Draft Code Of Practice On Disciplinary And Grievance Procedures

On 30 July 2026, Acas published a consultation on a revised draft Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures.

The current Code is primarily concerned with ensuring fairness once a disciplinary or grievance process has begun. The new draft Code shifts the focus significantly towards:

• Preventing escalation
• Resolving issues informally where possible
• Encouraging early intervention
• Providing better training and support
• Improving workplace relationships and
• Reducing the costs associated with formal disputes

ACAS has justified the changes by reference to research showing that formal conflict resolution costs employers approximately £2.36 billion annually and that 44% of working-age adults experienced workplace conflict during the previous year.

The practical effect is that tribunals may increasingly scrutinise not only how employers conducted formal procedures, but what they did before the formal process commenced.

Early and informal resolution

Informal resolution has been included in the Code of Practice for the first time. The draft explicitly encourages employees and workers to try to resolve concerns informally and at an early stage, in order to prevent unnecessary escalation and avoid unreasonable delays. It also makes clear that informal handling should not itself result in formal disciplinary action.

A failure to attempt informal resolution can directly impact an employment tribunal's decision to increase or decrease compensation awards by up to 25%. Where a concern is not fully resolved informally, it may be helpful to meet again to discuss the issue before escalating to a formal process.

A notable drafting change is that employers are expected to explain:

• What informal steps were taken before commencing a formal process or
• Why informal resolution was not appropriate

This information should appear in correspondence commencing formal proceedings.

New sections

New section on reasonable adjustments

New section on training and support

Suspension

The draft introduces a strict “necessity test” for workplace suspension, providing significantly more detail than the current Code. Suspension should be used only in limited circumstances and must not be treated as a routine or neutral act.

Employers must explicitly justify why suspension is required rather than applying it automatically. Periods of suspension must be as short as possible, actively monitored, regularly reviewed, and clearly communicated to the employee as a non-disciplinary measure.

Employers should implement:

• Suspension risk assessments
• Formal review periods
• Alternative duties assessments
• Homeworking options consideration and
• Written suspension rationale forms

Formal disciplinary meetings

When inviting a worker to a formal disciplinary meeting, employers would be expected to explain what informal steps have already been taken, or why none were taken. They must give the worker adequate time (typically 3 to 5 working day minimum) to review evidence and organise a defence. The worker has a statutory right to bring a trade union representative or workplace colleague. If the worker is unable or unwilling to attend the disciplinary meeting with good reasoning, the employer should make a decision based on the available evidence.

New written statement requirements

New written statement requirements

The draft Code also encourages a short, clear initial written explanation rather than unnecessarily long or complex grievances, while allowing further information to be provided later if needed.

For justifying suspensions, the written records must show that suspension was only used when strictly necessary and after reviewing alternatives. Written policies must account for and document any necessary adjustments for disabled workers throughout the process.

Employers should expect to formally document and record:

• Informal discussions
• Reasons for escalation
• Adjustment considerations
• Suspension decisions
• Mediation considerations
• Investigation steps and
• Review decisions

The draft reflects a wider expectation that employers should be able to demonstrate why decisions were reached rather than merely proving procedural fairness.

A new section on Mediation and facilitated conversations

A new section encourages consideration of mediation and facilitated conversations where appropriate and possible. ACAS encourages employers to consider:

• Mediation
• Facilitated discussions
• Relationship repair exercises
• Workplace restoration processes and
• Independent intervention

Importantly, where mediation is agreed, formal processes may be paused. Any third-party involvement should be with an accredited mediator or trained facilitator who is impartial and does not take sides. Where mediation or a facilitated conversation is agreed during a formal disciplinary process, the formal procedure should be paused. This approach can be particularly helpful where misconduct or poor performance is linked to a working relationship issue.

Historically, mediation has often been viewed as optional. The draft elevates it into a recognised conflict-resolution tool which employers may increasingly be expected to consider and to explain why they did not use it if they chose not to.

Terminology 

The draft generally uses “worker” rather than “employee”, except where the specific legal status of employee is intended. ACAS wants the principles of fair dispute resolution to apply to a much broader section of the workforce, such as casual staff, contractors, and zero-hours workers.

What has not changed

Despite the extensive revisions, the following core principles remain substantially unchanged:

• Prompt action
• Reasonable investigation
• Notice of allegations
• Disclosure of evidence
• An opportunity to respond
• Impartial decision-making
• The right to be accompanied
• The right of appeal and
• Procedural fairness generally

Summary

The draft Code is not really about disciplinary and grievance hearings. It is about conflict management and that represents a fundamental shift in approach.

The biggest risks for employers under the proposed Code will be:

1. Failing to attempt and document informal resolution
2. Automatically suspending employees
3. Failing to consider reasonable adjustments
4. Poorly trained managers handling conflict
5. Failing to consider mediation
6. Inadequate documentation explaining why decisions were made
7. Treating formal procedures as the first rather than the last step

The revised Code is only in draft form and is not yet in force. It may be amended before it takes effect, but the expectation is that the majority of the revisions will remain. Employers should therefore begin considering updates to their policies, practices and management training programmes now.

Originally published 19 August 2026

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.