Trade unions and the Employment Rights Act 2025: what employers need to know now
By May 2026, many UK employers are still focused on the headline employment reforms landing through the Employment Rights Act 2025. But beneath the broader conversation lie a set of trade union changes that could prove among the most commercially significant for businesses over the next 12 months.
For some employers, particularly those with established union relationships, these reforms may feel manageable. For others, especially private-sector businesses with no history of union engagement, this could come as a genuine shock.
That was the clear message from Andrew Knight, Partner of Employment Law at Shepherd and Wedderburn LLP, when the Hunter Adams team sat down with him to discuss what is changing, what is still to come, and what employers and HR leaders should be doing now.
Andrew Knight – Image: Kenny Elrick/DC Thomson
Andrew advises organisations across the UK on contentious and non-contentious employment matters, including tribunal claims, restructures, TUPE transfers, industrial relations issues and recognition disputes. His message was direct: many employers still underestimate the scale of what is happening.
Alongside Andrew’s legal insight, Kirsten McKenzie, Senior HR Manager at Hunter Adams, shares practical HR actions leaders should consider now.
Why these changes matter more than many employers realise
When asked which trade union reforms matter most, Andrew did not hesitate.
“I think there are three. Access, the reduction in requirements to achieve statutory recognition, and changes around industrial action balloting. But of those three, the biggest is access, just because it is not something we have really had before.”
That point is critical.
Historically, many employers assumed trade unions were only relevant if:
- They already recognised one
- Union reps were active on-site
- The business operated in a heavily unionised sector (like the public sector or manufacturing)
- There had already been organising activity among staff
Andrew says that this mindset is now outdated.
“Most organisations think, if a trade union is not already knocking at our door looking for members, then we are fine. We do not need to worry about this.”
Andrew warns that new access rights mean “a trade union can come completely out of the blue”, even where there has been no previous union presence.
It may not need existing recognition. It may not need deep workforce support at the outset. It may simply view the employer as an attractive growth opportunity.
“They can just think: we are active in this sector, you are a big employer in the sector, we want access to your people.”
Many employers still see trade union reform as a niche issue. Andrew says that is a mistake.
“We had a room on Tuesday at our recent Employment Law event of 120 HR professionals in Aberdeen, and you could hear a penny drop because of the shock and awe at some of this.”
His point is clear: even experienced HR leaders are only now realising how materially these changes could affect employers.
Union access rights: the October 2026 shift
One of the most anticipated changes is the expected introduction of physical and digital union access rights later in 2026.
Andrew points to recent draft guidance as highly revealing.
“There was a draft Code of Practice published last month on access, adding a little more meat to the bones in terms of how they see this playing out.”
Andrew sees this as a major concern for employers.
“The broad takeaway is it is going to be very difficult for employers in most circumstances to bat away an access request.”
Where voluntary agreement cannot be reached, matters may go before the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC), which can determine arrangements.
Andrew believes many employers are underestimating the practical burden this may create.
Under proposed default terms, the frequency of access may need to be agreed upon, with a presumption that weekly access could be deemed reasonable in most cases.
“You think about that from the perspective of a business. It might not even meet with its most important clients weekly.”
For lean businesses, operationally stretched sites or dispersed workforces, that could be significant. The business-as-usual interruption in terms of the people and resource pull could be significant here.
HR perspective: Kirsten McKenzie, Senior HR Manager, Hunter Adams
Many employers will instinctively ask, “Can we stop this?” A better question is, “How do we manage this professionally if it happens?”
Businesses should be planning now:
- Who handles an access request
- What facilities are realistically available
- How hybrid and remote workers are included
- How managers should respond if approached
- How normal operations are protected
Preparation creates options. Delay usually creates pressure.
Which employers are most likely to be targeted?
Andrew notes that the proposed scope starts at employers with 21 or more employees.
Importantly, that is not always as simple as it sounds.
“If you are part of a group of companies, and there are 21 across the group, then you may still fall within this.”
That means many businesses that think of themselves as small or standalone may still be caught.
As for likely union priorities, Andrew is pragmatic.
“The trade unions do not have unlimited resources.”
So where will they focus?
“They are going to target where they think this is going to be of most benefit to them.”
In practical terms:
- Larger headcount employers
- Concentrated workforces
- Sectors with historic union presence
- Organisations seen as influential within supply chains
- Sectors where membership growth looks realistic
Andrew used offshore energy as an example.
“They will look at the operators, who own the offshore assets, because those tend to be larger employers, and if they get in there, they may influence companies further down the supply chain.”
He also expects continued interest across manufacturing, transport, care, healthcare and public services, but notes newer sectors should not assume immunity.
“In new and emerging technologies, where workforces are more digitally aware, there may be an appetite to have active representation as well.”
He also referenced the rise of newer and emerging unions in gig-economy environments, suggesting the future may not always look like traditional industrial relations models.
Recognition rules: why this is such a major power shift
Alongside access rights, Andrew believes that changes to statutory recognition could materially alter the balance of power between employers and unions.
Before April 2026, unions had to clear more demanding thresholds to gain formal recognition for collective bargaining.
Andrew explained it using a simple example.
“Say you have a workforce of 100.”
Under the previous regime, a union would need:
- at least 10% membership in the proposed bargaining unit
- evidence that a majority supported recognition
- potentially a ballot with at least 40% of the workforce voting in favour, plus majority turnout support
Now, Andrew says, key hurdles have been removed or reduced.
“The requirement to show a majority-supported recognition is gone completely.”
“The requirement to have 40% vote in favour is now gone as well.”
That means, in his example:
“You could have only 10 union members. Only those 10 vote. Six vote in favour, four vote against, and 90 do not vote. All of a sudden, the employer has to recognise the trade union. It is a massive shift of power.”
Andrew also notes the government retains the power to reduce the initial membership threshold from 10% to as low as 2% through regulations.
For employers, this matters because recognition is not symbolic. It will create formal bargaining obligations around:
- Pay
- Holidays
- Working time
- Consultation structures
- Future workforce changes
HR perspective: Kirsten McKenzie, Senior HR Manager, Hunter Adams
Too many leaders hear “trade union recognition” and think it is simply another employee forum or consultation group.
They are very different things.
Trade union recognition can reshape decision-making, negotiation timetables and leadership flexibility. HR teams should be educating boards now so nobody learns what trade union recognition means for the first time when paperwork lands or a union makes an approach.
What employees often do not realise about trade union recognition
One of Andrew’s most valuable observations was that employees may support trade union recognition without fully understanding the practical consequences.
He gave a pay negotiation example.
Imagine an employer offers a 7% pay rise. The union demands 12%.
“A significant proportion of employees are saying, no, no, we would be happy with seven.”
But once trade union recognition applies, the employer may be constrained in how it implements that offer if agreement has not been reached.
“Someone else negotiating on your behalf, basically.”
He also notes non-members will be affected.
“If you recognise the trade union in respect of that entire workforce, they are all covered by the collective bargaining arrangement.”
So an employee who never joined the union may still be impacted by outcomes shaped largely through union member consultation.
That nuance is often missing from workplace conversations.
Industrial action: why the balance of power may shift
Andrew also highlighted changes to industrial action balloting thresholds. In simple terms, these are the voting rules a trade union must meet before it can lawfully ask members to take strike action or other forms of industrial action.
Previously, in some sectors, higher turnout and support thresholds applied. Reforms have reduced some of those barriers.
He is careful not to predict strikes everywhere.
“Unions would still only call members out on strike as a last resort.”
Why? Because workers lose pay.
“That is people giving up a day’s pay to participate in a strike.”
But he does believe leverage may change.
“It will be far easier for them post-August 2026 to get a strike mandate.”
“So it might be that we see threats of industrial action coming much sooner within a process.”
For employers, even the credible threat of action can materially affect negotiations, planning and reputation.
What about penalties and enforcement?
Andrew also drew attention to the proposed penalty regime for breaches of access obligations. Under the draft framework, either side could raise a complaint with the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC) if the agreed access arrangements are not being followed.
If the CAC finds there has been a breach, it may first order the party at fault to take steps to remedy the issue. Where there is a further breach within 12 months, or a failure to comply with the CAC’s order, financial penalties could then apply.
Andrew outlined escalating fines of up to:
- £75,000 for a further breach or failure to comply after an initial CAC finding
- £150,000 for a subsequent breach
- £500,000 for a third breach
His view was that, in practical terms, it is more likely that employers than unions would face scrutiny, simply because employers would usually be responsible for facilitating site access, meetings, system access, or agreed communications. And that it’s the day-to-day business operations being disrupted by Union access.
Andrew also expects the CAC to act proportionately, taking into account factors such as the employer’s size, available resources, and the seriousness or deliberate nature of the breach. Even so, the message for employers is clear: access requests should not be treated casually or left unmanaged.
The biggest misconception in April 2026
Andrew’s clearest warning was reserved for employers who think this only affects unionised businesses.
“There is still a misconception that the trade union aspects of the Employment Rights Act do not matter because we do not recognise a trade union.”
He immediately flips that logic.
“If you do not recognise a trade union now, you are the people who most need to know about these new rights.”
That is because organisations with no prior experience may have:
- No response plan
- No trained managers
- No employee voice alternatives
- No established relationships
- No board awareness of the risks
HR perspective: Kirsten McKenzie, Senior HR Manager, Hunter Adams
Often, the real issue is not the presence of the union. It is whether employees feel they are being listened to.
When communication is weak, promises fall by the wayside, and managers avoid difficult conversations, frustration builds. Strong workplaces are not built when a union appears, but long before that. Consider now how communication can be improved within your workplace. What current employee forums do you have in place, and are they effective? If not, look at how this can be improved now.
Anti-union detriment: another change employers should not overlook
Alongside access, recognition and industrial action reform, Andrew also highlighted an important protection many employers may not yet have focused on: anti-union detriment.
In simple terms, this relates to treating someone unfairly because they have taken part in lawful trade union activity.
Andrew explained that dismissal for certain trade union activities has long carried legal risk. What the Employment Rights Act 2025 does is widen the focus beyond dismissal alone.
“It has always been the case that dismissing someone for participating in certain trade union-related activities would be unfair. What the Employment Rights Act is doing is closing the loophole around conduct short of dismissal.”
That means employers should think beyond obvious headline decisions, such as termination. The legal risk may now extend to negative treatment, such as:
- Refusing promotion opportunities
- Withholding bonuses unfairly
- Overlooking training or development opportunities
- Disadvantaging someone in selection processes
- Excluding individuals because of union activity
- Treating union members less favourably than colleagues
Andrew noted that government consultation has suggested there may not be a rigid, prescribed list of what counts as detriment, meaning tribunals may look closely at facts and context.
Importantly, he also clarified that withholding pay for time not worked during lawful strike action would not fall into the same category.
The practical message for employers is clear: if a worker is active in trade union matters, decisions affecting them should be fair, evidence-based and capable of objective explanation.
HR perspective: Kirsten McKenzie, Senior HR Manager, Hunter Adams
This is where good people management really matters. In many businesses, risk does not come from policy. It comes from inconsistent manager behaviour in the heat of the moment.
A frustrated manager saying “they are always causing trouble” before a promotion or bonus decision can create real exposure. HR teams should be reminding leaders now that personal views on unions must never influence employment decisions.
Manager training, clean documentation and consistent, objective and evidence based decision-making processes will be key.
What should employers do now?
Andrew’s advice was emphatic.
“Do not just bury your head in the sand and hope it is going to go away.”
His message to employers was simple: waiting until a union formally requests access or recognition could leave you reacting under pressure, with little room to shape the outcome.
Instead, he recommends acting now.
1. Get leadership informed
“You are not thanked by the executive leadership team if the first time they hear about this is when a trade union is knocking at the door.”
Boards and senior leaders need to understand that this is not just an HR issue. It can affect operations, cost, employee relations and future pay negotiations.
2. Review employee forums
If you already have employee reps, listening groups or forums, ask whether they genuinely work.
Do employees feel heard? Do issues get resolved? Are outcomes visible?
“You asked for this, and we delivered.”
That is the message employees should be hearing from leadership.
3. Define workable access terms
Think in advance about what would be realistic and manageable if a Trade Union request arrived tomorrow:
- Monthly in-person access
- Scheduled meeting room use
- Periodic Zoom/Teams sessions
- Sensible notice periods
Being prepared now gives employers more control later.
4. Assess whether unions are already active
Andrew encouraged employers to be realistic about what may already be happening internally.
Are posters appearing in the workplace? Are conversations taking place? Are employees openly involved with unions? Is there visible appetite for representation?
If so, ignoring it rarely helps.
“We might as well tackle that up front.”
That could mean speaking with employees, understanding concerns, and communicating clearly about what trade union recognition would mean in practice.
5. Educate your workforce carefully
Andrew also stressed the importance of employees understanding what trade union recognition actually means, particularly around collective bargaining and who negotiates on their behalf.
Where there are clear signs of interest, honest communication matters. Where there are none, employers may choose not to introduce the topic unnecessarily.
6. Get expert support early
For larger organisations, Andrew says legal advice is essential. For leaner teams or growing businesses, both legal and HR support may be needed.
Good advice early is almost always easier, cheaper and less disruptive than trying to fix issues once positions have hardened.
HR perspective: Kirsten McKenzie, Senior HR Manager, Hunter Adams
The common thread here is preparedness.
The organisations that handle change best are rarely the ones scrambling after a letter arrives. They are the ones who already know their people, trust levels, manager capability and likely pressure points.
Now is the time to get organised, get informed and get ahead of it.
Is there any positive side for employers?
Andrew offered a balanced answer.
“If you are in favour of trade unions and feel they have a positive influence on workplace cultures, then this is all good.”
But he also recognises the frustration many good employers may feel.
“Employers who treat their staff well, pay people well, listen to their staff, can feel they are being smacked over the head by legislation designed for those who do not.”
That tension will resonate with many businesses.
Final thoughts
The Employment Rights Act 2025 has put trade unions back on employers’ strategic agenda.
The risk now is not panic. It is complacency.
Businesses that prepare early, strengthen employee voice, educate leaders and seek practical advice will be in a far stronger position than those who assume it will never reach them.
Hunter Adams helps organisations navigate complex people challenges with clear, commercially focused HR support, from outsourced HR and interim leadership to employee relations, manager capability and culture change.
If you would like an informal conversation about what these reforms could mean for your business, contact us today.
For legal considerations, Andrew can be contacted at andrew.knight@shepwedd.com
