The Employment Rights Bill was approved and finalised on 18 December 2025, after many rounds of parliamentary “ping pong”, becoming the Employment Rights Act (ERA) 2025. Its final form is substantively very similar to previous versions, with one important exception: the retention of a qualifying period for unfair dismissal rights (albeit reduced from two years to six months) and the removal of any cap on unfair dismissal compensation.
Although we now have a finalised ERA 2025, many key areas of detail are subject to consultations and further regulations. This article summarises the Act’s key provisions, the areas of outstanding detail, anticipated timelines (as set out in the government’s updated timeline on 4 February 2026), and what organisations could or should be doing now to prepare.

On 16 December 2025, the House of Lords resolved the final point of dispute in the Employment Rights Bill – whether the cap on unfair dismissal should be removed – paving the way for Royal Assent before Christmas.
The Bill introduces sweeping employment law reforms, including new provisions on strikes and trade unions, enhanced protective awards for collective redundancies, and restrictions on fire-and-rehire practices. It also reduces the qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims to six months from January 2027, although the timing for removing the compensation cap remains uncertain.
Implementation will be phased through 2026 and 2027, supported by over 20 consultations and secondary legislation following Royal Assent.

In March 2025, the Home Office issued a revised version of its statutory guidance “Transparency in Supply Chains” following the House of Lords Modern Slavery Act 2015 Committee’s report. This marks the first full revision of the guidance in nearly a decade. In an article for Compliance & Risk, Jon Tuck and David Yadid examine the current legal framework under the Act, unpack the key changes introduced by the new guidance, and consider their implications for businesses.

In March 2025, the Home Office issued a revised version of its statutory guidance “Transparency in Supply Chains” following the House of Lords Modern Slavery Act 2015 Committee’s report. This marks the first full revision of the guidance in nearly a decade. In an article for Compliance & Risk, Jon Tuck and David Yadid examine the current legal framework under the Act, unpack the key changes introduced by the new guidance, and consider their implications for businesses.

Further to the Employment Rights Bill that was published on 10 October 2024, the government has launched a consultation on strengthening statutory sick pay. The consultation seeks views on the amount of statutory sick pay that employees earning less than the current eligibility threshold should receive as part of the amendments to the Employment Rights Bill.

In today’s working world, transparency is not a box to tick but a new and very real workforce reality. Evolving reporting requirements, intensifying stakeholder pressure (both internally and externally) and increasing recognition of what it means to be a responsible business are shaping how organizations disclose information about – and subsequently respond to – their workforce priorities.

In the face of intensifying geopolitical risk and continuing economic uncertainty, the challenges for global employers to plan carefully and operate strategically to maintain a thriving workforce are greater than ever. We help employers navigate those challenges in our four-part webinar series featuring Baker McKenzie Global Employment Law colleagues from the Americas, Asia Pacific, Europe, and the Middle East and Africa who share legal updates and trends impacting US-based multinationals, and provide tips and best practices for your success.

In the face of intensifying geopolitical risk and continuing economic uncertainty, the challenges for global employers to plan carefully and operate strategically to maintain a thriving workforce is greater than ever. We’ll help employers navigate those challenges in our four-part webinar series featuring Baker McKenzie Global Employment Law colleagues from the Americas, Asia Pacific, Europe, and the Middle East and Africa who will share legal updates and trends impacting US-based multinationals, and provide tips and best practices for your success.

In an article published for Law360, Jon Tuck, Richard Cook, and Megan Clarkson Bowly discuss the implications of the Supreme Court’s decision in Mercer v. Alternative Futures Group, considering whether workers participating in industrial action are protected from action short of dismissal under the Trade Unions and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.

The Supreme Court has ruled that section 146 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (TULRCA) which does not prevent employers from taking action short of dismissal in response to striking employees is incompatible with Article 11 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). Although the declaration of incompatibility does not affect the validity or operation of section 146, it will put pressure on the government to legislate to correct the position, and employers are likely to be mindful of the decision when considering action short of dismissal in response to industrial action. Detriments for participation in industrial action, such as removing discretionary benefits from those who take part, currently remain lawful, so long as the detriments in question aren’t so severe as to constitute a constructive dismissal.