Accessibility statement for the Acas website

This accessibility statement applies to www.acas.org.uk.

This website is run by Acas. We want as many people as possible to be able to use this website. For example, that means you should be able to:

  • change colours, contrast levels and fonts using browser or device settings
  • zoom in up to 400% without the text spilling off the screen
  • navigate most of the website using a keyboard or speech recognition software
  • listen to most of the website using a screen reader (including the most recent versions of JAWS, NVDA and VoiceOver)

We've also made the website text as simple as possible to understand.

Find advice from AbilityNet on making your device easier to use

How accessible this website is

We know some parts of www.acas.org.uk are not fully accessible, for example:

  • some documents are in PDF format instead of HTML
  • some images have poor colour contrast
  • some images do not have clear image descriptions
  • some parts of the website are hard for assistive technology users to navigate
  • there are some accessibility issues with our notification forms

Feedback and contact information

Email digital@acas.org.uk if:

  • you find any accessibility problems that are not listed on this page
  • you need information in a different format, like large print or accessible PDF

Find other ways to contact us

Technical information about this website's accessibility

Acas is committed to making its website accessible, in accordance with the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018.

Compliance status

This website is partially compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.2 AA standard, due to the non-compliances and exemptions listed below.

Non-accessible content

The content listed below is non-accessible for the following reasons.

Non-compliance with the accessibility regulations

  1. Some images do not use alternative text correctly. This might make it difficult for screen reader users to understand the information. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.4.5 (images of text).
  2. Some images have poor contrast. Some elements in the site header have poor contrast. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criteria 1.4.3 (contrast: minimum) and 1.4.11 (non-text contrast).
  3. Some images in our research reports use colour to convey information. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.4.1 (use of colour).
  4. Users can download some pages as PDFs. These are automatically generated by the website. The PDFs do not specify a tab order or default language. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criteria 1.3.2 (meaningful sequence), 2.1.1 (keyboard), 2.4.3 (focus order) and 3.1.1 (language of page).

  5. The feedback form at the end of most web pages has some issues with focus order and headings. This affects screen reader users and users who navigate using a keyboard. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criteria 1.3.1 (info and relationships), 2.4.3 (focus order) and 2.4.6 (headings and labels).

  6. When the feedback form is completed, screen reader users are not notified. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 4.1.3 (status messages).

  7. On the accessible services form, some radio buttons are marked as required before submission. This results in screen reader users being told their entry is invalid before selecting a radio button. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 4.1.2 (name, role, value).

  8. A YouTube video failed to provide some information presented visually in an alternative format. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.2.5 (audio description: pre-recorded).

Navigation and accessing information

  1. The accessible services form has issues with error identification. If a mistake is made in more than one required field, only one error shows up. This might affect a screen reader user's ability to complete the form.  This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 3.3.1 (error identification).
  2. On the accessible services form, page titles do not match the page headings. This might be confusing for some users.  This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 2.4.2 (page titled).
  3. Our blogs page has issues with focus order. This affects users who navigate using a keyboard. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 2.4.3 (focus order).
  4. Some of our reports are in PDF format and do not identify data tables correctly, so screen reader users might not be able to follow the structure of the document. This might affect their ability to access and understand the information. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.3.1 (info and relationships).
  5. Some content is in PDF format and uses images without text alternatives. Some users will not be able to access and understand the information. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.1.1 (non-text content).
  6. The code for the cookie consent banner is placed at the bottom of the page. This can cause problems for screen reader users and users who navigate using a keyboard. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criteria 1.3.2 (meaningful sequence) and 2.4.3 (focus order).
  7. On the cookie settings page, the accept all cookies button does not convey its purpose. This makes it difficult for screen reader users to navigate out of context. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 2.4.6 (headings and labels).
  8. The cookie on the main Acas website is in a location that affects navigation for users of assistive technology who navigate using a keyboard.  This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 2.4.3 (focus order).
  9. An expandable button on the navigation menu is not interactive for users accessing the page on a mobile or tablet. This can cause problems for assistive technology users who navigate using a keyboard. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criteria 2.1.1 (keyboard), 4.1.2 (name, role, value) and 1.4.10 (reflow).

Notification forms

  1. Error messages are not descriptive enough for users to understand. Also assistive technology users are not made aware of error messages. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criteria 2.4.3 (focus order), 3.3.3 (error suggestion) and 4.1.3 (status messages).
  2. There are issues with focus order and where the focus goes once you've done something. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 2.4.11 (focus not obscured: minimum).
  3. On the return to your form page, the save and return code is incorrectly styled as a heading. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.3.1 (info and relationships).
  4. The group notification spreadsheet has poor contrast. The spreadsheet does not have headers or an instruction page, so screen reader users might not be able to follow the structure of the document. Some users will not be able to access and understand the information. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criteria 1.3.1 (info and relationships), 1.4.3 (contrast: minimum) and 1.4.6 (contrast: enhanced).
  5. On the individual notification form, the page asking a user to enter an amount of money shows a hidden '£' (pound) symbol. Screen reader users might miss this and enter it into the input. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criteria 1.3.1 (info and relationships) and 2.4.6 (headings and labels).
  6. On the individual notification form, the page asking a user if they've worked for their employer for more than 2 years is missing information. This can cause problems for screen reader users when navigating out of context. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 4.1.2 (name, role, value).
  7. On the individual notification form, the page asking when your holiday year starts and ends asks more than one question. The page heading is incorrectly coded and the date input fields are not grouped. This can cause problems for screen reader users and users who navigate using a keyboard. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criteria 1.3.1 (info and relationships) and 2.4.6 (headings and labels).
  8. On the individual notification form, there's no visible focus indicator when selecting an address. This affects users who navigate using a keyboard as they can lose their place on the page. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 2.4.7 (focus visible).
  9. A step-by-step process has been styled to look like a numbered list. But it is not marked up in the code as a numbered list. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criteria 1.1.1 (non-text content) and 1.3.1 (info and relationships).
  10. On the group notification form, when replacing the claimant list spreadsheet, text disappears on smaller screens. The dialog box has issues with focus order and keyboard. This affects users who navigate using a keyboard. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criteria 1.4.10 (reflow), 4.1.2 (name, role, value), 2.4.3 (focus order), 2.4.11 (focus not obscured) and 2.1.1 (keyboard).
  11. On the contact preference page, the heading contains the word 'optional' but the radio buttons show they are required.  If users do not provide an answer, a button is selected for them. This is confusing for assistive technology users. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 3.3.2 (labels or instructions).
  12. We do not state that the phone number page is 'optional' in the heading. But users can continue without providing the required information. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 3.3.2 (labels or instructions).
  13. The address pages do not show which fields are 'optional'. This makes it difficult for screen reader users to navigate. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 3.3.2 (labels or instructions).
  14. On the notification form, the feedback page opens in a new window without warning. This makes it difficult for screen reader users to navigate. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 3.2.5 (change on request).
  15. On the group notification form, screen reader users are not notified when they upload the page with the claimant's names and addresses. This does not meet WCAG 2.2 success criterion 4.1.3 (status messages).

Disproportionate burden

We've identified Codes of Practice 2 and 3 as a disproportionate burden.

We've published these Codes of Practice in HTML. But they are not fully accessible because they use large amounts of bold to convey meaning.

We would need parliamentary approval to make these Codes of Practice fully accessible. We've assessed the cost and resource needed and concluded that doing so would be a disproportionate burden within the meaning of the accessibility regulations.

What we're doing to improve accessibility

We're investigating all the issues we've mentioned in this statement and working to fix them.

Our latest accessibility audit was in April 2025. We'll update this statement again when we've fixed the issues.

In 2026, we plan to add more accessible alternatives for all PDFs. This includes:

  • replacing some PDFs with HTML content
  • adding Word and OpenDocument Text (ODT) documents as alternative formats

We're training staff to understand more about accessibility.

Preparation of this accessibility statement

This statement was prepared on 28 November 2025.

We've prepared this statement based on:

  • an accessibility audit of our website in September 2023
  • an accessibility audit of our group notification form in October 2023
  • previous accessibility audits
  • work we've done to test, review and fix issues

The audits in 2023 and 2025 were carried out to the WCAG 2.2 AA standard by the Digital Accessibility Centre.

If you would like a copy of our accessibility audit reports, email digital@acas.org.uk

Enforcement procedure

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is responsible for enforcing the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018 (the 'accessibility regulations').

If you're not happy with how we respond to your complaint, contact the Equality Advisory and Support Service (EASS).