Understanding the Impact of the Reduced Qualifying Period for Unfair Dismissal

This article summarises the key discussion points from our March HR Breakfast, where HR professionals explored the implications of reducing the qualifying period for unfair dismissal from two years to six months.

Why the Change Matters to Employers

The government’s decision to shorten the qualifying period significantly changes the landscape for employers. Many organisations have relied on the two‑year period as a safety net, giving them time to assess new hires before the risk of an unfair dismissal claim arises. With the protection now kicking in at six months, employers need a more structured and proactive approach from the very beginning of employment.

This shift affects recruitment, onboarding, probation, performance management and internal processes. Employers who continue operating as if they still have two years of flexibility could find themselves exposed to avoidable claims and reputational damage.

A New Focus on Performance Management

A major theme in our discussion was the heightened importance of robust performance management. With a much shorter window before employees gain protection, organisations must ensure that expectations, objectives and support mechanisms are in place from the outset.

This includes:

• clear and measurable objectives
• early identification of performance concerns
• constructive feedback delivered promptly
• timely interventions to support improvement

Proactive performance management is no longer simply good practice, but essential risk management.

Clear Objectives and KPIs From Day One

Participants agreed that clarity from day one is essential. Employees must understand exactly what is expected of them, including measurable KPIs, behavioural expectations and role‑specific targets.

This not only positions employees for success but also provides a fair and transparent foundation for addressing concerns if performance falls short. It also ensures that employers can demonstrate that expectations were communicated clearly if a dismissal is challenged.

Probation Period Practices Will Need Reviewing

Many employers have historically relied on the probation period as a relatively low‑risk opportunity to dismiss employees who aren’t working out. In some cases, individuals have been let go without a clear process or proper documentation because they did not yet have unfair dismissal rights.

This approach becomes unsafe under the new rules. Even during probation, employers will need to ensure that dismissals are based on a fair reason and follow a fair and reasonable process. That doesn’t mean probation periods become redundant; it means they need to be managed more carefully, with clear communication, structured reviews and documented feedback.

Strengthening Manager Capability

The discussion also highlighted the growing importance of manager training. Managers often hold responsibility for first‑line performance conversations, yet many have not been trained in conducting them fairly and consistently.

Key areas for improved training include:

• setting expectations and KPIs
• giving constructive feedback
• documenting conversations
• understanding when and how to escalate issues
• running fair and reasonable procedures

Equipping managers with these skills reduces organisational risk and ensures employees are treated consistently, regardless of who manages them.

More Structured and Documented Catch‑Ups

While many organisations hold informal catch‑ups, they are often undocumented. With the qualifying period reducing, documentation becomes increasingly important. Notes don’t need to be overly formal, but they should summarise:

• what was discussed
• any concerns raised
• guidance or support provided
• agreed actions and next steps

This provides an audit trail and helps ensure consistency, especially where different managers may handle similar situations differently.

Rethinking Recruitment Practices

With less time to assess suitability after hiring, organisations may need to strengthen their recruitment processes. That could include more robust interviewing, better skills testing, improved cultural fit assessment or enhanced referencing.

Some employers may consider the increased use of fixed‑term contracts or shorter contract cycles, though these options require careful handling to avoid creating different legal risks.

How We Can Help Your Organisation

If you’d like advice on preparing your organisation for the new six‑month qualifying period, our Employment team is here to help. We regularly support HR professionals with practical, risk‑aware processes, from recruitment to performance management

Contact us to discuss your organisation, or explore further insights on our Employment page.

About the Author