From 1 January 2027, the qualifying period for ordinary unfair dismissal will reduce from two years to six months in England, Scotland and Wales, but for employers, preparation cannot wait until then. Employees who already have six months’ service on 1 January 2027 will be protected, with employees recruited during 2026 potentially reaching the new qualifying period at or shortly after the new rules take effect.
At first glance, this change as part of the Employment Rights Act 2025 represents a significant operational change to how organisations may manage new employees. In practice, however, for many organisations the implications may be less dramatic; after all, six-month probationary periods are already the norm.
But there is a difference between having a six-month probation period and actually using it properly.
What this means operationally
A probation period should never just be a date in your HR system followed by a meeting at the end of it. Rather, it is an opportunity to assess whether someone is right for the role, whether they are meeting the required standards, what support or training they need and whether any concerns need to be addressed, and Acas describes it in much the same way.
The change to unfair dismissal protection makes this even more important. If a manager first raises concerns at the five-month review period, the organisation may have missed several opportunities to address the problem, leaving limited time to remedy it or make decisions about ongoing employment. If there are genuine concerns at month two or three, they should not be allowed to drift simply because there is still time before the probation end date.
Importantly, the six-month point should be the conclusion of an assessment process, not the beginning of one.
Make probation a process, not a meeting
Once someone starts, there should be regular check-ins to discuss progress, identify training needs, clarify expectations and address small issues before they become bigger ones.
As the probation period progresses, managers should be assessing performance against the requirements of the role, as well as conduct and behaviours. Where concerns arise, they should be raised promptly, with appropriate records of important conversations and agreed actions.
There should be no surprises when the final formal probation review arrives; the manager and employee should already have a good understanding of the landscape. This is particularly important because simply terminating employment within the probation period does not remove all legal risk and organisations should maintain a fair process.
Good risk management starts with robust recruitment
For organisations reviewing their approach, it is worth thinking about probation as a journey rather than a single event, starting before the employee joins.
From the outset, hiring managers should be clear on what they are looking for and what good measurable performance looks like to avoid appointing someone who is not suited to the role. This is enabled through ensuring the role and job description is well-defined and realistic, that candidates are assessed via structured interviews and/or other relevant assessment, and they are scored fairly against appropriate selection criteria.
Likewise, it should be viewed as a learning opportunity if there have previously been some failed probation periods; managers should review earlier cases to assess the potential root cause(s) of the issue and address it if it related to recruitment, onboarding, training or management.
The cost of getting it wrong
An unsuitable appointment brings the obvious costs of recruitment, onboarding, training and management time, as well as the less obvious impact on productivity, team dynamics, colleague wellbeing, and service delivery. If the employment relationship then develops into a dispute, there can be additional financial and operational costs, including management time, disruption, further recruitment costs and potential reputational damage.
From a risk perspective, alongside the reduction to the unfair dismissal qualifying period, the compensatory award cap is being removed, increasing the potential financial exposure resulting from a successful claim. Moreover, employment disputes are also often uninsured, meaning that where costs cannot be recovered through insurance, they fall directly on the organisation's budget. This clearly makes getting recruitment and the first six months of employment right an important part of both the HR and wider organisation risk agenda.
A good probation process starts with good management
No probation process will work if managers do not engage with it; HR can provide the framework, guidance and support, but it is the manager who sees the employee's day-to-day performance. Managers therefore need to be confident in giving constructive feedback, raising concerns and having difficult conversations. They need to know when to seek HR advice, what should be documented (generally everything!) and how to distinguish between performance, capability and conduct issues (oftentimes skill versus will). They also need to recognise when a concern may involve a protected characteristic or another day-one employment protection.
One of the biggest practical risks may therefore be managerial reluctance; allowing concerns to drift because a conversation feels difficult or involving HR only when the manager has already decided to terminate employment. Best practice is to involve HR early enough to help manage a concern or identify and mitigate potential risks.
Six months does not mean a six-month legal safety net
Regardless of the reduction in the qualifying period, employees already have day-one protections covering areas including discrimination and automatically unfair dismissal. There are also contractual matters to consider, including notice and wrongful dismissal, which do not depend on two years’ service.
The answer, therefore, is not to become hesitant to recruit or to assume that every underperforming employee presents an insurmountable legal risk. It is to make better decisions, earlier, and to make sure managers have the skills and support to do so.
Is your organisation ready?
Employers should be asking themselves:
- Is our probation process genuinely structured, or is it largely administrative?
- Have managers themselves received training to ensure a clear and consistent approach?
- Do line managers meet with new starters regularly and give meaningful feedback?
- Are concerns being raised, documented and addressed when they occur?
- Is HR brought into the conversation early enough?
The legislation may take effect on 1 January 2027, but for employers recruiting now, the practical preparation has already started.
The six-month clock is already ticking.