Trade Union Access Rights – New Reforms Confirmed

The Employment Rights Act 2025 will give trade unions a general right to enter workplaces to recruit, organise and represent members for the first time in Great Britain.

Workplace access rights are a key pillar of the government’s agenda to increase the size and power of the trade union movement. They potentially affect all but the very smallest employers, aiming to give unions a ‘foot in the door’ in businesses where they may have had little or no presence. Following a public consultation, the government has now published the regulations and Code of Practice implementing the access regime. This article provides an overview of what access rights will involve in practice and what employers can do to prepare before 30 October 2026 when the law changes.

How will the process for access requests work?

The Employment Rights Act outlines a complex legal framework through which unions will be able to request access from employers and apply to the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC) to order access arrangements.

Employers will have 15 working days to respond to a union’s request for access, using a standard form included in the new Code.

If they don’t accept the request in full, employers will then have a further 25 working days to negotiate access terms with the union. If negotiations fail, the union will have a further 15 working days to apply to the CAC for a workplace access order (with potential for the CAC to extend this time limit by 15 days in certain circumstances).

The CAC will then decide whether the union should be given access to the workplace and, if so, on what terms. There is a presumption in favour of union access, reflected in the five statutory ‘access principles’ which the CAC will have to follow, including that “access should be refused entirely only where it is reasonable in all the circumstances to do so” and that union officials should be granted access “in any manner that does not unreasonably interfere with the employer’s business”. It will therefore be very difficult for employers to block an access request altogether, though specific elements of a union’s proposals may be challenged.

It's important to note that – in contrast to statutory recognition – there are no minimum levels of membership or support which a union must demonstrate, and this will not even be a factor which the CAC can consider. This reflects the government’s intention for access arrangements to be an early step towards building up the membership needed for a later recognition bid.

What restrictions will there be on the new right of access?

Only businesses with fewer than 21 workers will be exempt from access. This includes workers employed by group and associated companies (rather than being assessed on a workplace or entity-specific basis). The government has committed to consider lowering this threshold even further in future, especially in the adult social care and education sectors.

There are also narrow exemptions for national security and criminal justice. If access would prejudice the national security of the UK or the investigation and detection of crimes, the CAC must refuse the request. However, this won’t provide a complete exemption for relevant employers, who would still be required to facilitate access in less disruptive ways – for example, through rooms which visitors use on a day-to-day basis, digital methods, or at off-site meetings away from sensitive locations.

The CAC can also deny access where it might jeopardise the health and safety of any person. However, the Code makes clear that access will only be refused on these grounds in exceptional circumstances, and employers and unions will be expected to cooperate to mitigate any health and safety risks.

It's notable that already recognising a union, or having an access agreement in place with one, won’t automatically block another union from being able to secure access at the same workplace. However, the government has acknowledged that this could destabilise workplaces with established industrial relations. If an employer already recognises an independent union, has a statutory access agreement in place with one, or is subject to a ‘live’ request for recognition from one, the regulations say that it will be reasonable for the CAC to deny an access request by another union in respect of the same workers.

In practice, this means that, if the employer objects (potentially with the support of the first union), the burden will be on the second union to show why it should nonetheless be awarded access. These rules may prove particularly relevant when an employer has recognised a more moderate union with a view to blocking a less moderate one from applying for statutory recognition.

How will access arrangements work in practice?

There will be ‘model terms’ for access agreements. They won’t operate as statutory default terms (as happens in the context of statutory recognition), but a union’s request for access based on them will make it much more likely to be ordered by the CAC, so they are likely to strongly influence market practice.

The model terms are that:

• the union will be entitled to have access (whether physically or digitally) up to once per week;
• after the first occasion, which requires five working days’ notice, the union must give at least two working days’ notice for each subsequent access visit, and must specify whether the access is to be physical or digital;
• the employer must make available existing meeting spaces and communication channels as is reasonable in all the circumstances to enable agreed arrangements;
• the employer must ensure, as far as reasonably possible, the privacy of direct communications between workers and the union; and
• union officials visiting the workplace must comply with all reasonable instructions from the employer (which may include providing identification or completing health and safety inductions).

The requirement for weekly access stands out as particularly onerous. Unions will struggle to provide enough officials to attend many workplaces on a weekly basis. They may try to address this resourcing challenge by relying on a combination of (i) electronic communications and (ii) using union activists from within the employer’s own workforce to staff access meetings (noting that local shop stewards count as ‘union officials’ for these purposes).

The requirement for union officials to follow reasonable management instructions in the workplace should give some comfort to employers. However, there is scope for dispute here – for example, it is unclear whether an employer could require visiting union officials to sign NDAs, if it ordinarily requires them from visitors. Compliance with existing visitor policies was originally proposed as a model term, but has now been relegated to an additional factor in the Code which the CAC must have regard to.

The government had originally said that it would publish a full ‘model agreement’ but has ended up taking the less prescriptive approach of publishing limited model terms.  This reflects the inherent difficulty of setting out a full set of access terms capable of covering every kind of workplace. The government is instead relying on additional guidance in the Code, which the CAC will have to take into account when making decisions. For example, the government has now clarified in the Code that workers should be paid in full for their time attending access meetings during working time.

We’ve summarised some of the guidance in the Code below. However, it fails to address several key details. For example, while we know that unions will be able to access workplaces up to once per week, there is no guidance on how long each visit should last. Similarly, the Code recommends access during normal working hours at times which minimise disruption, but does not say if an employer can allow only part of a team to go to the union meeting to ensure sufficient cover. Given the lack of detail, it will be up to employers to try to negotiate tailored access agreements that minimise disruption and reflect their needs.

Physical access

The Code states that “where practicable, a union should be granted access to the workers at their actual workplace, and in the actual location of their work in that workplace, such as in a meeting room, or in an adjoining work area”.

The specific space(s) allocated to union officials will depend on the workplace, including health and safety and security considerations as well as the availability of meeting rooms. However, the Code recommends that the union be allowed to use whatever the employer typically uses to communicate with employees – so if the business typically uses a canteen for large staff meetings, the same facility should be made available to the union, and the same if the business typically holds only small meetings at the workplace. However, a union may still hold meetings with staff in facilities which are available and suitable even if the employer does not usually do so itself.

In exceptional circumstances, a business may not be able to accommodate union meetings on its own premises. In that scenario, the Code envisages that the union may be required to hold meetings off-site at its own expense, with the employer taking reasonable steps to inform employees about the meeting.

The Code recommends that access meetings should be “aligned” with “events that involve significant proportions of the workforce during work time, such as during induction events or at training courses.” Unions are likely to push for arrangements of this kind, to maximise the impact and reach of their access meetings.

Digital access

As well as the right to visit a workplace in-person, the Employment Rights Act specifically gives unions new rights to communicate electronically with workers. This represents a major victory for the union movement, which has long seen ‘digital access’ as critical to modernising its organising strategies and recruiting workers in hard-to-reach sectors.

The Code clarifies that digital access will primarily involve employers sending out information and invites to virtual meetings on behalf of the union on its existing IT platforms. Unhelpfully, it states that “the cascading of an email” will not be considered to constitute ‘weekly access’, leaving open the possibility that unions may seek to have very large volumes of emails sent out on their behalf to employees. Employers may also be required to facilitate online meetings via existing IT platforms, where unions can run presentations and Q&A sessions for workers.

The Code also envisages that unions may have direct digital access to employees outside of the terms of the access agreement – for example, sending them emails directly, rather than through the employer as an intermediary – where individual employees have provided consent for their details to be shared with the union. This should generally be done via the unions’ own systems and not those of the employer.

Given the unions’ limited manpower, digital communications may well prove the more impactful element of these reforms, as unions will find it easier to arrange for large volumes of emails to be sent out on their behalf than to staff in-person meetings in workplaces.

Third-party property

Many businesses employ staff to work on sites which are controlled by third parties – such as security and facilities management companies, where their employees are based in clients’ premises. Facilitating access for union officials is challenging in these situations.

The Code acknowledges this, and makes clear that employers in this position are required to take reasonable steps, including engaging with the owner of the premises to arrange access. If the premises owner refuses to provide access, the union could bring a complaint in the CAC for breach of the access agreement (noting that complaints can be brought against third parties). This would be likely to damage the relationship between the employer and its client or landlord, but unhelpfully the Code does not provide any guidance on how best to deal with that issue.

How will access agreements be enforced?

A party can complain to the CAC about a breach of an access agreement within three months of the breach. If the complaint is upheld, the CAC can order steps to be taken to ensure compliance. If there is another breach within 12 months, the CAC impose financial penalties.

The government has strengthened its initial proposals for financial penalties, and now intends to introduce a three-tier framework:

• The first penalty for breach of an access agreement will be capped at £75,000;
• The second penalty for repeated non-compliance will be capped at £150,000; and
• The maximum penalty for each further breach of the same access agreement will be £500,000.

The three-tier framework will apply even if the subsequent breaches are of a different nature to the previous breaches. Breaches at multiple workplaces covered under the same access agreement can be treated cumulatively and enable a higher penalty to be imposed, though the penalty must be proportionate to the breach.

The government’s intention here is to deter ‘rogue employers’ who might otherwise seek to treat penalties as an acceptable cost of deliberate non-compliance.

How can employers prepare for the new rights of access?

Here are the key things you can do to prepare for the changes on 30 October 2026:

• Establish internal protocols for responding to an access request. Given that you will have just 15 working days to respond, consider designating the individuals or teams responsible for coordinating your response and make sure any requests are escalated to them on receipt.
• Review existing employee engagement structures and internal communications strategies. From October, it will become much easier for unions to campaign and get out their messages to the workforce. To mitigate this, be proactive about keeping your workforce informed about developments at work and give them the opportunity to have their voice heard directly on issues that matter to them.
• If you already recognise a trade union, consider agreeing voluntary access arrangements. Doing so is likely to promote good industrial relations, noting that the union would be able to secure access through the CAC in any event. Voluntary arrangements agreed outside of the statutory framework won’t be subject to the enforcement framework above, so you would also avoid the risk of financial penalties for non-compliance.
• If you are concerned about a particular union obtaining access, think about exploring  recognition or a statutory access agreement with another, more moderate union. While this won’t be a complete block to militant unions securing access through the CAC, it is likely to significantly reduce that risk.
• Careful planning may help you identify ways of fulfilling your access obligations with minimum disruption to operations. Once an access request has landed, blanket refusals are unlikely to be successful, but the negotiation period gives you an opportunity to shape and limit the practical impact.
• Review any policies and procedures for visitors attending workplaces. While unions will not be required to follow them in all circumstances, they will be a factor that the CAC can take into account and could be important safeguards.
• Once access arrangements are in place, train your managers, HR teams and visitor-facing staff (such as receptionists and security guards) to ensure union visits are handled appropriately.

What about access during recognition or derecognition ballots?

Separate rules already apply to access during statutory union recognition and derecognition processes, with guidance provided in an existing Code of Practice.

From 30 October, the Employment Rights Act will widen the scope of these existing access rights, bringing them forward to the point at which a recognition application is received by the CAC. Other changes include increasing the length and frequency of campaign meetings which unions are entitled to hold as part of the statutory recognition process, from a 30-minute meeting every 10 working days up to a 45-minute every 5 working days. The revised Code will also place greater emphasis on the use of digital communications, including specifying that the union should be permitted to post information on the union’s intranet.

In practice, we anticipate that the new general right of workplace access may make these existing rules less significant, as any union which applies for statutory recognition is likely to have already requested workplace access rights as an earlier step to assist its organising.

Conclusion

The introduction of workplace access rights is a significant change to the industrial relations framework in Great Britain. From 30 October 2026, unions will look to use their access rights to campaign more aggressively in a broader range of workplaces, with a view to later capitalising on the reduced thresholds for statutory recognition which came into effect in April 2026.

For many businesses who have had little or no engagement with unions to date, access rights are likely to be the most impactful of the union-related reforms in the Employment Rights Act. It is likely to fundamentally change how non-unionised businesses respond to union activity, as they can no longer rely on a blanket policy prohibiting organising in the workplace.

Now that the government has provided clarity on the new legal framework, employers should use the time before these changes come into effect to be as well-prepared as possible. This should involve both exploring proactive industrial relations strategies and careful practical planning.

However, it still remains to be seen whether unions have the resources or a sufficient value proposition to make the most of the new platform provided by the Employment Rights Act. After decades of decline, unions have relatively few organisers and so are likely to target their limited resources for in-person access meetings at businesses where they are already actively organising, as well as opportunistically targeting high-profile organisations. In contrast, it may be easier for the unions to use digital communications to spread their message more widely at a larger range of businesses. Even then, the unions will need to be able to have a sufficiently attractive offer to convert that into increased membership in the workplace.

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.