On 18 February 2026, the first phase of reforms under the Employment Rights Act 2025 took effect. The initial changes focus on industrial action and collective dispute procedure. For HR teams, the significance lies in how these amendments affect day-to-day dispute management, dismissal decisions and documentation standards.
The reforms do not remove the statutory framework governing ballots or notice. They do, however, reduce reliance on technical procedural challenges and extend protection for employees participating in lawful industrial action. HR professionals should assume that collective disputes may require earlier engagement and closer evidential discipline.
Ballot Process: What HR Needs to Understand
The revised ballot framework removes several procedural obstacles that previously created scope for challenge on technical defects. In practical terms, this means industrial action is less likely to be restrained solely because of minor irregularities in ballot wording or notice detail.
For HR teams, the shift is operational. Disputes are less likely to be resolved through procedural litigation and more likely to require substantive engagement. Internal response plans should assume that lawful strike mandates may be secured with fewer technical barriers. Escalation protocols, communication strategies and contingency planning should reflect that position.
HR should also ensure that managers understand the limits of lawful challenge and avoid over-reliance on historic assumptions about ballot technicalities.
Dismissal Protection: Increased Scrutiny for HR Decisions
The reforms extend the statutory period during which employees are protected from dismissal for participating in lawful industrial action. Dismissals connected to strike participation within the protected period may give rise to automatic unfair dismissal claims.
From an HR perspective, this requires disciplined separation between strike activity and unrelated management action. Where performance, misconduct or restructuring processes are ongoing during a dispute, the rationale for any decision must be clearly evidenced and capable of standing independently of industrial action.
Contemporaneous records are critical. Documentation should record the legitimate business grounds relied upon, the sequence of events and the decision-making process followed. Managers involved in disciplinary or termination decisions during industrial action should be briefed on the heightened scrutiny that may follow.
Tribunal exposure is only one aspect of risk. Allegations of retaliation for lawful strike participation are likely to attract union escalation and media attention. HR should anticipate that decisions taken during disputes will be examined closely, both legally and reputationally.
Notice Requirements and Internal Protocols
Notice requirements relating to industrial action have been streamlined. While statutory obligations remain, disputes are less likely to turn on narrow technical non-compliance. HR policies and industrial relations procedures developed under the previous framework should be reviewed to ensure alignment with the updated regime. This includes reviewing internal guidance for line managers, updating template communications and confirming escalation pathways during collective disputes. Response times, documentation standards and senior sign-off processes should be clear and consistent.
HR teams should also ensure that any internal training materials reflect the revised legal position. Outdated advice based on the pre-2026 regime may create avoidable compliance risk.
Operational Planning During Industrial Action
The practical reality following the February reforms is that industrial action may be procedurally easier to organise. HR functions should plan accordingly. Workforce contingency arrangements, communication planning and operational continuity measures should be reviewed in advance rather than in response to an announced strike.
Where restructures, redundancies or performance management processes coincide with industrial action, the sequencing and evidential basis for decisions should be carefully considered. HR should ensure that documentation demonstrates independent and lawful grounds for action, separate from strike participation.
Board-level reporting may also need to reflect the revised risk profile. Industrial relations governance should form part of regular risk assessment in unionised or workforce-sensitive environments.
Looking Ahead: Ongoing ERA Implementation
The February 2026 ERA changes represent the first phase of a wider implementation programme under the Employment Rights Act 2025. Further developments are expected throughout 2026 and into 2027 in areas including unfair dismissal, flexible working and zero-hours arrangements.
For HR professionals, this is not a single compliance event. It is part of a broader recalibration of employment protections. Monitoring legislative updates and reviewing internal policies at each stage will reduce the risk of reactive decision-making.
Author
Gill Laing is a qualified Legal Researcher & Analyst with niche specialisms in Law, Tax, Human Resources, Immigration & Employment Law.
Gill is a Multiple Business Owner and the Managing Director of Prof Services - a Marketing & Content Agency for the Professional Services Sector.
