Since 1 October 2026, the time limit for bringing most employment tribunal claims has increased from three months to six months. For health and safety managers, this is more than an HR update: it changes how long a workplace concern may remain a live employment risk.
A stress complaint, a dismissal after someone raises a safety issue, or an employee’s account of why they felt forced to resign may now resurface much later. That puts pressure on records, investigations and decisions that may once have seemed settled.
The answer is not to treat every concern as a legal dispute. It is to connect your people processes with your health and safety systems, preserve reliable evidence and make timely, fair decisions. That is practical risk management, and a source of greater peace of mind.
What changed on 1st October 2026?
Section 152 and Schedule 12 of the Employment Rights Act 2025 extend the time limit for most employment tribunal claims in Great Britain. For relevant events on or after 1 October 2026, the usual limit is now six months minus one day.
The change applies to claims where the relevant act, failure or other matter occurred on or after 1 October. Earlier events generally remain subject to the previous time limits, so organisations may need to manage both regimes during the transition.
There is a limited exception in Scotland, where the new six-month time limit for employment tribunal breach of contract claims takes effect on 9 November 2026. Other exceptions and claim-specific rules may also apply, so the relevant deadline should always be checked.
The exact deadline depends on the type of claim and the facts. In many cases, notifying Acas about a potential claim pauses the time limit during early conciliation, provided notification is made in time. Internal grievance, disciplinary or appeal procedures do not, by themselves, stop the clock. Acas explains the current time-limit rules, including important exceptions.
There is also a separate change ahead: the qualifying period for ordinary unfair dismissal remains two years until 1 January 2027, when it is due to reduce to six months. The qualifying period and the time limit for making a claim are different rules. Do not confuse one with the other.
Why leaders and health and safety managers should pay attention
Health and safety concerns often sit inside wider employment issues. An employee may raise excessive workload, report unsafe practice, suffer an injury, or question how a manager responded to a complaint. If the relationship later breaks down, those earlier conversations and decisions may become relevant to a tribunal claim.
Employees already have specific legal protections where they raise certain health and safety concerns or take steps to protect themselves or others from workplace risks. Under the Employment Rights Act 1996, dismissal for qualifying health and safety reasons may be automatically unfair, regardless of length of service. Employees and certain workers may also be protected against detrimental treatment in specified circumstances.
For employers, this reinforces the importance of ensuring that safety concerns are taken seriously, investigated appropriately and never allowed to become a reason for treating someone unfairly. The extended tribunal time limit does not create these protections, but it gives individuals longer to bring many claims arising from alleged breaches.
That does not mean every safety complaint becomes an employment claim, or that a claim will succeed. It does mean that a longer period may pass before you need to explain what happened, what you knew and what action you took.
The implications extend beyond individual complaints. They may arise where employees report workplace incidents or unsafe practices, raise concerns about inadequate risk controls, or challenge how their employer has responded to health and safety issues. Employee consultation is another important consideration, particularly where concerns have been raised but there is little evidence of meaningful engagement or follow-up. In each case, the way concerns are received, investigated and addressed can become relevant if an employment dispute subsequently arises.
This is particularly important where concerns relate to work-related stress. The HSE estimates that in Great Britain during 2024/25, 964,000 workers were suffering from work-related stress, depression or anxiety. These conditions resulted in an estimated 22.1 million working days lost. HSE’s figures and methodology underline that stress is a significant workplace health issue, not simply an individual absence-management matter.
Why it’s important: If concerns are recorded in separate places, or not recorded at all, it can be difficult to reconstruct the sequence of events months later. A gap between a stress report, an absence discussion and a safety investigation can weaken both your understanding of the risk and your ability to demonstrate a fair, considered response.
Tip: When a concern involves workload, wellbeing, safety or conduct, make sure the relevant people know what needs follow-up. Record the issue, the decision, the reasons, the actions agreed and who owns them. Keep sensitive personal information appropriately restricted.
Keep complaints, investigations and safety records connected
A safety-related dismissal or constructive dismissal allegation may turn on more than the final decision. The relevant history could include a reported hazard, an incident investigation, a request for support, a change in duties or a series of management conversations.
A robust record does not need to be complicated. It needs to be timely, factual and clear about what happened next. Separate facts from opinion. Note the date, participants, evidence considered, actions taken and any follow-up date. If a decision changes, record why.
This is not about building a defensive file after the event. It is about making sound decisions as matters develop, and retaining the information that explains them.
Why it’s important: Memories fade, managers move roles, and routine records can be deleted under ordinary retention schedules. If an issue later becomes a dispute, contemporaneous records can save time and cost when establishing what was reported, investigated and resolved.
Tip: Review how long you retain relevant incident reports, risk assessments, grievance and disciplinary records, investigation notes and communications. Set a consistent approach with HR or your employment law adviser, taking account of data protection requirements and the type of matter. Do not keep personal information indefinitely “just in case”; retain what is necessary for a defined purpose and review it appropriately.
Remember that the six-month tribunal time limit is not a six-month document retention rule. Different records may be subject to separate legal requirements, limitation periods and retention considerations. Where litigation is reasonably anticipated or underway, relevant records should also be preserved appropriately, even if they would otherwise be due for routine deletion.
Treat stress complaints as health and safety information
A complaint about stress may be a request for support, a warning about work design, or both. Managers should avoid jumping straight to a conclusion about performance or absence before considering whether workplace factors may be contributing.
The HSE’s Management Standards identify six areas to consider: demands, control, support, relationships, role and change. Employers have a legal duty to assess risks to employees’ health, including risks arising from work-related stress, and to act on the findings.
Why it’s important: If workload, unclear responsibilities or poor communication remain unaddressed, the underlying risk can continue even after one employee’s immediate concern has been discussed. A longer claim period makes it all the more important to show how your organisation identified and responded to relevant risks.
Tip: Take concerns seriously, arrange a suitable conversation and consider whether an individual risk assessment or broader review is needed. Agree practical steps, review them and involve HR or occupational health where appropriate. Handle health information sensitively and share only what is necessary for decisions and support.
For leaders, this is where joined-up governance matters. As we explain in Why HR and Health & Safety Should Be Sitting at the Same Table, neither function sees the full picture alone. Health and safety can assess the work and its risks; HR can support fair, consistent people processes; operational managers can explain how work is actually done.
A practical review for employers and safety leaders
Use the change as a prompt to check whether your systems can support a fair and defensible response months after an issue first arises.
- Grievances and safety concerns: Do employees know how to raise concerns, and is there a clear route for escalating safety-related complaints?
- Investigations: Do your procedures bring together relevant HR, health and safety, and operational evidence?
- Decisions: Can you explain the reasons for disciplinary, capability or dismissal decisions, and show what information was considered?
- Follow-up: Are actions assigned to a named person and checked to completion?
- Records: Are relevant documents retained securely for an appropriate period, with access limited where needed?
- Manager capability: Do managers know when to seek HR, employment law, health and safety or occupational health guidance?
None of these steps guarantees that a claim will not be brought or that a tribunal will decide in your favour. They do help you make better decisions, reduce avoidable confusion and demonstrate that concerns were handled thoughtfully.
The practical takeaway
The extended tribunal time limit makes it more important to connect employment law, human resources and health and safety compliance. A concern raised today may still matter long after the original conversation, especially if the organisation’s response was unclear or its records are incomplete.
For health and safety managers, the priority is to ensure that concerns are acted on, investigations are proportionate and the evidence of decisions is retained appropriately. For directors and business owners, it is to know that these systems are joined up and that someone is accountable for follow-through.
accuSafe supports organisations with health and safety compliance and governance, alongside access to HR and employment law support through our trusted partners. We work with you to identify gaps, strengthen processes and provide practical guidance that fits your organisation, not simply add another layer of paperwork.
If you would value support reviewing how your people and safety systems work together, contact accuSafe for a conversation. Clearer processes, stronger records and joined-up advice can help you save time, manage costs and protect your organisation’s reputation, while giving you greater peace of mind.
