The UK’s statutory sick pay framework has just undergone its most significant overhaul in four decades. The Employment Rights Act 2025 brought a package of changes into effect on 6 April that affect virtually every employer in the country. For businesses with part-time, low-paid, or zero-hours workers, the practical and financial implications are substantial – and they are live right now.
In this blog, we walk through exactly what changed, how the new rules work in practice, and what you should be doing if you have not yet reviewed your processes.
How SSP worked before 6 April
It is worth starting with a brief recap, because some of the changes represent a genuine reversal of rules that were in place for decades.
Under the old framework, SSP was a relatively simple entitlement – but also a restrictive one.
To qualify, an employee had to
- Earn at or above the Lower Earnings Limit (£125 per week for 2025/26)
- Be absent for at least four consecutive calendar days
- And wait through three unpaid “waiting days” before SSP began on the fourth qualifying day.
- The weekly rate was £118.75, payable for up to 28 weeks.
For millions of lower-paid and variable-hours workers, those rules meant they fell outside the safety net entirely.
What changed on 6 April 2026
SSP is now a day-one entitlement
The three waiting days have been abolished. Eligible employees are now entitled to SSP from their first qualifying day of sickness absence.
This is arguably the single most impactful change for day-to-day payroll processing. Previously, a two-day illness resulted in no SSP payment at all. An employee absent for even a single qualifying day is now entitled to SSP. Short-term absences – which were previously straightforward to dismiss from a cost perspective – now carry a financial obligation from the outset.
An ACAS survey on the Employment Rights Act 2025 found that 43% of employers identified day-one SSP as the change with the greatest workplace impact. It is easy to see why.
The Lower Earnings Limit (LEL) no longer applies
The requirement to earn at least £125 per week has been removed. Eligibility now extends to an estimated 1.3 million additional workers who previously fell below the threshold.
This is particularly significant for:
- Part-time workers on limited hours
- Zero-hours contract employees with variable weekly earnings
- Workers holding multiple jobs, each of which may have previously fallen below the LEL individually
- Seasonal and casual workers employed for short engagements
The rationale is straightforward – the LEL created an imbalance where the lowest-paid workers, those least able to absorb a loss of income, were the least protected. The new rules correct that.
A new earnings-linked rate for lower earners
The flat weekly rate has increased from £118.75 to £123.25. However, rather than applying this universally, SSP is now calculated as the lower of the flat weekly rate of £123.25 or 80% of the employee’s Average Weekly Earnings (AWE).
This prevents lower earners from receiving SSP that exceeds their normal pay, while those who earn above the threshold continue on the standard amount. AWE is calculated based on the eight weeks immediately prior to the sickness absence.
For payroll teams, this is a meaningful change in methodology – particularly for workers with variable earnings. Every time a lower-earning employee takes a qualifying sick day, an averaging exercise must be performed unless the employer elects to pay the flat rate regardless.
What this means for zero-hours contract employees
Zero-hours workers have historically occupied an uncertain position within the SSP framework. The April 2026 reforms bring greater inclusion – but also greater complexity.
Newly eligible workers
Under the old rules, a zero-hours employee whose weekly earnings fluctuated below £125 would frequently fail the LEL test and receive nothing when sick. That employee is now eligible for SSP regardless of earnings. This is a genuinely positive development for workers in hospitality, retail, social care, and
logistics – sectors that rely heavily on zero-hours arrangements. The flip side is the cash flow impact on businesses operating in those same sectors.
The earnings-linked calculation challenge
Where earnings are irregular, calculating 80% of AWE becomes an ongoing administrative task.
Employers need to:
- Identify the relevant eight-week earnings period prior to each absence
- Calculate total earnings paid in that period and divide by eight
- Determine whether 80% of that figure falls below £123.25
- Pay whichever rate is lower
For workers with genuinely variable hours, who may have earned nothing in some weeks and worked full-time in others, this calculation can produce counterintuitive results.
A period of light work followed by illness could result in very low SSP entitlement, even though the employee is now newly eligible in principle. If you have not already confirmed that your payroll software handles this correctly, that is worth checking as a priority.
Qualifying days – the critical issue
Perhaps the most practically complex aspect of the reforms for zero-hours employers is the question of qualifying days (QDs).
SSP is only ever payable for qualifying days – the days on which an employee is normally required to work. For employees on standard Monday-to-Friday arrangements, QDs are unambiguous. For zero-hours workers. they are anything but.
What are qualifying days?
A qualifying day is a day on which the employee would ordinarily be required to work. The daily rate of SSP is derived by dividing the weekly rate by the number of qualifying days in that week.
Before 6 April, QDs also determined which days counted as waiting days. That function has gone with the removal of waiting days, but the importance of QDs has not diminished. Because SSP is paid only for qualifying days, the number and pattern of QDs directly determine how much an employer pays during a period of
sickness.
Where no agreement exists
This is where employers of zero-hours workers face real risk. Where no qualifying days have been formally agreed, and working patterns are entirely irregular, the default statutory position applies.
Legislation provides a hierarchy:
- The days the employer and employee agree the employee is or was required to work
- Wednesday only, where there is no specified working day under the contract
- All days except those when no one works, in limited operational contexts
The “Wednesday only” default is well known but rarely understood in its implications.
If an employer and a zero-hours worker have never formally agreed qualifying days, and the employee calls in sick claiming SSP, the default position may result in SSP being paid only for Wednesday, or, potentially, across all seven days of the week if the contract is poorly drafted. One outcome underpays the employee; the other imposes unnecessary cost on the employer.
Why this matters more now
Under the old rules, many zero-hours employees never reached the SSP eligibility threshold anyway – the LEL acted as an inadvertent filter. With that filter gone, the qualifying-day question now arises for a far greater proportion of the zero-hours workforce. Employers who have never needed to formally document QDs
for casual workers now need to do so.
For businesses with zero-hours or variable-hours workers, we advise:
- Reviewing all zero-hours contracts to ensure they contain a clear qualifying-day clause, or a process for agreeing QDs at the start of each engagement or assignment period
- Where workers have established patterns – for example, someone who consistently works Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday – documenting those days as QDs
- Where patterns are genuinely variable, consider agreeing QDs on a rolling basis based on the previous 12-week working pattern, clearly recorded in advance
- Maintaining rotas and timesheets as supporting evidence; these will be essential if any dispute arises about which days should have attracted SSP
- Reviewing QDs whenever working patterns change
Absences that started before 6 April
If you have any employees who were absent before 6 April and are still off sick, specific transitional provisions apply.
- An employee who was serving waiting days on 5 April became entitled to SSP from 6 April onwards – without completing the three waiting days.
- An employee earning below the LEL who was off sick on or after 6 April became newly eligible under the new rules.
- Employees already receiving SSP before 6 April are transitionally protected and will not see a reduction in their payments; they continue at the uprated flat rate of £123.25 for the duration of their continuous absence.
This protection applies until the employee returns to work, exhausts their 28-week entitlement, their contract ends, or they are excluded from SSP on other grounds. If you have any such absences currently in progress, it is worth reviewing which transitional provisions apply to each case.
The financial impact
SSP remains non-recoverable from HMRC – unlike statutory maternity, paternity, and adoption pay, where smaller employers can reclaim payments. The full cost sits with employers.
The April reforms will increase payroll costs for many businesses, particularly:
- Small and micro employers who previously benefited from the three waiting days, filtering out short-term absences
- Employers in high-turnover sectors such as hospitality and retail with large zero-hours workforces
- Any business where most staff receive SSP rather than enhanced contractual sick pay
For short absences in particular, costs could more than double. A one-to-three-day illness that previously attracted no SSP payment at all now triggers a full entitlement from day one. If you have not already modelled the potential increase in SSP liability across your workforce, that review is overdue.
The Fair Work Agency is now active
The Fair Work Agency launches on 7 April 2026, consolidating enforcement functions previously spread across HMRC’s National Minimum Wage team, the Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority, and the Employment Agency Standards Inspectorate. Its SSP enforcement powers are now in effect.
The FWA has the authority to pursue non-compliant employers directly. Employers who underpay SSP, apply outdated waiting-day rules, or fail to extend eligibility to newly qualifying workers will face a more proactive enforcement environment than has historically been the case.
What to check now
If you have not yet reviewed your processes for the new tax year, these are the areas to work through.
Policies and contracts
- Remove all references to three waiting days from employment contracts, staff handbooks, and sickness absence policies
- Remove references to the Lower Earnings Limit as an eligibility criterion
- Review any company sick pay scheme rules that mirror or build on the old SSP structure
- Add or review qualifying-day clauses for all zero-hours and variable-hours workers
Payroll systems
- Confirm your payroll software is updated for the 80% AWE calculation
- Ensure your payroll is configured to treat day one as the first qualifying day of entitlement
- Test the AWE calculation for a sample of lower-earning employees
People and process
- Brief line managers – many still operate under the assumption that SSP does not begin until day four
- Communicate the changes to employees in accessible language; this is particularly important for zero-hours workers who may be newly eligible
- Strengthen absence reporting processes so payroll receives timely and accurate data on the first and last days of absence
These are not small changes. For many businesses, particularly those with large flexible or casual workforces, April 2026 represents a genuine operational shift in how sick pay is calculated and administered.
