Our submission to the Department for Business and Trade’s consultation on fire and rehire – changes to expenses, benefits and shift patterns
This consultation sought views on two proposed changes to fire and rehire protections in relation to benefits and expenses, and to shift patterns.
Fire and rehire refers to the process of an employer dismissing an employee and then re-employing them (or someone else) under a new contract, usually with less favourable terms and conditions. The Employment Rights Act 2025 (ERA 25) will introduce new protections to prevent unscrupulous fire and rehire practices.
The CIPD responded to previous consultation regarding interim relief in ‘fire and rehire’ cases and set out its views on the principle of legislating in this area. We maintain that fire and rehire remains a rare occurrence. We do not believe it should be completely outlawed as a practice as it does have a place in a situation of last resort to prevent redundancies, but we recognise that it has been abused by a small minority of employers. The CIPD considers that this minority will continue to act in this way should it suit them and agrees with the need for firm regulation; however, our review remains that legislation is ill-advised.
Along with other changes, it could lead to serious and potentially unintended consequences for employers with the knock-on impact of reducing employment and opportunity and contributing to economic uncertainty for individuals. This is particularly the case in the increasingly unpredictable economic climate.
A strengthened statutory Code of Practice would be a more appropriate approach.
We agree that employees are entitled to protection, but we believe that the inclusion of the provisions covered in this consultation would be disproportionate given the very limited use of fire and rehire, and within that limited usage, the lack of evidence to suggest that expenses, benefits in kind or the detail of shift patterns are the subject of fire and rehire. Our answers to the consultation questions should be read against our belief that there is insufficient evidence to support further (secondary) legislation in these specific areas, and that there could be unhelpful, unintended consequences including business closures and more redundancies.
Our submission to the Department for Business and Trade
Submission to the Business and Trade Committee
Submission to the UK Department for Work and Pensions and HM Treasury
Submission to the Department for Business and Trade
