- within Employment and HR topic(s)
- with Senior Company Executives, HR and Finance and Tax Executives
- with readers working within the Accounting & Consultancy and Environment & Waste Management industries
For more than a decade, employers have worked on the assumption that ordinary unfair dismissal rights do not arise until an employee completes two years' continuous service. That threshold shaped how businesses approached recruitment, probation, training and performance management. It offered a substantial window in which to assess whether a new starter was the right fit, and it gave employers comfort that, provided discrimination or whistleblowing was not involved, they had time to act without facing a tribunal claim for ordinary unfair dismissal.
But that landscape has since shifted. When the Employment Rights Bill was announced in 2024, the Government proposed a dramatic change to make ordinary unfair dismissal a day-one right. At the time, employers responded with real concern, arguing that a day-one right risked discouraging hiring, increasing litigation and undermining the practical value of probation periods. However, in the period since, those concerns gained traction in Parliament, and the proposal has now been substantially modified. Instead of a day-one right, the Government has now confirmed that the qualifying period will become six months.
Whilst this change is not yet in force, it is expected to be written directly into the Employment Rights Bill and to form part of the new baseline for workplace rights once the legislation receives Royal Assent. For employers, this creates a new legal horizon. A shorter qualifying period than the familiar two years, but not the immediate entitlement that a day-one right would have introduced.
Where we are now
Under existing law, employees must usually complete two years' continuous service before gaining protection against ordinary unfair dismissal. This protection applies to the majority of dismissals, including conduct, capability, redundancy and "some other substantial reason". The two-year rule does not apply to automatically unfair dismissals, nor to dismissals linked to discrimination. Those rights arise from day one and will continue to do so regardless of the new legislative framework.
The two-year threshold therefore continues to limit the risk of challenge around performance issues, organisational restructuring, cultural fit and other reasons that commonly arise in the early stages of employment. It has been a defining feature of employer risk management for more than a decade.
What was proposed
The original proposal within the Employment Rights Bill was to abolish the qualifying period entirely, granting every employee an ordinary unfair dismissal right from the day they started work. This was framed as part of a broader shift towards earlier worker protection and a more interventionist approach to employment rights.
However, the reaction from the business community was immediate. Employers warned that a day-one qualifying period would make early-stage recruitment more cautious and could lead to an increase in early disputes. The prospect of ordinary unfair dismissal claims arising within a matter of weeks was viewed as out of step with the realities of managing performance, settling new employees into roles and assessing suitability. Those concerns ultimately led the Government to withdraw the day-one proposal and settle on a six-month compromise.
A six-month qualifying period
The Government has stated that the six-month threshold will be written into primary legislation before Royal Assent. That matters because it offers greater stability: embedding the rule in the Act itself makes it less vulnerable to later changes through secondary regulations.
A six-month qualifying period represents a significant reduction from the current two years. It compresses the period in which employers can assess performance, capability and cultural alignment before the risk of an ordinary unfair dismissal claim arises. Dismissals that, in the past, may have occurred after twelve or eighteen months will need to be considered far earlier if employers wish to avoid the risk associated with the new threshold.
There are also wider reforms in the Employment Rights Bill that may influence how costly unfair dismissal claims could become in future, including the prospect of changes to the existing cap on compensatory awards. That possibility increases the importance of early performance management and robust documentation.
When the change is likely to take effect
At the time of writing, the Government has not set a commencement date for the six-month qualifying period. While Ministers have confirmed that the amendment will be written into the Employment Rights Bill before Royal Assent, the change will not take legal effect until separate commencement regulations are issued. Those regulations have not yet been published.
Given that the Bill is likely to complete its passage early next, the most realistic expectation is that the six-month qualifying period will come into force sometime during 2026. Major employment reforms of this scale are rarely brought into effect immediately, and the Government has already indicated that the new framework will be implemented in phases.
Employers should therefore expect a short period of advance notice to allow for policy updates, contractual amendments and managerial training.
Until commencement regulations are issued, the existing two-year qualifying period remains firmly in place.
What this will mean in practice for employers
The move to a six-month qualifying period will require employers to revisit the way they manage the earliest stage of the employment relationship. Contracts, Policies and handbooks may need updating, but the real focus should be on the practical workings of probation, performance and feedback.
Probation periods will carry renewed weight. Employers who currently use shorter periods may need to consider whether they continue to offer meaningful protection once employees acquire unfair dismissal rights at the six-month point. Whatever the model, the key will be avoiding drift.
Regular reviews, clear expectations and timely interventions will be essential if concerns are to be identified and addressed before the qualifying period expires.
Dismissals close to the six-month threshold will need careful handling. Employers should ensure that any concerns are raised early, that employees have had reasonable opportunity to respond, and that decisions are taken promptly and documented thoroughly. An unhurried, loosely managed approach to early performance issues will pose a far greater risk once the new qualifying period takes effect.
It is equally important to remember that the changes do not affect the existing landscape for automatically unfair dismissals or discrimination claims. Those rights continue to arise from day one and require the same attention and care as before.
Looking ahead
The Government's shift from a day-one proposal to a six-month compromise reflects the wider balance the Employment Rights Bill seeks to strike between increased worker protection and the flexibility employers need to manage their workforce. While the six-month period will be welcomed by many businesses, it still represents the most significant change to unfair dismissal rights in a generation.
Employers should use the coming months to review their probation structures, reinforce performance management during the early stages of employment, and ensure that managers have the training and confidence to document and address issues promptly. As the Bill moves towards implementation, Buckles will continue to monitor developments closely.
If you would like guidance on preparing your organisation for the new qualifying period or support with updating your existing policies, our Employment Team can help you navigate the changes with clarity and confidence.
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.
