The New Draft Acas Code: What the Greater Focus on Workplace Mediation Means for Employers

Acas has published a new draft Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures which could materially change the way employers are expected to approach workplace conflict.

Published on 30 July 2026 and currently under consultation, the proposed Code places considerably greater emphasis on early resolution, informal intervention, mediation and facilitated conversations. The consultation closes on 23 September 2026.

For HR professionals, managers and senior leaders, the message is significant: resolving workplace problems should not simply mean moving efficiently through a grievance or disciplinary procedure. Employers should increasingly be considering whether there is an opportunity to resolve the underlying conflict before, during or alongside a formal process.

Draft Acas code - What is changing?

The existing Acas Code already recognises that employers and employees should try to resolve disciplinary and grievance issues within the workplace. However, the new draft goes considerably further.

It establishes an overarching expectation that employers and workers should communicate with the aim of resolving concerns early and preventing unnecessary escalation. It also introduces dedicated provisions dealing with informal resolution and a specific section on mediation and facilitated conversations.

Acas describes mediation as a voluntary process involving an independent and impartial third party. Importantly, the draft does not treat mediation as something that can only happen before a grievance is raised.

It appears throughout the proposed conflict-management pathway.

For example, an employer dealing informally with concerns about conduct or performance may offer mediation or a facilitated conversation. Following fact-finding, an employer may consider mediation rather than immediately moving to a disciplinary meeting. Mediation might also form part of the outcome of a disciplinary process where misconduct or performance concerns are connected with a deteriorating working relationship.

That is an important shift in emphasis.

Formal grievance should not automatically be the starting point

One of the problems we regularly see in workplace disputes is that an organisation becomes focused on administering a grievance rather than resolving the conflict that caused it.

A complaint is submitted. Statements are obtained. An investigation begins. Meetings take place. Findings are issued. There may then be an appeal.

The process may be perfectly well managed, yet six months later the two employees concerned still cannot work together.

The draft Code encourages employers to think differently.

Acas expressly states that concerns should generally be addressed early and informally where appropriate. When formal disciplinary procedures are initiated, the draft also proposes that employers record the steps already taken to resolve the concern informally — or explain why no such steps were taken.

For HR teams, that creates a useful additional question at the point a workplace problem emerges:

Are we dealing with something that requires a formal determination, or are we dealing with a relationship problem that might be capable of resolution?

Sometimes it will be both.

Where mediation fits into workplace grievance management

Mediation is particularly useful where the continuing relationship matters.

Typical examples include:

·      communication breakdowns between managers and employees;

·      conflict between colleagues or members of a team;

·      allegations of inappropriate behaviour where the parties must continue working together;

·      disagreements about management style, responsibilities or expectations;

·      recurring interpersonal grievances;

·      conflict following organisational change;

·      situations where an investigation has concluded but working relationships remain damaged.

Mediation does not replace a necessary investigation into serious misconduct, discrimination, harassment, safeguarding concerns or other matters requiring formal determination. Instead, it gives employers another tool.

A formal process primarily asks: What happened, and what should the organisation do about it?

Mediation asks something different: What needs to happen now for these people to move forward?

Both questions can sometimes need answering.

Why early intervention matters

Acas estimates that formal disciplinary and grievance procedures cost UK employers approximately £2.36 billion each year, while the estimated cost associated with informal resolution is around ten times lower at £250 million.

There are also costs that are harder to quantify.

Workplace disputes consume management time, affect colleagues who are drawn into the disagreement, contribute to absence and disengagement, reduce productivity and can ultimately lead to resignations, dismissals or Employment Tribunal proceedings.

By the time lawyers become involved, positions may already have become deeply entrenched.

Effective mediation therefore should not be regarded simply as an alternative to an Employment Tribunal claim. Its greatest value may come much earlier.

What should employers do now?

The Code remains a draft, so employers do not need to rewrite their procedures immediately. However, the direction of travel is clear.

HR teams and senior leaders should consider reviewing their existing grievance, disciplinary and conflict-management processes and asking:

Where do we currently offer opportunities for early resolution?

Managers should know when an issue can be handled through conversation, when HR should become involved and when an independent mediator may help.

Grievance policies should also avoid presenting formal investigation as the only meaningful response available to an employee raising concerns.

Organisations may additionally want to establish a clear mechanism for referring appropriate matters to mediation, whether through trained internal mediators or an independent external provider.

This is particularly important because the Acas Code has consequences beyond internal good practice. Employment Tribunals take the Code into account in relevant cases and can adjust certain awards by up to 25% where there has been an unreasonable failure to comply with its provisions.

Moving from grievance management to conflict resolution

Perhaps the most important development in the draft Code is philosophical rather than procedural.

The objective should not simply be to process workplace conflict correctly.

It should be to resolve it wherever reasonably possible.

For employers, that means developing a broader conflict-management toolkit in which informal conversations, management intervention, facilitated conversations, mediation and formal procedures each have their place.

At the Mediation Agency, we already work with employers where workplace grievances, management disputes and relationship breakdowns have reached different stages — from emerging difficulties through to formal complaints and potential Employment Tribunal claims.

The proposed Acas Code reinforces an approach we strongly support: intervene earlier, choose the process that fits the problem, and do not allow formal procedure to become a substitute for resolving the underlying conflict.

For more practical guidance, see our guides on Employee Grievance Mediation: Step-by-Step Process Explained, Can I Ask for Mediation Instead of Raising a Grievance at Work? and How Can HR Stop Workplace Conflict from Escalating? These provide the natural next steps for employers considering how mediation can fit within their own grievance and workplace conflict procedures. If you need help, please contact our team for a confidential and non-obligatory conversation about your options.