At a Glance
Acas has published a consultation on a revised draft Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures with a view to “fixing the friction” and promoting better early resolution of concerns in the workplace. The current proposed draft is a much expanded and materially reworked version of the existing Code and is described as playing a “critical role in a wider reset to build good workplace relations.”
The consultation is open for feedback until 23 September 2026.
Overview of the Consultation
The Acas Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures (the ‘Code’) has long been a cornerstone for navigating workplace disputes in the UK. While a failure to follow the Code does not by itself give rise to legal liability, employment tribunals must take the Code into account in relevant cases and can adjust compensation awards by up to 25% for unreasonable failure to comply with it. This means that if a tribunal feels that an employer has unreasonably failed to follow the Code, they can increase any award they have made by up to 25%. Conversely, if they feel an employee has unreasonably failed to follow the Code, they can reduce any award they have made by up to 25%. The Code therefore effectively operates as the minimum standard of fair process that employers are expected to follow when dealing with employee grievances and disciplinary matters.
On 30 July 2026, Acas published a draft revised version of the Code for public consultation. The consultation notes that the Code was last fully revised in 2009 (although some revisions were made in 2015), so it has been some time since it was last looked at in detail. The consultation comes “at a time of broad social, economic and demographic shifts in the workplace”, and will play a “critical role in a wider reset to build good workplace relations.”
As a result, the draft Code is a considerably more detailed document, reorganising the guidance around a broader concept of ‘concerns at work’ and expanding its coverage to a wider scope of workers. It uses the language of ‘must’ to indicate legal requirements, ‘should’ for strongly recommended expectations and ‘good practice’ to indicate what Acas considers to be good employment practice.
We set out below some of the key changes proposed:
1. Widened Scope
One of the most significant conceptual shifts is in the Code’s terminology. The current Code applies to disciplinary and grievance situations involving employees. The new draft consistently refers to workers rather than employees, noting that it “sets out principles and standards of reasonable behaviour for employers and workers which should apply in most situations.” It also reframes the subject matter as concerns at work, covering both an employer’s concerns about a worker’s misconduct or poor performance, and a worker’s concerns, problems or complaints that they raise with their employer.
The consultation specifically seeks views on the change to ‘worker’ and whether this may have any unintended consequences. It does, however, note that the power for tribunals to adjust compensation awards by up to 25% for unreasonable failure to comply with the Code only applies to claims brought by employees.
The draft also expressly notes that other legal regimes may need to be applied alongside the Code, for example, the UK Market Abuse Regulation for senior employees or company directors, with the Code to be followed “to the extent that is reasonably possible” in such cases.
It is worth noting that neither the current nor the new draft Code apply to redundancy dismissals or the non-renewal of fixed term contracts upon expiry.
2. Greater Emphasis on Informal Resolution
The draft Code devotes considerably more attention to resolving concerns informally before any formal process begins. Whilst the current Code does acknowledge that many disciplinary or grievance issues can be resolved informally, it does not set out any specific expectations or procedures for informal resolution. The new draft Code goes further, bringing a framework for informal resolution within the Code’s ambit (with the resulting potential consequences for compensation if not followed).
It states that concerns about both misconduct or unsatisfactory performance are “usually best dealt with informally” and sets out a number of principles, including:
- Encouraging early, direct conversations between workers and managers
- Noting that it could be helpful to involve workplace representatives, where appropriate, to discuss the concern informally (with the worker’s agreement)
- That it may be useful to confirm the outcome of an informal approach in writing
Examples of possible outcomes of an informal approach are listed, including clarifying expected standards of conduct or performance, arranging training to help improve the worker’s performance, making reasonable adjustments to support a worker with a disability, offering mediation or a facilitated conversation, or commencing a formal disciplinary process.
Importantly, the draft reiterates that an informal conversation should never itself result in a formal disciplinary warning or sanction, and that any formal action should only follow a formal disciplinary meeting at which the worker has the right to be accompanied. It goes on to state that written notifications of formal disciplinary meetings should include a description of what steps have already been taken to attempt to resolve the concern informally, or the reason why none have been taken.
The same emphasis applies to workers’ concerns. Workers are encouraged to raise issues informally and guidance is provided to suggest that workers may find it helpful to discuss their concerns with a colleague or union representative to gain an alternative perspective on the issue. Employers will still be expected to take informally raised concerns seriously and to address them without unreasonable delay.
However, the Code is clear that an informal approach will not be appropriate in every situation and states that, for example, “concerns about gross misconduct or other serious issues that could result in dismissal should be handled using a formal disciplinary procedure.”
3. Content of Written Grievances
An addition that may be welcomed by employers is the inclusion of more prescriptive expectations on workers raising grievances. The draft Code states that written grievances should set out, if possible, how they would like the concern to be resolved and what informal steps have already been attempted (or the reason why none have been taken). It notes that a “short, clear written explanation of the concern will often be enough at this stage”, in order to help the employer consider the grievance and respond quickly.
The consultation acknowledges that Acas is aware of concerns about the increasing use of AI in disciplinary and grievance processes and therefore is also seeking views on whether the Code or non-statutory guidance should address such issues.
4. New Section on Avoiding Unlawful Discrimination
The draft Code includes a new dedicated section reminding employers of their obligations under the Equality Act 2010, including the duty to make reasonable adjustments for disabled workers. Practical examples given where processes may need to be adapted include ensuring meeting venues are physically accessible, providing documents in accessible formats, and allowing a worker to bring a support worker or interpreter in addition to their statutory right to be accompanied. Workers are encouraged to raise any adjustment needs as early as possible.
5. Restrictions on Suspension
The draft Code includes further guidance on suspensions and clarifies the narrow circumstances where suspension should be considered, i.e. where necessary to comply with a legal requirement, or where the employer reasonably believes it is needed to protect the investigation, the organisation, other staff, or the person under investigation. New good-practice guidance also addresses how a suspension decision should be communicated, which should be done sensitively, in private, with a clear explanation that it is not a disciplinary sanction, and with information about next steps and available support.
6. Disciplinary Meetings – Outcomes Beyond Formal Warnings
The draft Code expressly recognises that a disciplinary process may warrant an outcome beyond or in addition to a formal warning. It notes that such processes may identify a need for training, additional support, or another approach to resolve the issue. It gives the example of mediation or a facilitated conversation which may help where the misconduct or unsatisfactory performance is linked to a working relationship issue.
7. Mediation and Facilitated Conversations
An entirely new section is added on mediation and facilitated conversations. The draft encourages employers to consider appointing an independent, impartial accredited mediator or trained facilitator to help resolve a concern, and confirms that such processes are voluntary and confidential, and can be proposed at any stage by either party. It clarifies that any formal disciplinary or grievance process should be paused if mediation is agreed.
The draft also identifies situations where mediation will not be appropriate, for example, where a factual determination about statutory rights is required, where the issue needs someone else to make a decision, where there is a substantial power imbalance such as intimidation, coercion or abuse, or where a participant cannot meaningfully engage due to a mental health difficulty, learning difficulty, or lack of mental capacity.
8. Right to be Accompanied
The statutory right to be accompanied is consolidated into its own section with more precise definitions of what constitutes a ‘formal’ disciplinary or grievance meeting, and confirmation that there is no statutory right to be accompanied at informal conversations or investigatory meetings (save where needed to avoid unlawful discrimination or provided for in the employer’s policy). However, the draft Code notes that where the statutory right does not apply, and a worker requests to be accompanied, it is good practice to consider the request. Further clarification is also added to note that it may be reasonable to allow a rearranged meeting beyond five working days where a companion is unavailable, particularly in cases that could result in dismissal.
The consultation acknowledges that the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade is currently conducting a review of the statutory right of accompaniment and that Acas will consider any recommendations from that review when finalising the draft Code.
9. Training
The draft Code includes new language stating that it is “good practice to provide training and support to help managers, workers and representatives build the skills and confidence needed to resolve concerns early and effectively.” The consultation notes that this is underpinned by Acas research, which highlighted the importance of conflict handling skills.
For further information on Littler’s manager training offering, please contact our Client Training Partner Natasha Adom.
Impacts for Employers
The revised draft Code is considerably more detailed than the existing Code, and if implemented in this form will require employers to review and update their current processes and policies for managing disciplinary issues and staff grievances.
There are some interesting and potentially helpful procedural points within the draft Code for employers, particularly the emphasis on informal resolution and the setting of some parameters around the content of employee grievances. The consultation acknowledges a concern shared by employers that they have seen a trend towards unnecessarily long and complex written grievances which can cause delays in responding to and resolving concerns and can escalate tensions. This has of course been amplified with the use of AI, although the draft Code itself does not address the use of AI in disciplinary or grievances processes. The consultation does, however, separately seek views on whether the Code or non-statutory guidance can address concerns raised by stakeholders about the increasing use of AI in such processes. Employers may wish to consider sharing their own perspectives on this topic as part of the consultation process.
Employers may also wish to start exploring the use of mediation or facilitated conversations to help resolve concerns, given the emphasis on such alternative methods within the draft Code.
The Code is likely to take on added significance once the removal of the cap on compensatory awards under the Employment Rights Act 2025 (ERA 2025) comes into force from 1 January 2027, given the potential for tribunal awards to be adjusted by up to 25% for an unreasonable failure to comply with the Code. It is also interesting in the wider context of the ERA 2025 reforms that the draft Code doesn’t appear to include any ‘lighter touch’ process for certain dismissals, which was originally trailed alongside the earlier proposals to move to ‘day 1’ unfair dismissal rights.
Next Steps
The consultation is open until 23 September 2026 and responses can be submitted here.
Acas will consider any feedback and may then amend the draft Code further. Following this, it will need to be presented to the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade and if approved, will be laid before Parliament before it is in force. Alongside the existing Code, Acas has stated that its non-statutory guidance will also be reviewed and updated in line with revisions to the Code.
