Deadlines and notifications

Deadlines remain unchanged. Notification must be at least 30 days before the first dismissal (20 – 99 redundancies), or 45 days before first dismissal (100+ redundancies).

^Status:^{In effect}

Failure to comply remains a criminal offence, carrying unlimited fines.

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

Single-sex space guidance updates

Following The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) revised interim update on the practical implications of the Supreme Court’s For Women Scotland decision, we now have our first case law on this subject.

This is an Employment Tribunal decision (not an Employment Appeal Tribunal ruling), so it isn’t legally binding. However, it offers light and additional guidance for employers who are floundering with this controversial, and still largely undefined, area.

A quick recap

The EHRC’s April 2025 update placed particular emphasis on the compulsory provision of single-sex toilets, changing and washing facilities.

This position prompted questions and legal challenges, given that the Supreme Court ruling did not directly address this issue.

In its June 2025 revision, the EHRC has removed that statement and instead restated the existing legal framework under the 1992 Health and Safety Regulations.

In summary, employers must ensure that:

"Men" and “women” have separate facilities, unless each facility is a self-contained, lockable, single-user room.

The EHRC also clarified that where lawful single-sex facilities are provided:

Trans women should not use cis women’s facilities, and trans men should not use cis

men’s facilities, as this would mean the facilities are no longer single-sex according to the ruling.

However, employers should not leave trans people without access to facilities, and are encouraged to provide mixed-sex options alongside single-sex spaces where possible. This position prompted questions and legal challenges, given that the Supreme Court ruling did not directly address this issue.

The EHRC confirmed that its updates are not formal guidance, and there remained ambiguity in its wording.

Continue reading →

^Status:^{In effect}

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

Many employers faced uncertainty: for some time, their transgender employees had been using single-sex facilities that do not align with their biological sex, without objection. The question became – does this breach the law?

The recent case of Sandie Peggie v NHS Fife offers insight into how a Tribunal might approach such situations.

Peggie raised concerns about her manager using female changing rooms. The Tribunal considered whether her concerns amounted to discrimination and misconduct, and whether the employer’s decision to allow the manager to use those facilities was unlawful.

In summary, the Tribunal concluded that the Supreme Court ruling does not mean that it is inherently unlawful for a transgender woman, who is biologically male, to be allowed to use female changing rooms at work.

However, it also found that permission for a transgender woman to use female changing rooms at work is not necessarily lawful.

Confused?

In what appears to be a common sense approach, it found that:

“it was initially lawful for NHS Fife to grant Peggie’s manager permission to use the female changing rooms. However, once Peggie had made a complaint, this permission should have been revoked on an interim basis and alternatives considered”.

So, if it isn’t broken, don’t fix it approach. This may give some reassurance to employers who have similar situations, that they do not need to act immediately and risk employee unrest – however, this position changes upon receiving a complaint. Legal advice should then be taken on the action required.

Looking ahead

Further clarification is likely through future case law, legislation or statutory guidance.

In the meantime, employers must take a careful and balanced approach, ensuring they meet legal obligations while respecting the rights, safety and dignity of all employees.

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

Neonatal Care (Leave and Pay) Act

The Neonatal Care (Leave and Pay) Act is now in effect. The act creates a statutory right for parents whose child is receiving neonatal care to take paid leave of up to 12 weeks.

This is in addition to any other parental and maternity rights to leave and pay. It applies where a baby receives neonatal care for more than 7 days in a row in the first 28 days of life.

During neonatal care leave, eligible employees will retain the benefit of their terms and conditions of employment (excluding remuneration) which would have been applied if it wasn't for the absence and remain bound by any obligations arising from the same.

They also retain the right to return to a job of a prescribed kind and enjoy the same protection as that afforded to parents exercising other family friendly entitlements (i.e. not to be subject to a detriment or discrimination arising from them taking, or seeking to take, neonatal care leave).

‘Neonatal Care’ is considered to mean medical or palliative care starting before the end of 28 days beginning the day after the date of the child’s birth.

The criteria for this right mirrors the conditions in place for other family friendly entitlements, with neonatal pay aligning with other statutory payments for employees with 26 weeks service.

Continue reading →

^Status:^{In effect}

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

The rules and notice requirements, however, have been widely criticised for being overcomplicated.

Although, it's important to note that employers and employees can agree to waive the statutory notice required.

There are two categories of statutory neonatal care leave depending on when the employee takes the leave: tier 1 period leave and tier 2 period leave.

Tier 1 period leave

Eligibility is only granted once the baby has received at least 7 consecutive days in neonatal care. This tier 1 period starts from day 8 of care and can continue for up to one week after discharge (or when neonatal care ends, if sooner).

Tier 1 leave can be taken in non-continuous blocks of a minimum of one week at a time, for up to 12 weeks.

Notice period for leave and pay

The notice period for leave must be given before an employee is due to start work on the first day of absence or if this is not possible, notice must be given as soon as reasonably practicable.

The notice period for pay must be given within 28 days from the first day of leave in which the period relates to or if this is not possible notice should be given as soon as reasonably practicable. For tier 1 leave notice does not need to be in writing.

Tier 2 period leave

This applies to leave taken after the tier 1 period ends and must be taken in one

continuous block. It ends 68 weeks after the child’s birth.

Notice period for leave and pay

For a single week of leave and pay, written notice is required at least 15 days before the first day of neonatal care leave.

For two or more weeks of leave and pay, written notice is required at least 28 days before the first day of leave in which the period it relates to.

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

Worker Protection Act

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) issued technical guidance for employers following the enactment of the Worker Protection (Amendment of Equality Act 2010) Act that came into effect on 26 October 2024.

This Act introduced a new legal duty for employers to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment of their workers, known as the ‘preventative duty’. Previously, there was no proactive legal obligation for employers to prevent sexual harassment at work.

Given the significant impact sexual harassment can have on an individual’s career, mental, and physical health, it was found that employers were not adequately addressing these concerns.

The updated law is a welcome addition in the fight against sexual harassment.

The Act also allows for increased compensation in sexual harassment claims. If an employment tribunal finds that a worker has been sexually harassed, it must consider whether the preventative duty was met. If not, the employer can be ordered to pay up to an additional 25% in compensation.

The legislation also empowers the EHRC to take enforcement action against organisations that fail to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment, regardless of whether an incident has occurred.

The law doesn't outline specific steps that employers must take, allowing for flexibility in how each organisation addresses the issue.

However, recent guidance highlights the importance of conducting a risk assessment and reinforces that all employers are obligated to take action – no organisation is exempt from this preventative duty. The new guidelines emphasise preventing sexual harassment from any perpetrator, whether a colleague or a third-party contractor.

And the responsibility on employers is going to increase. The previous legislation was “watered down” to “reasonable steps” from the initial suggestion of “all reasonable steps”. But with the Employment Rights Bill, the obligation will become a duty to take "all reasonable steps”. Regulations will specify the steps that employers should take, such as carrying out risk assessments and implementing harassment policies and complaints procedures.

Continue reading →

^Status:^{In effect}

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

The bill has also indicated that:

A complaint of sexual harassment at work will be treated as a protected disclosure under whistleblowing legislation.

This may limit the effectiveness of confidentiality provisions in settlement agreements, as it is not possible to prevent a worker from making whistleblowing disclosures.
Employers will be liable for harassment (of any kind) by third parties, such as clients or suppliers, unless they take all reasonable steps to prevent it.

Employers will need to ensure that they have measures in place, such as appropriate wording in contracts with clients and suppliers.

While not exhaustive, implementing these steps can help you take positive action:

Develop an effective anti-harassment policy and engage your staff.
Assess and mitigate risks in your workplace by conducting risk assessments.
Establish reporting mechanisms, ensuring all employees are aware of, and feel comfortable using them.
Provide regular training to all, including management training on how to deal with complaints of sexual harassment.
Respond appropriately to harassment complaints and investigate thoroughly.
Address harassment by third parties.
Monitor and evaluate your actions.

While the ERB will significantly strengthen harassment prevention by shifting the duty from "reasonable steps" to "all reasonable steps", raising the bar for employers, especially regarding third-party harassment, the act and guidance remains unchanged for now.

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

Autumn Budget 2025: what you need to know

While most of us are already familiar with the key issues, here’s a brief recap.

With employers still feeling the impact of last year’s budget, which brought a significant rise in National Insurance contributions and an increase in the National Living Wage, hitting sectors such as retail, hospitality and care the hardest, the Autumn Budget has sparked much debate.

Predictions of further redundancies, a reduction in recruitment, and consequently a further rise in economic inactivity have followed.

The Autumn Budget, announced on 26 November 2025, introduces a range of measures that will have further impact on employers.

While the government’s focus is said to be on stabilising the economy, supporting growth and “making work pay”, the changes will inevitably affect payroll budgets, benefits and workforce planning. Here's the main “highlights”.

1. Minimum Wage increases from April 2026

The National Living Wage (NLW) for workers aged 21 and over will increase from £12.21 to £12.71 per hour (4.1% increase).
18–20-year-olds: From £10.00 to £10.85 per hour (8.5% increase).
16–17-year-olds and apprentices: From £7.55 to £8.00 per hour (6.0% increase).

^Status:^Approaching

This move has been widely quoted as increasing the gross annual earnings for a full-time worker on the NLW by £900 – benefiting around 2.4 million employees.

And the increases are more significant with the National Minimum Wage (NMW) for younger workers:

18–20-year-olds: From £10.00 to £10.85 per hour (8.5% increase).
16–17-year-olds and apprentices: From £7.55 to £8.00 per hour (6.0% increase).

Side note: you can find all of the proposed statutory rate changes announced in the Budget (including Statutory Sick Pay and family leave pay) in your HR Supplies.

Continue reading →

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

Why?

This approach is intended to:

Ensure full time workers on the NLW can meet basic living costs.
Boost pay for the lowest earners.
Reduce labour turnover.
Reduce the disparity in pay for older and younger workers carrying out the same job.
Reduce the tendency for lower paid workers to rely on overtime pay – reducing the risk of burnout and improving work-life balance.

But at what cost?

Payroll costs will rise, particularly in retail, hospitality and care sectors (again).

These will include rises in holiday pay, overtime, and pension contributions.
Many employers may need to revisit pay structures and budgets, and critics are already questioning whether this could fuel more redundancies or push some SMEs to the brink.

2. Pension salary sacrifice cap

From April 2029, the NI savings on salary sacrifice pension contributions will be capped at £2,000 per employee per year. Contributions above this threshold will attract standard NI rates.

How will this affect employees and employers?

Employers offering generous pension schemes will face increased National Insurance (NI) contributions, raising overall employment costs.

With less tax benefit for making additional pension contributions, employees may choose not to contribute extra, resulting in a reduction in pension income in the future.
Employees who continue making additional contributions will see an immediate fall in disposable income.
And of course, reduced income has a knock-on effect on consumer spending and the wider economy.
Employers may need to review their benefits packages, which could mean consulting with existing employees and managing the knock-on impact.

This may increase turnover risk and reduce the appeal of salary sacrifice benefits for attracting and retaining new talent, potentially weakening competitive advantage.

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

Workplace standards for menopause

Menopause remains a critical topic. The Employment Rights Bill includes provisions to enhance workplace support for women experiencing menopause.

This may include flexible working arrangements or comfortable working environments, such as cooling systems, quiet rooms, and more flexibility in uniform requirements.

This legislation will also require larger employers (over 250 employees) to develop and publish menopause action plans and will provide guidance for smaller employers to adapt workplaces.

In the meantime, the guidance from the British Standards Institute (BSI), ‘BS 30416, Menstruation, Menstrual Health and

Menopause in the Workplace,’ remains a valuable resource for employers.

This guidance highlights the challenges, symptoms, and experiences associated with menopause and menstrual health, offering practical insights into how these can impact women in the workplace.

BS 30416 is a free, practical toolkit for businesses of all sizes and sectors. Developed by experts in the field of menstruation, menopause and occupational health and academics, it aims to help organisations identify the misconceptions around menstruation and menopause.

It also identifies the impact of stigma surrounding these topics on workplace cultures and support. The standard helps businesses to take action to make their workplace more inclusive.

It contains examples of actions and adjustments that can improve employees’ wellbeing.

Examples include:

Physical aspects of work
Policy guidance and practices
Supportive workplace cultures
Work design
Inclusivity
Evaluation and metrics

^Status:^Approaching

The Government has launched a public consultation on proposed reforms to so-called “fire and rehire” practices.

They're seeking views on new restrictions to be introduced under the Employment Rights Act 2025 (ERA).

Under the proposals, it would become automatically unfair to dismiss an employee for refusing to agree to a restricted contractual variation, unless the employer can demonstrate that the change was necessary due to serious financial difficulties threatening the viability of the business.

This represents a significant shift from the current unfair dismissal framework and is intended to curb the use of dismissal as a negotiation tactic in contractual changes.

The consultation invites feedback on:

Which contractual changes should fall within the definition of a restricted variation, including changes to pay, benefits, pensions, working hours and shift patterns
Whether reductions in pay or leave entitlement should receive enhanced protection
The scope of any exemptions where employers face genuine financial distress

Employers should be aware that, if implemented, these reforms will increase the legal risk associated with restructuring and contractual changes, placing greater emphasis on consultation, justification, and evidence of financial necessity.

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

Fire and rehire consultations

^Status:^{In progress}

Guidance through fire and rehire reform

If you’re considering restructures or contract changes in 2026, Moorepay can guide you through compliant consultation and documentation.

FIND OUT MORE

The consultation is due to close on 1 April 2026, after which draft regulations and guidance are expected.

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

Limits on non-disclosure agreements

The Employment Rights Bill is still making its way through Parliament, with several proposed amendments now on the table in the House of Lords.

One of the most significant changes is a proposal to make NDAs covering harassment or discrimination between an employer and a worker void.

This reflects growing pressure from campaigners, particularly following the #MeToo movement, who have long called for tighter restrictions on their use. Notably, this provision was absent from the Bill’s original draft.

If introduced, the ban would represent a major shift for employers who routinely include

confidentiality and non-disparagement clauses in settlement agreements.

The government has suggested that some NDAs may still be permissible in narrowly defined ‘excepted agreements’, but further detail is awaited.

Article spotlight

Check out our blog on restrictive covenants for more insight into how contractual protections are changing.

READ NOW

^Status:^{In progress}

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

^Status:^{In progress}

The Office of the Whistleblower Bill

This bill was put forward to parliament in December 2024 and proposes to establish an independant Office of the Whistleblower to protect whistleblowers.

It will set, monitor and enforce standards for the management of whistleblowing cases, provide disclosure and advice services, direct whistleblowing investigations, and order redress of detriment suffered by whistleblowers.

By having this office in place, the Bill also proposes that it will be a designated body to which people can report when they have made a disclosure. The Bill will need to go through the full parliamentary process before becoming law.

The Court of Appeal is considering whether whistleblowing protections should be extended to apply to external job applicants.

The legal challenge has been raised by the whistleblowing charity ‘Protect’, which has filed a third-party intervention at the Court of Appeal after it was given permission to intervene in the case.

The current scope of whistleblowing law doesn't cover external job applicants other than those applying to the NHS, who are protected by the Employment Rights Act 1996 if they make a protected disclosure. Protect highlights that job applicants who blow the whistle risk being blacklisted and can be effectively excluded from working in their chosen field.

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

Timis & Anor v Osipov & Anor

In a significant employment law case, the Court of Appeal has confirmed that an employer may be held vicariously liable where a dismissal decision is materially influenced or carried out by a co-worker, rather than a manager.

Here we explore what the decision means in practice, including how detriment and dismissal claims can run side by side, where employer liability can arise, and the steps you can take to reduce risk.

Background

The Court of Appeal confirmed that:

An employee may pursue an automatic unfair dismissal claim against their employer; and
At the same time, bring a separate detriment claim against a co-worker where that individual’s actions contributed to the dismissal

The Supreme Court has granted permission to appeal, meaning further legal clarification is expected.

Employers should therefore be alert to the risk that informal influence, retaliatory behaviour, or poor management oversight could expose them to liability even where dismissal decisions are not taken solely by senior management.

What claims can employees bring?

This case has confirmed employees may:

Claim automatic unfair dismissal against their employer (under s.103A) and at the same time claim detriment against a co-worker, also based on their dismissal (under s.47B(1A))
Add to a claim for unfair dismissal to a detriment claim against a co-worker, based on that dismissal
Bring a claim against their employer for the detriment of dismissal by a co-worker and they do not have to include the co-worker in that claim

The employer’s defence

In detriment claims where it is alleged that an employer is vicariously liable for the actions of a co-worker, the employer may rely on a defence if it can show that it took “all reasonable steps” to prevent the co-worker from acting in that way.

^{Legislation Book}^|^{HR Supplies}^|^{HR Forum}

Practical steps for employers

In light of this, it would be prudent for employers to review their whistleblowing policies and practices so that, in the event of a claim, they can demonstrate that appropriate preventative measures were in place. This includes:

Having an effective whistleblowing policy that is regularly reviewed
Clearly communicating that victimisation of whistleblowers will not be tolerated and may result in disciplinary action
Providing training on the whistleblowing policy and the consequences of non-compliance
Ensuring whistleblowing complaints are dealt with promptly and appropriately, with robust investigations and action taken where necessary

Review & strengthen whistleblowing policies

Need support strengthening your whistleblowing framework? Moorepay’s HR & Employment Law Services can help.

FIND OUT MORE