Flexible working reforms: what happens when the next request lands on your desk?

For many employers, flexible working is already an important tool for attracting and retaining talent, supporting employee wellbeing and helping staff balance caring responsibilities. The government has recently published a response to its consultation on various reforms to the flexible working regime, which are intended to encourage greater transparency and consistency in how requests are handled, while recognising that not every form of flexibility will be feasible in every role.

The current position 

Employees have the right to make a flexible working request (for example, a change to their hours, working pattern, working time or place of work) from their first day of employment.

Currently, employees can make up to two statutory flexible working requests during any 12-month period, although only one request can be active at any given time. Employers must deal with requests reasonably, consult with the employee before refusing a request and communicate a final decision (including any appeal) within two months of the date of the request, unless an extension is agreed.

A request can only be refused for one or more of the following eight statutory business reasons:

1. The burden of additional costs; 
2. A detrimental effect on the ability to meet customer demand; 
3. An inability to reorganise work among existing staff;
4. An inability to recruit additional staff;
5. A detrimental impact on quality; 
6. A detrimental impact on performance; 
7. Insufficient work during the periods the employee proposes to work; and 
8. Planned structural changes.

There is currently no statutory right to appeal, although offering an appeal remains good practice and is encouraged by the ACAS Code of Practice on requests for flexible working (the ACAS Code)

What is changing? 

The Employment Rights Act 2025 introduces a significant shift in approach. The government has made clear that employers will still be able to refuse requests where there are genuine operational reasons for doing so and the eight statutory business reasons for refusal will remain unchanged. Instead, the reforms are intended to improve transparency and accountability by requiring employers to explain why a refusal is reasonable and engage in more meaningful discussions about whether flexibility can be accommodated. 

Rather than just identifying one of the statutory business grounds, employers will also need to show that it is reasonable to refuse the request on that ground. Refusal letters will therefore need to do more than recite a statutory reason. They will need to explain why that reason genuinely applies in the circumstances and why refusal is justified.

The government has also confirmed that employers will be required to follow a prescribed consultation process before rejecting a request. The emphasis is on genuine dialogue and problem-solving. Consultation meetings should focus first on whether the employee’s preferred arrangement can work in practice and, if not, whether modifications, trial periods or alternative forms of flexibility could address the employer’s concerns. While the detailed regulations are still awaited, the proposed framework will broadly require employers to: 

• hold a meeting with the employee before refusing a request; 
• approach discussions with a view to reaching agreement; 
• consider whether the proposed arrangement is feasible; 
• discuss operational challenges and possible solutions; 
• explore alternative arrangements where the original proposal cannot be accommodated; 
• give fair and reasonable notice of the meeting and explain its purpose in advance; and 
• provide written confirmation of both the consultation outcome and the final decision. 

Although the government considered introducing a statutory right of appeal, it has decided against this. It will remain good practice, though, for an appeal to be offered. As at present, there will also be no statutory right for the employee to be accompanied to the meeting to discuss their flexible working request, although it will remain good practice for employers to allow this in some circumstances (and employers should always think about whether do so would be a reasonable adjustment for a disabled employee).  

The reforms are intended to come into force in Autumn 2027, alongside a revised ACAS Code.

Four practical steps HR teams can take now

1. Back up decisions with evidence

Many flexible working disputes arise because decision-makers rely on general concerns rather than specific evidence of why a request cannot be accommodated. A preference for office attendance, concerns about setting a precedent or a feeling that an arrangement “would not work” will not be enough on their own. Managers should be trained to identify the actual operational impact of a proposal and evidence it where possible.

The stronger the evidence, the easier it will be to demonstrate that a refusal is reasonable.

2. Approach consultation meetings as problem-solving discussions 

Under the new regime, consultation is likely to become the most important stage of the process.  Managers should approach discussions with an open mind and be prepared to explore alternatives. This might include different working days, hybrid working arrangements, revised attendance expectations or a trial period. Where trial arrangements are agreed, document the duration, review dates, success measures and next steps from the outset.

Most importantly, avoid treating the consultation meeting as a formality or arriving with a refusal decision already made.

3. Create consistency across the business

For medium-sized and larger employers, inconsistency is often a greater risk than the decision itself.  Different managers may reach different conclusions when faced with similar requests. HR teams should therefore consider introducing central oversight of requests and internal approval processes for refusals. Tracking requests across departments can help identify trends, ensure comparable requests are being treated consistently and highlight areas where additional manager training may be needed.

Consistency does not mean identical outcomes, but employers should be able to explain why different roles or different sets of circumstances justify different decisions. Employers should also be aware that agreeing to one request does not mean that they must automatically agree to a similar, later request. The fact that other members of a team already work flexibly could sometimes mean that agreeing to the later request is not operationally possible, this would again need to be backed up with clear reasoning and evidence. 

4. Don’t forget the wider legal risks 

Flexible working requests rarely exist in isolation. Requests connected to disability may trigger the duty to make reasonable adjustments, while requests linked to childcare or other caring responsibilities can give rise to indirect discrimination risks. A technically compliant flexible working process will not necessarily protect an employer from those wider claims. 

HR teams should encourage managers to flag complex or sensitive requests early to mitigate the risk of legal claims, and ensure any agreed changes are accurately reflected in contractual documentation and workforce records.

The key takeaway 

For many employers, the biggest challenge when dealing with flexible working requests in 2027 will not be the new legal test itself, but proving that decisions were reached through a fair, consistent and evidence-based process. Organisations that invest now in manager training, robust consultation practices and consistent decision-making are likely to be best placed to navigate the changes and reduce the risk of disputes when the next flexible working request arrives.