The Six-Month Countdown: How the Employment Rights Act Is Changing UK Hiring for 2027

From 1 January 2027, one of the most significant changes to UK dismissal law will take effect. Under the Employment Rights Act 2025, the qualifying period for ordinary unfair dismissal protection will fall from two years of continuous employment to just six months.

For UK employers, that changes more than the timetable for reviewing probation.

It shortens the period organisations have to understand whether a new employee is right for the role before ordinary unfair dismissal rights apply. It also increases the importance of making structured, consistent, and well-evidenced hiring decisions before employment begins.

And while January 2027 may still sound some distance away, the hiring decisions being made in 2026 are already part of the countdown.

Employees who have completed at least six months of continuous employment by 1 January 2027 will gain ordinary unfair dismissal protection when the new rules take effect. For HR and talent acquisition leaders, Employment Rights Act 2025 preparation therefore needs to begin before 2027, and it needs to begin with recruitment.

The answer is not to make hiring more cautious for the sake of it. Nor is it simply to shorten probationary periods.

It is to strengthen the quality, consistency, and documentation of the decisions that happen before and immediately after a person joins.

Key Takeaways

• The Employment Rights Act 2025 reduces the qualifying period for ordinary unfair dismissal protection from two years to six months from 1 January 2027.
• Employees who have already completed six months of continuous employment by 1 January 2027 will gain protection immediately.
• The existing cap on compensatory awards for unfair dismissal will also be removed.
• Employers should review how their probationary periods, performance management, and dismissal procedures will operate under the new rules.
• Recruitment also deserves attention. Structured candidate assessment, consistent evaluation criteria, and an appropriate audit trail can help organisations make better-evidenced hiring decisions before an offer is made.
• Technology, including agentic AI, can support this process, but human oversight remains essential for consequential employment decisions.

What Does the Employment Rights Act 2025 Change for Employers?

One of the most consequential Employment Rights Act 2025 changes for employers is the reduction in the unfair dismissal qualifying period. Under the new rules, the qualifying period for ordinary unfair dismissal claims will fall from two years to six months of continuous employment.

The change takes effect on 1 January 2027 across England, Scotland, and Wales. Northern Ireland has separate employment legislation. Importantly, the change does not apply only to employees hired after January 2027.

Employees who have already completed at least six months of continuous employment when the new rules take effect will gain ordinary unfair dismissal protection immediately.

That makes the six-month unfair dismissal rule relevant to employers hiring during 2026, not just those making hiring decisions after the legislation takes effect.

Unfair Dismissal Rights: From Two Years to Six Months

Aspect	Until 31 December 2026	From 1 January 2027
Qualifying period for ordinary unfair dismissal	Usually two years	Six months’ continuous service
Compensatory award	Statutory cap applies	Existing cap removed
Employees already above six months’ service	May not yet qualify under the ordinary two-year rule	Gain protection from 1 January 2027
Written reasons for dismissal	Two-year qualifying period	Six-month qualifying period

The change does not mean every dismissal after six months will automatically be unfair.

Employers will still be able to dismiss employees for legitimate reasons, but the reason for dismissal and the process followed will need to satisfy the relevant legal requirements. Existing day-one protections against discrimination and certain automatically unfair dismissals also remain.

The practical difference is the speed at which ordinary unfair dismissal protection arrives. For employers accustomed to a two-year qualifying period, six months creates a considerably shorter window in which recruitment, onboarding, probation, performance management, and documentation need to work together effectively.

How Does the Employment Rights Act Affect Probation Periods?

Probationary periods still matter. They can help employers establish expectations, review performance, provide support, and determine whether someone is settling successfully into a role. But a contractual probationary period does not override statutory employment rights.

Once the new six-month qualifying period takes effect, employers using contractual probation will need to consider carefully how those arrangements interact with the employee’s unfair dismissal rights. That makes one assumption particularly risky: treating probation as the point at which an organisation first seriously determines whether someone was the right hire.

Instead, employers should review probation alongside recruitment, onboarding, performance management, documentation, and dismissal procedures. The shorter the statutory qualifying period becomes, the stronger the case for building confidence in a hiring decision before the employee starts.

How the Six-Month Unfair Dismissal Rule Changes the Cost of a Bad Hire

A bad hire has always carried a cost.

There is the recruitment spend required to fill the position, the time managers invest in interviewing and onboarding, lost productivity while a role remains below capacity, and the cost of restarting recruitment if the employee leaves or does not work out. The Employment Rights Act 2025 adds another consideration.

Once the six-month unfair dismissal qualifying period takes effect, employers will reach the point at which ordinary unfair dismissal protection applies considerably sooner.

That does not make a poor hiring decision automatically an employment-law problem. But it does increase the importance of being able to explain how recruitment and subsequent employment decisions were made. It also raises a broader question about where organisations currently place their confidence.

If the hiring process is relatively light and the organisation relies heavily on probation to determine whether somebody is suitable, that balance may need to change. More of the evaluation can happen before the offer.

A Changing Labour Market Adds to the Decision

The legislation is also arriving while employers are navigating a changing UK labour market. That matters because a larger or more competitive candidate pool does not automatically make hiring easier.

Recruitment teams still need to identify which candidates best match the requirements of the role and do so consistently. For HR leaders, the question should therefore not simply be:

How can we avoid making a hiring mistake?

No recruitment process can eliminate that possibility entirely.

A more useful question is:

How can we make each hiring decision more structured, consistent, and evidence-based before the employment relationship begins?

That is where assessment design and hiring governance become increasingly important.

Shrink the Probation Window, Not the Hiring Bar

A shorter qualifying period should not lead organisations to rush decisions or become unnecessarily risk-averse. It should encourage them to strengthen the evidence behind hiring.

Front-Load Structured Assessment Before the Offer Stage

An unstructured interview can leave a significant part of the hiring decision dependent on individual impressions. A structured candidate assessment creates greater consistency by evaluating candidates against predetermined criteria relevant to the role.

Those criteria might include technical capability, behavioural competencies, communication skills, job-specific knowledge, or other requirements identified before assessment begins. The objective is not to automate the final hiring decision.

It is to give recruiters and hiring managers better evidence on which to base that decision.

A structured pre-recorded video interview process can support the same principle by giving candidates a consistent assessment experience and enabling responses to be evaluated against common criteria.

This becomes particularly relevant as employers reconsider how much assessment should happen before employment rather than relying on probation to uncover problems later. When ordinary unfair dismissal rights begin after six months instead of two years, improving the evidence behind the original hiring decision becomes more valuable.

Build a Governed, Auditable Record From Day One

Consistency is only part of the equation. Organisations also need to know how a decision was reached.

An appropriate audit trail can record key stages of the recruitment process, including approvals, assessments, candidate progression, and relevant hiring activity.

For enterprise and public-sector employers, this is especially important because hiring decisions may involve multiple stakeholders, approval levels, and governance requirements.

A connected hiring operating system can help bring those workflows together rather than leaving important recruitment information scattered across emails, spreadsheets, and separate tools.

Any use of candidate data also needs to reflect the organisation’s obligations under the UK GDPR and Data Protection Act 2018. UK GDPR should not be treated as interchangeable with EU GDPR simply because the terminology and many underlying principles are similar.

Keep Human Judgement at the Centre

Agentic AI can reduce repetitive recruitment work, help structure candidate information, and support recruiters in identifying relevant evidence. It should not turn consequential hiring decisions into unexplained automated outcomes.

Employers evaluating AI recruitment technology should understand what information informs recommendations, where automation is being used, how decisions can be reviewed, and where human approval remains required. That combination of structure, technology, and human oversight is more useful than simply adding another AI tool to the recruitment process.

Employment Rights Act 2025 Checklist: What UK Employers Should Do Before 2027

The Employment Rights Act changes coming in 2027 should be treated as a reason to review the complete early-employment journey, beginning before an employee is hired.

For HR and talent acquisition teams, practical preparation should include:

• Review probationary periods and policies. Determine how existing probation arrangements will operate alongside the new six-month unfair dismissal qualifying period.
• Strengthen structured assessment. Define the criteria candidates should be evaluated against and apply them consistently during the recruitment process.
• Document hiring decisions appropriately. Make sure relevant assessments, approvals, and recruitment activity create a usable audit trail.
• Review early performance management. Managers should establish expectations, provide feedback, and document concerns consistently rather than waiting until the end of probation.
• Train hiring and line managers. Managers need to understand both the organisation’s recruitment standards and the employment processes they are responsible for once someone joins.
• Review recruitment technology and governance. Determine whether current systems provide appropriate visibility, controls, permissions, and documentation.
• Connect recruitment and onboarding. Evidence gathered during assessment should help create a clearer transition into expectations, development, and early performance management.
• Seek appropriate employment-law advice. Recruitment technology and process improvements can support governance, but they are not substitutes for legal advice about individual employment decisions.

The key point for employers is timing. January 2027 is the implementation date. It should not be the preparation date.

Organisations hiring in 2026 are already bringing in employees who may have six months of continuous service when the new rules take effect. For recruitment leaders, the countdown has therefore already started.

The Qualifying Period Is Shrinking. The Hiring Bar Should Not.

The Employment Rights Act 2025 does not make good hiring impossible. It makes the quality of the decision increasingly important. From 1 January 2027, the ordinary unfair dismissal qualifying period will be six months rather than two years. For employers hiring in 2026, however, the practical countdown has already begun.

That gives organisations a clear reason to examine what happens before an offer is signed, how candidates are evaluated, what evidence supports the final decision, and how effectively that information carries into onboarding and early employment. Probation still matters.

But it should not be the first time an organisation seriously tests whether someone is right for the role. The stronger approach is to build confidence earlier.

Ready to Make Every Hiring Decision Better Evidenced?

When the time available to evaluate a new hire becomes shorter, relying on CVs, disconnected interviews, and manual recruitment processes leaves too much important information fragmented across the hiring journey.

Elevatus is an agentic AI hiring operating system that helps enterprises and governments structure, manage, and document recruitment from the moment a hiring need is approved through candidate assessment and selection.

It helps organisations strengthen the process before an employee starts by bringing recruitment workflows, candidate evaluation, approvals, and hiring information into a more connected environment.

With Elevatus, organisations can:

✅ Evaluate candidates more consistently using structured assessments and standardised hiring criteria.
✅ Maintain clearer hiring records through governed workflows, permissions, approvals, and traceable recruitment activity.
✅ Reduce repetitive recruitment work with agentic AI while keeping recruiters and hiring managers in control of consequential hiring decisions.

Preparing your hiring process for 2027? Request a free Elevatus demo and see how a more structured, auditable recruitment process works in practice.

Frequently Asked Questions About the Employment Rights Act 2025

What is the Employment Rights Act 2025?

The Employment Rights Act 2025 is a major package of UK employment law reforms that received Royal Assent in December 2025. It covers areas including unfair dismissal, statutory sick pay, family leave, dismissal and rehire, harassment protections, and other employment rights.

For recruitment teams, one of the most significant changes is the reduction in the ordinary unfair dismissal qualifying period from two years to six months.

When does the six-month unfair dismissal qualifying period start?

The change takes effect on 1 January 2027. From that date, most employees will qualify for ordinary unfair dismissal protection after six months of continuous employment rather than two years.

What happens to the two-year unfair dismissal rule?

The ordinary qualifying period is being reduced from two years of continuous employment to six months. From 1 January 2027, eligible employees will therefore gain ordinary unfair dismissal rights considerably earlier in the employment relationship.

Does the Employment Rights Act change probation periods?

The legislation changes the statutory qualifying period for ordinary unfair dismissal rather than simply replacing contractual probation periods. A contractual probationary period and the statutory qualifying period are separate concepts. Employers should therefore review how probation operates alongside the new six-month rule rather than assuming that a six-month probationary period itself provides protection.

Does the change apply to staff who are already employed?

Yes. Employees who have already completed at least six months of continuous employment by 1 January 2027 will gain ordinary unfair dismissal protection when the change takes effect. That is one reason employers hiring during 2026 should begin preparing before the implementation date.

Can an employee claim unfair dismissal during probation?

Being on probation does not in itself prevent an employee from having statutory employment rights. Under the new rules, ordinary unfair dismissal protection will generally become available once the employee reaches the required six months of continuous service. Separate day-one protections, including protections relating to discrimination and certain automatically unfair reasons for dismissal, also exist independently of the ordinary qualifying period.

Employers should therefore avoid treating probation as a substitute for a fair, well-documented employment process.

Will the Employment Rights Act reduce permanent hiring in the UK?

Some employers may respond more cautiously to increased employment costs and regulatory change, but the impact will vary between organisations and sectors. For talent acquisition teams, the more useful response is not simply to hire fewer people.

It is to strengthen the quality and evidence behind the hires the organisation does make.

How can structured hiring help employers prepare for the Employment Rights Act?

A structured hiring process evaluates candidates against consistent, role-relevant criteria and creates clearer evidence behind selection decisions. That can help organisations make more informed choices before an offer is made while improving consistency and governance across recruitment.

Structured hiring does not eliminate employment-law risk, nor does it replace a fair employment process once somebody has been hired. Its value is in helping employers build greater confidence in the original decision before the employment relationship begins.

What other Employment Rights Act changes should employers consider?

The Employment Rights Act introduces reforms across several areas of employment law. For example, from 1 January 2027 the existing cap on compensatory awards for unfair dismissal will be removed and stronger protections around dismissal and rehire will take effect. Other provisions are being introduced at different points throughout 2026 and 2027.

Employers should therefore review the wider implementation timetable rather than preparing for the six-month unfair dismissal change in isolation.

Author