Proposed changes to the ACAS Code: have your say

ACAS’s proposed revisions to its code of practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures represent the most significant update to the framework in years. 

While many of the suggested changes reflect what employers already regard as good employee relations practice, several proposals could have important implications for how organisations handle workplace concerns, disciplinary matters and capability issues. ACAS has launched a consultation on the revised draft, and employers are encouraged to respond in order to help to shape the code so that it is relevant and workable.

The key proposed changes to the code are explored in this article.

Extending the code to workers

A potentially significant development is the proposal to extend elements of the code beyond employees to include workers. From a practical perspective, this reflects the modern workforce and the increasing prevalence of non-traditional working arrangements. However, the proposal also creates some uncertainty.

The current statutory uplift for non-compliance with the ACAS code applies in the context of certain Employment Tribunal claims brought by employees. Workers do not enjoy unfair dismissal rights, raising questions about whether there will be any meaningful consequences of non-compliance where workers are concerned.

Greater focus on preventing discrimination

The draft introduces a dedicated section encouraging employers to take steps to avoid discrimination when handling disciplinary and grievance processes. Employers are encouraged to consider adjustments that may be required to enable participation in meetings and investigations, which clearly reflects best practice.

However, the current proposals appear heavily focused on practical and physical adjustments in relation to disability. There is less emphasis on wider adjustments that employers frequently have to consider in practice, such as:

• postponing meetings to accommodate health conditions;
• modifying communication methods;
• conducting meetings remotely;
• obtaining occupational health input; and
• providing alternative ways for individuals to engage with a process.

The draft also refers to the possibility of a ‘support worker’ attending meetings, but does not clearly define who such individuals might be or what role they would perform. Further guidance in this area would be helpful for employers.

Focus on informal resolution

Perhaps the strongest theme running through the revised code is the increased emphasis on informal resolution of what are now described as ‘concerns’.

The draft contains expanded guidance encouraging employers to address issues informally wherever possible before commencing formal disciplinary procedures. In many respects, this reflects best practice, particularly in terms of performance management. Early conversations, coaching, feedback and clear expectations can often resolve concerns more effectively than formal sanctions.

However, the proposals also raise practical questions. There will inevitably be situations where a formal process remains the most appropriate response, particularly where issues are serious or where the employment relationship is clearly unsustainable. Employers will therefore need to ensure that an increased focus on informal action does not inadvertently create unnecessary procedural burdens or delay legitimate management decisions.

The draft also includes more detailed guidance on what should be included in disciplinary notifications, including the need to explain any informal steps that have already been taken or, alternatively, the reasons why no informal action was considered appropriate. This reflects the wider focus on early and informal resolution but may also increase the administrative burden and could cause employers to slip up in respect of following a fair process.

The draft also suggests involving trade union representatives at the informal stage in some circumstances. While this may be appropriate in certain situations, it may be counter-productive in others.

Capability and conduct: a need for greater distinction

The revised disciplinary section of the code still remains geared primarily towards conduct issues and those drafting the revisions have arguably missed the opportunity to clarify how capability and conduct issues can and should be dealt with differently.

While many of the principles in the code are equally applicable to capability concerns, performance issues and misconduct often require very different management approaches. Capability processes typically involve support, monitoring, development opportunities and longer-term improvement plans, whereas disciplinary procedures focus on a system of warnings as conduct issues escalate.

Guidance on suspension

Specific guidance regarding the limited cases in which suspension will be appropriate is included in the draft revised code. This is to be welcomed. Many employers still default to suspension at the outset of investigations without thinking through properly whether it is necessary. If tribunals increasingly scrutinise suspension decisions through the lens of the revised code, employers may face greater risks where suspension is used unnecessarily or without proper consideration.

Approach to non-attendance at meetings

One welcome clarification for employers concerns employees who repeatedly fail or refuse to attend disciplinary meetings. The draft confirms that where an individual is persistently unable or unwilling to participate, employers should eventually make decisions on the basis of the evidence available. This provides helpful reassurance to employers faced with otherwise stalled processes. It recognises that fairness requires reasonable opportunities to participate, but not indefinite delay.

The impact of AI: ignored?

One gap in the revised draft is in relation to AI. Workplace disputes are becoming more unwieldy and difficult to manage as a result of the use by employees (and sometimes employers) of AI and, perhaps surprisingly, there is nothing in the revised code to address this. However, comments on this point are invited in the consultation document.

Inputting into the final version of the code

The final version of the revised ACAS code will ultimately determine the extent of employers’ obligations. Employer input will be vital to ensuring it is workable and relevant. The consultation closes on 23 September 2026 and all employers are encouraged to take the time to contribute to it. The consultation can be found here.