ACAS CONSULTS ON NEW APPROACH TO WORKPLACE DISPUTES

The first major overhaul of the Code of Practice in more than 15 years.

On 30 July 2026, Acas launched a consultation on a new draft Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures. While the existing Code focuses primarily on formal disciplinary and grievance processes, the draft Code seeks to encourage employers and workers to resolve concerns much earlier.

While the Code is not legally binding, Employment Tribunals must take the Acas Code into account for disciplinary and grievance processes, and unreasonable failure to follow the Code can result in an uplift or reduction of up to 25% in compensation awards.

It’s clear that the Code needs to tackle the new employee relations landscape. Employers are facing a significant increase in lengthy, highly detailed grievances, often running to dozens of pages. It is harder for employers to then find solutions, particularly where large language models reinforce misguided analyses of the situation. In the absence of any workable solutions, Acas and the Tribunals are equally bogged down with disputes where the parties are wholly entrenched in their position.

So what are the key changes?

• Informal resolution moves centre stage.

Under the current Code, informal resolution is mentioned only briefly in the foreword. The draft Code incorporates detailed provisions on resolving both employer concerns and employee concerns informally and makes early resolution a core principle of good workplace relations. This means tribunals will now be able to take parties' attempts, or failures, to resolve matters informally into account. The draft Code seeks to redirect attention towards practical resolution rather than procedural escalation.

• A direct response to increasingly long grievances.

Acas has expressly recognised concerns that formal grievances are becoming unnecessarily lengthy and complex, contributing to delay, cost and escalation. While AI use is not explicitly mentioned, the draft Code encourages employees to provide a short and clear written explanation of their concern when initially raising a grievance, with an opportunity to provide further information later if required.

• Employers may need to explain why formal action was necessary.

The draft Code proposes that employers notifying an individual of a formal disciplinary process should state what informal steps have already been taken, or explain why informal resolution was not appropriate. A similar obligation is proposed for employees raising formal grievances.

• Greater focus on reasonable adjustments and inclusion.

Unlike the current Code, the draft Code expressly reminds employers of their obligations under the Equality Act 2010 and references the need for reasonable adjustments throughout the process. It also encourages workers to raise adjustment requirements at an early stage.

• A new approach to suspension.

The existing Code provides little guidance on suspension. The draft Code makes clear that suspension should only be used in limited circumstances and encourages employers to communicate the reasons for suspension clearly.

• Mediation is formally recognised.

For the first time, the draft Code includes specific guidance on mediation and facilitated conversations as potential methods of resolving workplace disputes.

• A less adversarial tone.

The draft Code deliberately moves away from legalistic language and focuses on workplace "concerns" rather than immediately framing issues as disciplinary or grievance matters. Acas hopes this will encourage earlier and more constructive conversations.

While the draft Code is subject to consultation (open until 23 September 2026), it is expected that the final version will be largely unchanged. In preparation for the Code coming into force, employers can:

• Review policies and update manager training to ensure informal conversations, mediation, coaching and facilitated discussions are considered before formal processes are started where appropriate.

• Update policies and processes to encourage concise submissions and focus attention on the core issues requiring resolution.

• Keep records of informal conversations, mediation offers and other attempts to resolve issues. These records may become increasingly important where parties later dispute whether a matter could have been resolved earlier.

• Review suspension practices to ensure suspension is not treated as a default response during investigations.