Make Work Pay: ending one-sided flexibility – reforms of zero-hours and similar contracts – Acas response

This is the Acas Executive response to the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade (BIST) consultation on Make Work Pay: ending one-sided flexibility – reforms of zero-hours and similar contracts. It was submitted on 25 August 2026. 

Question 10a: Based on the 2 options for directly engaged workers, select which option is preferred.

• Option A: A weekly distribution requirement
• Option B: A weekly distribution requirement and a total hours requirement
• Other  

Question 10b: Please explain your answer [free text]

1. Acas does not have evidence that would enable us to recommend a preference between the proposed approaches to regularity requirements.  
2. Whichever approach is adopted, workers and employers need to be able to understand entitlement, verify calculations and explain outcomes where those calculations are challenged. The more complex the qualifying criteria become, the greater the likelihood that workers and employers will reach different views on whether entitlement has arisen.
3. Acas therefore encourages the government to give significant weight to simplicity, transparency and ease of application when designing this, and other, regulatory requirements relating to variable hours contracts. An approach to regularity requirements that is simple and clear is likely to support understanding, reduce disputes and improve the practical operation of the new right for both workers and employers.
4. Acas believes there is a risk of underestimating increases in early conciliation and tribunal cases associated with these reforms. While we are already taking steps to handle higher caseloads, this must be seen against a background of rising numbers of early conciliation cases. In 2024 to 2025 there was a 17% increase from the prior year, and in 2025 to 2026 a further 27% increase with further increases expected in the current year.
5. The government's 'Right to guaranteed hours: options assessment' (on the ending one-sided flexibility consultation on GOV.UK) identifies the potential for an increase in demand on Acas early conciliation and employment tribunal cases. This is based on illustrative analysis of the 'part-time workers regulations' and 'written statements' proxy jurisdictions. Depending on the final thresholds, the potential increase is calculated as between 1,500 and 2,700 early conciliation notifications and 500 and 800 employment tribunal cases.
6. The extent of any increase is likely to be influenced by the level of complexity in reference periods and calculations. Acas's data involving similar jurisdictions to the government’s analysis – 'zero-hour contracts', 'agency worker', 'part-time worker regulations' and 'written statements' – account for a relatively small proportion of demand in 2025 to 2026:
   • 1.5% of around 585,000 recorded calls to our helpline
   • 0.6% of around 150,000 early conciliation claims
7. However, Acas data for employment rights involving more complex calculations points to higher levels of demand on advice, support and dispute resolution services. While not directly comparable, working time, holiday pay and holiday entitlement jurisdictions often include complex calculations and reference periods. These jurisdictions account for a higher proportion of demand in 2025 to 2026:
   • 5.8% of around 585,000 recorded calls to the helpline
   • 7.9% of around 150,000 early conciliation claims

Question 22a: Do you think employers should have the flexibility to use an adjustment margin?

• Yes, the margin should be a fixed figure
• Yes, the margin should be a percentage of the hours generated by the calculation
• No, employers should not have the flexibility to use an adjustment margin
• Other

Question 22b: Please explain your answer [free text]

8. Acas does not have evidence that would enable us to recommend whether an adjustment margin should take the form of a fixed figure or a percentage. Our principal concern is that any adjustment mechanism supports practical implementation without undermining confidence in the operation of the right.
9. Acas recognises that a limited adjustment margin may provide practical benefits where calculations do not align neatly with existing shift patterns, working arrangements or an individual's availability. It is Acas's view that a clear and transparent adjustment margin is likely to support simpler administration and reduce disputes arising from small differences in calculations.
10. A limited adjustment margin may also help employers implement guaranteed hours offers in practice. Calculations will not always produce outcomes that align neatly with existing shift patterns, working arrangements or an individual's availability.
11. However, any adjustment margin should be limited in scope, transparent and straightforward to understand. Workers should be able to easily see how a guaranteed-hours offer has been calculated, how any adjustment has been applied and how the final figure has been arrived at.
12. There is a balance to be struck between practicality and accuracy in determining what any margin should be. The larger the adjustment margin, the greater the possibility that guaranteed hours offers will differ from the hours generated by the underlying calculation. If workers do not believe that offers accurately reflect the hours they have worked, this may create questions about how calculations have been performed and whether outcomes are fair, increasing the risk of disputes arising.
13. Existing holiday entitlement and National Minimum Wage legislation allow limited rounding up of calculations while protecting workers from receiving less than their calculated entitlement by not permitting rounding down. These examples demonstrate how employment rights frameworks can incorporate practical adjustments while maintaining confidence that workers receive the full benefit of their entitlement.  
14. Including a principle allowing a calculated entitlement to be rounded down may create a greater risk of confusion and increased disputes if workers perceive they are receiving less than the calculated entitlement. Any provision including rounding down would therefore need to be accompanied by a clear, simple and easily understood methodology, together with transparent explanations for workers and employers, to minimise the risk of misunderstanding and disputes arising.

Question 32a: Do you think that our proposals in Part 1 of this consultation, on the right to guaranteed hours, will have a particular impact on groups sharing a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010?  

• Yes  
• No  

Question 32b: Please explain your answer [free text]

15. Yes, Acas expects these proposals to have benefits for some groups sharing protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010. This is particularly the case where they currently experience disadvantage arising from insecure or unpredictable working patterns.

16. Workers from certain protected groups are disproportionately represented in sectors where insecure work, variable working patterns and unpredictable hours are more common.

     

    Office for National Statistics data shows there were approximately 1.2 million workers on zero-hours contracts between January and March 2026, representing 3.6% of all people in employment. High concentrations were found in:

    • accommodation and food services (27.9% of employment in that sector)
    • health and social work (13.8%)
    • education (9.8%)
    • wholesale and retail (9.7%)

     

    We know that women, disabled workers, young people and some ethnic minority groups are disproportionately represented among workers on zero-hours contracts.

     

    For example, TUC analysis of the government's Make Work Pay commitments published in late 2024 found that young workers aged 16 to 24 were almost four times as likely as the wider workforce to be employed on a zero-hours contract. Young Women's Trust research on young women’s experiences of insecure work also found that young women were more likely than young men to have been offered a zero-hours contract (40% compared with 35%). Carnegie Trust analysis found that young adults from black, Asian and minority ethnic groups were 47% more likely than white young adults to be on a zero-hours contract. Evidence from the Office for National Statistics on the employment of disabled people also shows that disabled workers are more likely than non-disabled workers to be employed on zero-hours contracts.

     

    As such, these groups may experience the impacts of reforms to zero-hours contracts differently.

17. Greater certainty over hours and income may improve financial security, wellbeing and labour market participation. At the same time, Acas recognises that some individuals with protected characteristics, including carers, young workers and some disabled workers, may value more flexible working arrangements. The ability for workers to decline a guaranteed hours offer and remain on their existing arrangement is therefore an important safeguard, helping to ensure that the proposals enhance security without reducing flexibility where flexibility is preferred.
18. As these reforms are likely to benefit workers who are disproportionately represented within some protected groups, successful implementation will be particularly important. Effective management capability, constructive workplace relations and strong employee voice arrangements can play an important role in ensuring that the intended benefits of the reforms are realised in practice.
19. Acas's behavioural insights framework sector analysis shows that some of the sectors likely to be most affected by these reforms may also face wider workplace challenges, including high workforce turnover, variable staffing requirements and more limited access to specialist HR support. This emphasises the need for clear and practical policy options that enable all sectors to realise the benefits of reform. Doing so will depend heavily on their effective implementation in practice.

Question 33: Is there anything else you want to tell us in relation to Part 1 of this consultation, on the right to guaranteed hours?

Overall workability of the framework

20. Acas recognises the policy objective of improving security and predictability of hours for workers. In our view, the effectiveness of the new right is likely to depend not only on the detailed design of the framework but also on how straightforward it is for workers, employers, agencies and hirers to understand and apply in practice.

21. The proposed framework includes several interrelated features, including:

    • hours thresholds
    • reference periods
    • regularity requirements
    • calculation methods
    • exemptions

     

    These elements need to operate together consistently and coherently. Unnecessary complexity risks creating confusion, making compliance more difficult and increasing workplace disputes.

Transparency and record keeping

22. Acas recommends that the government considers how transparency can be supported through proportionate record keeping. For example, this might be through considering whether to introduce a requirement to keep records of guaranteed hours or recommending relevant records are kept. To avoid unnecessary disputes, workers and employers will need to be clear on not only whether entitlement has arisen and what the entitlement is, but also how that conclusion has been arrived at. This is likely to be particularly important where entitlement depends on multiple calculations or qualifying criteria.

23. Record keeping is therefore likely to be an important implementation consideration. This is because it could help to simplify and speed up dispute resolution by providing evidence and showing the reasoning behind calculations and offers. Employers, agencies and hirers are likely to benefit from tracking information including:

    • hours worked
    • qualifying weeks
    • excess hours
    • reference periods
    • guaranteed hours offers

     

    Clear expectations about what information should be retained, and how decisions should be evidenced could help parties understand entitlement and resolve concerns more quickly. This is particularly important in agency arrangements where responsibilities may be shared between multiple parties.

24. Otherwise, disputes risk adding to the overburdening of the dispute resolution system. This would be disproportionate for what are likely to be low-value, administrative claims. We acknowledge that record keeping places an administrative burden on employers. It is therefore important that any requirements on record keeping are proportionate and, in particular, reflect the capacity of smaller employers to comply. However, the benefits from maintaining clear evidence to support dispute resolution could be significant, avoiding time and costs for all parties.

Implementation in practice

25. The framework will influence how hours are offered, assignments are structured and work is allocated in practice. Government should therefore consider whether thresholds, reference periods or eligibility requirements could create incentives that affect eligibility for the new rights or otherwise undermine the policy intention.

26. Employers and workers will also need clear information and support, particularly during the early stages of implementation. The Acas service data outlined in our response to question 10 already shows some ongoing demand for information relating to:

    • zero-hours contracts
    • agency work
    • shift changes
    • irregular hours

     

    New rights that rely on complex statutory eligibility criteria and calculations are likely to increase that demand.

Working patterns and workplace dialogue

27. Acas recommends the government takes steps to encourage employers and workers to discuss, and ideally agree, how the hours calculated will be implemented. This should include how individual work patterns will be arranged following a guaranteed hours calculation.
28. The effectiveness of the reforms will depend not only on the number of guaranteed hours offered, but also on how those hours are implemented in practice and how changes are communicated.

29. Acas's research on increasing prevalence of conflict at work and the costs of conflict demonstrate the importance of constructive workplace dialogue and early discussion of concerns. Our experience of workplace disputes shows this helps to:

    • build trust
    • address issues before they escalate
    • support positive workplace relations

     

    These factors are likely to help organisations implement the reforms successfully and reduce the risk of escalating workplace disputes unnecessarily.

30. In Acas's view, the provisions allowing aspects of the framework to be varied through collective agreement are likely to support effective implementation. They provide useful flexibility, enabling employers and workers, through their trade unions, to agree arrangements that reflect the circumstances of particular sectors, organisations and workplaces. Such approaches support:

    • clearer implementation
    • greater workforce engagement
    • improved workplace relations

     

    Acas evidence on the importance of employee voice and consultation highlights the benefits to employers and workers of involving workers and their representatives in workplace decision-making.

Question 37a: How much notice should be presumed reasonable for directly engaged workers?  

• 1 week  
• 2 weeks  
• 3 weeks  
• 4 weeks  
• Other  

Question 37b: Please explain your answer [free text]

31. Acas does not have evidence that would enable us to recommend a specific notice period that should be presumed reasonable.
32. The government's 'Employment Rights Act 2025: economic analysis' (on Employment Rights Act impact assessments guidance on GOV.UK) sets out an estimate of 3,000 additional early conciliation notifications and 1,000 additional tribunal cases. It is Acas's view that the proposed presumed reasonableness approach must be carefully designed to avoid unintentionally increasing the scope for disputes. This is because, as proposed, a departure from the presumed reasonable notice period will not necessarily always make the notice unreasonable.
33. The benefit of such an approach is that it allows employers and workers to take account of different workplace circumstances. However, where notice periods can potentially be justified as reasonable despite departing from the presumed standard, there is likely to be scope for disagreement about:
    • whether it was reasonable to do so
    • whether the factors considered in arriving at that decision were appropriate

    • what weight that should be given to those factors

       

34. Therefore, Acas recommends that the government considers how the framework can minimise uncertainty and reduce the scope for such disputes. This could include ensuring that any exemptions are clearly defined, and straightforward to apply and explain.
35. Clear guidance and practical examples could also help employers and workers understand what constitutes reasonable notice in different circumstances. The government should encourage parties to resolve disagreements informally where possible and ensure that workers and employers can easily access appropriate advice and dispute resolution services when concerns arise. This reflects Acas's view that supporting parties to resolve disagreements at the earliest possible stage can help reduce the stress, duration and cost associated with workplace disputes.
36. Many disputes concerning shift notice are likely to involve relatively small financial losses but have the potential to damage ongoing employment relationships. Litigation will not always provide a proportionate or practical means of resolving disagreements of this nature. Early dispute resolution can help employers and workers resolve concerns constructively while maintaining productive working relationships.

Question 57a: Should the Fair Work Agency enforce the right to short notice payments?

• Yes  
• No

Question 57b: Please explain your answer [free text]

37. Yes, Acas supports the Fair Work Agency (FWA) having an enforcement role in relation to short notice payments.
38. Where disputes arise about whether a shorter notice period was reasonable in the circumstances, the Fair Work Agency will need appropriate expertise, training and resources to assess the relevant facts and reach robust decisions. Government should therefore ensure that the Fair Work Agency is adequately equipped to deal with such cases. Subject to this, short notice payments remain well suited to Fair Work Agency enforcement because they ultimately relate to a specific and measurable financial entitlement.

39. Fair Work Agency enforcement has the potential to improve compliance by:

    • providing a visible and credible enforcement route
    • reducing reliance on individual employment tribunal claims
    • helping workers access their rights in practice

     

    This may be particularly important where disputes involve relatively modest sums, making formal tribunal proceedings a less proportionate or practical route for resolving individual cases. Effective enforcement can also help ensure that employers who comply with their obligations are not undercut by those who do not.

40. Acas's experience of workplace disputes shows that individual complaints do not always provide a complete picture of compliance. The Fair Work Agency will therefore have an important role in identifying and addressing non-compliance beyond individual cases, including where wider patterns emerge.
41. Effective enforcement must also recognise the realities of the employment relationship. Workers may be reluctant to raise concerns where they fear adverse treatment, damage to working relationships or an impact on future work opportunities and shift allocation. Independent enforcement can help address non-compliance while reducing the burden on individual workers to enforce rights themselves. This approach is consistent with the wider objective of creating a simpler and more coherent enforcement landscape, while allowing more complex workplace rights to remain within the tribunal system where greater contextual judgement may be required.
42. Acas expects some employers to find the new requirements challenging during the early stages of implementation, particularly where the framework introduces new notice requirements and payment obligations. Not all non-compliance will be deliberate. The most effective enforcement regime will therefore combine enforcement activity with clear guidance, communication and support that helps employers understand and comply with their obligations.
43. Clear alignment between the Fair Work Agency, Acas and the employment tribunal system will also be important. Workers and employers should be able to understand where to go for advice, help with dispute resolution and enforcement action, helping to avoid duplication and support compliance.
44. Acas is already working with the Fair Work Agency to support a joined-up approach to guidance, advice, conciliation and enforcement in the areas for which the Fair Work Agency will be responsible. We would seek to do so should Fair Work Agency enforcement of short notice periods be confirmed. We look forward to creating a practical system that is clear for workers and employers that will encourage early resolution and compliance.

Question 62a: Do you think that the proposals in Part 2 of this consultation, on reasonable notice of shifts and short notice payments, will have a particular impact on groups sharing a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010?

• Yes  
• No  

Question 62b: Please explain your answer [free text]

45. Yes, Acas expects these proposals to have benefits for some groups sharing protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010. This is particularly the case where they experience disadvantage arising from unpredictable scheduling and short-notice cancellations.
46. Workers from certain protected groups are more likely to experience challenges where work is offered, changed or cancelled at short notice. As with the guaranteed-hours proposals, the workers most likely to benefit from these reforms are not distributed evenly across the labour market. Some protected groups are disproportionately represented in sectors where variable hours, irregular scheduling and insecure work are more common. This includes women with caring responsibilities, pregnant workers, young workers and disabled workers. Greater certainty regarding when work will take place, together with compensation where shifts are cancelled, moved or curtailed at short notice, may therefore provide particular benefits for these groups.
47. Advance notice allows workers to make practical arrangements associated with caring responsibilities, health needs, travel, education and other commitments. Sudden changes to working arrangements can have a disproportionate impact on workers who depend on that certainty to participate effectively in work.
48. Acas's experience suggests that successful implementation will therefore be particularly important in these sectors. The following will all play an important role in ensuring that workers can benefit from the new rights in practice:
    • effective management capability
    • clear communication
    • constructive workplace relations
    • strong employee voice arrangements
49. Overall, Acas considers that the proposals have the potential to improve fairness, predictability and inclusion in the workplace. Realising those benefits will depend not only on the rights themselves, but on how effectively employers communicate, apply and support them in practice.