Employment Rights Bill research 2025

Author: Hannah Mason

Reforms to statutory sick pay, parental leave, and whistleblowing protections are set to affect UK workplaces from April 2026, as part of the Employment Rights Bill. This research examines the anticipated impact of these proposals and captures HR professionals' thoughts on what the changes will mean for their organisation.

Key points

  • Changes to statutory sick pay are expected to increase absence costs for around half of organisations.
  • Making paternity and unpaid ordinary parental leave a day-one right is anticipated by many HR professionals not to have a significant impact at their organisation but may require them to review their occupational schemes.
  • Many organisations indicate that the changes to whistleblowing protections will take several months to implement.
  • Two-fifths of organisations believe that their organisation cannot withstand additional costs resulting from the proposed employment law changes.
  • Around two-thirds of organisations anticipate the changes will be positive for their employees.

The 2025 Employment Rights Bill research explores some of the employment law changes expected to come into effect in April 2026. This piece examines the extent to which the changes will impact organisations based on their existing provisions and assesses HR professionals' opinions on how these changes will be managed and implemented. This original Brightmine research, conducted in November 2025, collected insights from 155 organisations, which collectively employ more than 250,000 UK employees.

Benchmarking - HR metrics

Unlock the full insights from the Employment Rights Bill survey with the Benchmarking - HR Metrics service. Easily filter the data by broad sector, organisation size and region to access the most relevant results for your organisation.

Changes to statutory sick pay

The Employment Rights Bill proposes to make the following changes to statutory sick pay (SSP) from April 2026:

  • removal of the three-day waiting period, so statutory sick pay is payable from the first day of a period of incapacity for work; and
  • removal of the requirement to earn at least the lower earnings limit to be eligible for SSP.

At present, two-thirds (66.5%) of organisations state that their current provision is more generous than the proposal, and a further 9.7% indicated their present offering is in line with what will be introduced. This leaves around a quarter (23.2%) of organisations that will be impacted by the proposals and will therefore need to align their provisions in order to remain compliant. Just 0.6% were unsure. Within our sample, manufacturing-and-production organisations were most likely to indicate their current offering is less generous than the proposals and will therefore need to be amended, as reported by around one-third (34.1%) of these organisations.

Chart 1: Current sick pay provision compared to the proposed changes, by broad sector

Ahead of the expected changes in April 2026, the vast majority of organisations indicated they had not yet taken action. Just one-fifth of organisations (18.7%) responded at the time of the survey (November 2025) that they have already started reviewing or drafting updated sick pay policies and procedures.

With the three-day waiting period expected to be removed, organisations that currently align with the statutory minimum sickness provision will have increased costs. Half of organisations (49.7%) in our research anticipate that absence costs will increase if the proposals come into effect, while a similar proportion indicated they expect there to be little or no impact on absence costs.

Chart 2: How proposed changes are expected to impact absence costs

Where costs are expected to rise, organisations are anticipating a range of actions in order to manage this. More than two-thirds (70.1%) of organisations expect to absorb these additional costs within their existing budgets.

For those organisations anticipating increased costs, the following actions may be needed to offset the additional costs of the changes to SSP:

  • one-fifth of organisations (19.5%) plan to review or reduce their enhanced occupational sick pay schemes;
  • around a quarter of organisations (23.4%) are expecting to have to limit recruitment activity as a result; and
  • one in eight (13%) will be considering redundancies.

Chart 3: How organisations expect to deal with increased costs, as a result of the changes to statutory sick pay

Beyond the direct financial costs to the business, around half of HR professionals (48.4%) are expecting employee behaviour to change as a result, while 51.6% anticipate little or no change. The most common change expected is an increase in short-term absences. Around a quarter of HR professionals (28.4%) anticipate employees will be more willing to take sick leave when unwell, which may promote a more positive health and wellbeing culture, but also creates the possibility of potential misuse and higher absence levels. These trends are similar to when we asked the same question in our sickness absence rates and management research, in early 2025.

When asked how absence management processes will need to transform as a result of these changes, some organisations shared that due to their already generous sick pay provision, little or no change will be required.

Meanwhile, other HR professionals stated that monitoring absence levels, reviewing trigger points and tightening absence controls will be important. One respondent detailed: "The Bradford factor scoring and triggers will need to be reviewed, to ensure short-term persistent absence is better monitored and reviewed with the team members. Managers will need additional support in how to conduct absence reviews and welfare meetings. The changes will probably give more insight to long-term health conditions which may currently be masked through presenteeism."

In organisations that will be impacted by the change in policy, some HR professionals discussed the increased workload for HR and line managers as a result, demonstrating that not only will this change be more costly for some organisations, it will also increase pressure on HR teams. One professional explained that for their organisation: "There will be more cases of short-term absence, and more employees will reach the trigger point for disciplinary absence review meetings. This will increase workload for HR and line managers who will have more cases to deal with and meetings to attend. It will not be beneficial and create a more stressful environment. We will possibly need a new approach in order to be proactive and remind workers of the consequences of absence, as we anticipate sick absence will be abused for non-sickness-related absence."

Changes to paternity and parental leave

Another change expected in April 2026 is the reforms to paternity and ordinary parental leave, which will see:

  • the removal of the qualifying periods for paternity leave (currently 26 weeks) and ordinary parental leave (currently one year), making them both day-one rights; and
  • removing the restriction on employees taking paternity leave and pay after they have taken shared parental leave and pay - currently, employees lose their entitlement to paternity leave pay if they take shared parental leave and pay first.

At the time of the survey, just 13.5% of responding organisations offer both paternity and unpaid ordinary parental leave from day one of employment. Around three-fifths (58.7%) of organisations do not currently offer either benefit to employees from day one, with the remainder offering just one type of leave from the start of employment or being unsure. This indicates that the majority of employers will need to make amendments in order to stay compliant.

Chart 4: Current parental leave offerings from day one of employment

Similar to the changes to SSP, the majority of organisations have not yet begun reviewing or drafting updated parental leave policies and procedures. This is despite approximately four-fifths (82.6%) of organisations not yet offering what will likely become the legal requirement.

We asked HR professionals what challenges or opportunities they thought the changes to paternity and parental leave will present. The overriding sentiment was that this policy change wasn't anticipated to have a significant impact. Some organisations detailed that take-up is already relatively low for these forms of leave, so therefore the impact is expected to be minimal, with one respondent noting "this is not something that happens widely or regularly, so we are not too concerned".

Increased costs were mentioned by some HR professionals as a potential challenge. Where an organisation offers enhanced parental pay, some indicated they were unsure how their organisation would handle this change of policy; whether to pay the enhancement from day one, or whether there will be a qualifying period to be eligible for the higher payments.

Improved staff morale and support for male employees were some opportunities cited by respondents, with one describing: "I think it will help with the wellbeing of expectant fathers to be with their newborn child, even if they have just started a new job. The paternity leave is pretty minimal overall, so it won't have a huge impact, but the day-one right could massively help their stress and happiness."

From a more logistical standpoint, another HR professional explained that the change will require their organisation to consider how they manage the onboarding process for new employees, stating: "We welcome the changes, however we will need to think about how to best manage onboarding periods for new starters if they take paternity or parental leave during this time."

Changes to whistleblowing protections

The Employment Rights Bill proposes to add sexual harassment to the list of types of disclosure that qualify for protection under the whistleblowing provisions of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

In around two-fifths (40.6%) of organisations, sexual harassment is not currently covered within their whistleblowing policy and therefore adjustments will need to be made to remain compliant. One in four organisations (25.2%) reported they have already started reviewing or drafting updated whistleblowing policies and procedures ahead of the April 2026 introduction date.

In response to the changes, the majority of organisations in our research are expecting to take action. Reviewing the investigation and whistleblowing reporting processes for sexual harassment are steps expected to be carried out by the majority of organisations (75.5%).

Chart 5: Actions expected to be taken if proposed changes come into effect

Only a minority of organisations (12.9%) anticipate that the proposed changes will increase the risk of sexual-harassment-related whistleblowing disputes or tribunal claims.

Preparations for the proposed changes

The changes to whistleblowing protections are anticipated to take some time for organisations to prepare for and implement, with 58.1% expecting it to take at least one month. The changes to sick pay and parental leave are commonly expected to take less than one month to prepare for, or organisations already feel prepared.

Chart 6: Time expected to appropriately prepare for the upcoming changes

Around three-fifths of organisations (59.4%) are planning to communicate with employees about the upcoming legal changes to keep them informed. There is also a fair number of organisations unsure whether they will inform employees about these changes, at 30.3% of the sample, indicating a moderate level of uncertainty among organisations about their communication plans. Just one organisation in 10 (10.3%) does not plan to update employees when these changes come into effect.

Those who expect to communicate with employees about the changes indicated there are several ways this is likely to be done, including by:

  • direct email communication;
  • issuing updated policies;
  • notifications on internal systems or internal intranets; and
  • relevant information cascaded through managers.

Sentiment of HR professionals towards the proposals

We asked HR professionals whether they agreed with a range of statements about the changes proposed in the Employment Rights Bill (respondents could answer in respect to all proposed changes, not just those covered in this research). The majority of organisations agreed that their HR team has the capacity to manage the upcoming changes, and that there is a clear plan to implement the changes that will be required as a result. In general, HR teams feel they will be able to manage the required changes.

However, while just over half (53.5%) believe that their organisation can withstand additional costs resulting from the changes, 41.9% disagree and the remainder are unsure. This indicates that the financial burden of the changes may be difficult for some organisations to manage.

Less than half (47.7%) of HR professionals indicated that senior leaders at their organisation understand the scale and impact of the proposed changes, highlighting a disconnect between HR teams and leadership at some organisations. There is also a perceived skills gap, with just 49.7% of organisations anticipating that line managers have the skills to implement the changes as required. This could signal the potential risk of upcoming changes for organisations.

Chart 7: The expected impact of proposed changes on organisations

Overall, while HR professionals generally feel equipped to manage the operational aspects of the proposals, some have concerns around financial capacity, leadership awareness, and line manager capability. These gaps suggest that organisations may face challenges in fully implementing the changes, particularly where costs are high and skills development is required. Proactive planning and targeted training will be critical to mitigate these risks and ensure successful compliance.

Our research