Preventing sexual harassment — how employers can meet the new 'all reasonable steps' duty

The changes taking effect in October 2026, what they mean in practice and how employers can strengthen their approach to prevention.
Talk to us: 0333 004 4488 | hello@brabners.com | Contact us
AuthorsDaisy DickensonJoseph Shelston
4 min read

A significant new change means that individuals who want to take an employment case to a tribunal must first take part (or at least be offered the chance to take part) in a longer conciliation process.
The aim is to give both sides more time to reach a settlement without needing to go to tribunal, which could save time and reduce pressure on the tribunal system. The extension also offers claimants extra time to take legal advice or decide whether to proceed with their claim.
Here, Daisy Dickenson and Joe Shelston from our award-winning employment group explain how the early conciliation procedure works and what the new 12-week window means in practice.
The Government has introduced this change in response to the increasing pressure placed on the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (Acas). From 1 December 2025, the mandatory early conciliation period for Acas to promote a settlement between parties to an employment dispute will double from six weeks to 12.
This amendment is being brought in by the Employment Tribunals (Early Conciliation: Exemptions and Rules of Procedure) (Amendment) Regulations 2025 and will apply to any employment case notified to Acas for early conciliation on or after 1 December 2025.
A prospective claimant who wishes to issue relevant employment tribunal proceedings must first comply with the early conciliation requirement. This involves submitting an early conciliation form online, by post or by telephoning Acas, which will complete the form on their behalf.
At this stage, the prospective claimant must confirm whether they wish to participate in early conciliation. If the claimant agrees to conciliate, the matter is referred to an Acas conciliator, who’ll contact the prospective respondent to see if they agree to conciliate. The limitation period (timeframe) for bringing the claim is normally paused during the conciliation period, which allows claimants extra time to seek advice on their claims before deciding whether or not to proceed. Yet due to Acas backlogs, employers aren’t often notified that the early conciliation period has begun — leaving parties with insufficient time to reach a settlement. A longer period could help to address this issue.
Alternatively, if the prospective claimant or respondent declines conciliation, Acas issues an early conciliation certificate confirming compliance with the obligation to contact Acas — enabling the claimant to proceed to the employment tribunal.
The more sceptical among us would argue that extending the time limit is unlikely to change the overall outcome of a case and instead simply prolong the process. Yet if one or both parties don’t want to conciliate, they don’t have to — and the conciliation period will come to an end before the expiration of the 12 weeks.
Doubling the early conciliation period — combined with the Government’s plan to extend the time limit for submitting Employment Tribunal claims from three to six months — also significantly increases the delay before employers even become aware of a claim. This prolonged uncertainty exposes employers to risks such as fading witness memories and lost documents.
The change further risks coming across as a sticking plaster in the context of the wider issue of the pressures currently faced not just by Acas but the wider employment tribunal system. Anecdotally, cases are being listed later — meaning that parties are having to face waits that run into years even in respect of relatively straightforward proceedings. The Government’s announcement — confirming that while the right not to be unfairly dismissed won’t be made a ‘day one’ right, the qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims will be reduced to six months (down from two years) has the potential to put Acas and the employment tribunal system under even more pressure when this comes into force.
While there are mixed opinions on whether the 12-week period will bring about meaningful change, it should be noted that major unions, business groups, legal stakeholders and devolved governments were consulted.
The Government has also committed to monitoring the impact of this extension. A formal review is scheduled for October 2026 to assess whether the 12-week period achieves its intended objectives or further adjustments are required. This review will be critical in determining whether the policy remains in place or is revised.
Want to know more about how this change will impact you? Talk to our experienced employment dispute solicitors today — email hello@brabners.com, call 0333 004 4488 or fill in our contact form below.


Loading form...

The changes taking effect in October 2026, what they mean in practice and how employers can strengthen their approach to prevention.

From pensions and property to child arrangements, we explore the key considerations for couples separating after a long marriage.

We break down what’s changed, how the transitional provisions work and what employers need to be thinking about now.

Learn more about the background to the case, why the ruling matters for maternity protections in women’s football and the key lessons for football clubs.

A look at what the MCC’s consultation may mean in practice, potential legal risks and considerations for organisations looking to increase representation.

Everton is fighting a compensation ruling that could have implications for potential claims against City, according to Coleen Rooney's lawyer, Paul Lunt.

We explore whether titles could be stripped, the appeals process, what other clubs need to know and importantly, what could happen next.

Our litigation team considers some of the libel law in play around Morgan's pursuit of legal action against the Earl and his book publisher.

A guide to testamentary capacity, common grounds for challenge and the factors that can influence the validity of a Will.

We break down what happens at a Financial Dispute Resolution (FDR) hearing and how can it help separating couples to reach a financial settlement.

We outline what employers need to know about the changes to fire and rehire, including four key steps to take in preparation.

We explain the current proposals around digital Wills and highlight other Will reforms that could be on the horizon.

We explore what the new record-keeping requirements mean for employers, the risks of non-compliance and steps that organisations should take now.

We explore the collective consultation overhaul and detail what’s changing, the associated risks and how employers should prepare.

We explore the Court’s decision and what this evolving interpretation of ‘benefit’ could mean for trust structuring and administration.

Our data protection team examines the risks of relying on oversimplified legal arguments in DSAR disputes and highlights key lessons for data controllers.

We outline the legal protections that may be available if you face a threat to expose personal information such as your sexual orientation.

We break down the latest and upcoming trade union reforms — from ballot changes and electronic voting to wider union access and new employer duties.

The Government's 'ending one-sided flexibility' consultation signals significant change for hospitality employers. We explore what employers need to know.

The Supreme Court's decision in Drelle v Servis-Terminal may provide a powerful new recovery option, with insolvency pressure able to be deployed immediately.

Amid debate over the Chelsea, Everton and Forest cases, Paul Lunt joined Total Sport to explain how football disciplinary decisions are reached and why sanctions can vary.

We explore what the decision means in practice for parties, witnesses and experts based overseas and outline when evidence can be given remotely.

From 6 April 2026, paternity leave and unpaid parental leave have become day one rights. Here's what's changed and what it means in practice for employers.

Competing in certain women’s tournaments must now include women in coaching roles on the bench. We explore the implications for clubs and NGBs.

We outline some of the key commercial and legal considerations for parties considering a franchise arrangement.