Why is 2 July 2026 a significant date for UK employers?

The headline change in the Employment Rights Act 2025 is the reduction in the qualifying period for unfair dismissal. This is reducing from two years to 6 months and, although the protection will formally kick in with effect from 1 January 2027, it actually starts to bite today, 2 July 2026. Anyone employed from today will get protected employment at 6 months' service (so someone starting today will have exactly 6 months' service on 1 January). Anyone who started employment before today, will get protected employment from 1 January (or the point at which they hit 2 years' service, if before). 

Whilst this sounds like a straightforward reduction, in fact there are many technical pitfalls for the unwary. Specifically, a shorter qualifying period is likely to result in many more decisions being made much later in the period than is the case at present. This means that close attention will need to be paid to dates and how to calculate time periods.  

Firstly, the two year qualifying period has never been two years, it has always been two years less one week. This is because when calculating the effective date of termination for the purposes of whether someone has the right not to be unfairly dismissed, the statutory notice period of one week is taken into account. A dismissal with immediate effect and payment in lieu of notice one day before two years' service is accrued will therefore still render the employee protected as the statutory one week notice period expires after the two year qualifying date. This will be the same when the qualifying period is six months, so six months is in reality six months less one week.

Secondly, it will also be important to understand when six months' service is actually accrued to work back from that date. This will be the final day in the six month period, so person starting employment on 1 July, will accrue six months' service on 31 December, not 1 January. The final day of employment (taking into account any statutory notice period) needs to be before this date, so in this example, 30 December not 31 December. This means that anyone employed on 2 July 2026 will be the first to accrue protection from unfair dismissal at exactly six months of employment when the law changes on 1 January 2027.

Thirdly, notice periods need to be calculated correctly, with a clear and accurate date of termination confirmed to the employee. Employers often include incorrect termination dates in letters to employees confirming the end of employment. This is often because the employer has included the date on which notice is given within the notice period which is not correct. Where notice is given on the first of the month (a Wednesday), the seven day notice period will expire on the following Wednesday, which would be the eighth day of the month.   

There can also be confusion around when a month's notice terminates, in particular if given on the first or last day of a month (a reminder here that the corresponding date rule applies, so notice given on the first of a month runs out on the first of the following month). Sometimes notice periods of say four weeks are treated as notice periods of one month, and vice versa.  

This issue also applies when looking at a fixed term contract. Often these are drafted to start on say the 13th of the month and then have the final day as the 13th of the month say six months later. A six month term would in fact end on the 12th of the month, but with the employee having protected employment at that point if they started on or after 2 July 2026.

Aside from calculating the dates, the notice needs to be served in a way that is effective. 

Firstly, many contracts require that notice is given in writing, which in practice is easy to comply with as any form of writing, including email, will suffice. However, some employment contracts contain specific provisions dealing with how notices must be served under the contract, and these sometimes restrict service to certain forms, such as by hand, by post, or increasingly surprisingly, by fax.  

If notice is not served strictly in accordance with these provisions, it will not be validly served until those provisions have been complied with allowing an employee to argue for a later start date to their notice period with potentially significant consequences. If a clause requires notice to be provided by post, and an employee is told in person that they are being dismissed and this is confirmed in an email, notice will not have been validly served until the employee receives that notice in the post.  

Similarly, if an employer is making a payment in lieu of notice, it must comply with the contractual provisions for doing so – if the clause requires immediate payment of the notice this must be done or notice may not be validly given or effective, or the employment not terminated on the expected date.  

Secondly, regardless of whether or not notice has been effectively served according to the contract, it must actually be received by the employee in order to be effective from a statutory perspective. Some detailed notices provisions appear to helpfully include provisions that 'deem' notice to have been received, for example, two days after posting. However, this is not effective from a statutory perspective and you must ensure that the employee receives the notice, or at least has a reasonable chance to receive it – those who deliberately avoid service cannot therefore take advantage.  

Handing an employee a letter in a meeting is therefore the safest way to effect notice because it is clear that the employee has received it. An employee on sick leave, family leave or holiday may not see an email until the following day, or even later. If they can prove this is the case then notice will start to run from that later date.  

Both factors need to be taken into account when planning dismissals as they can have a significant effect on whether or not the dismissal can take place before the employee accrues the right not to be unfairly dismissed.  

So don't underestimate the importance of correct counting. Employees launching an unfair dismissal claim risk seeing it fail if their maths is wrong, while employers need to ensure that they serve notice correctly if they want to terminate an employee before they qualify for unfair dismissal. 

This article was authored by Libby Payne, Partner in the UK employment team.