Women’s Workplace Protections and Support
Employment Rights Directorate
Department for Business and Trade
Old Admiralty Building
Admiralty Place
London
SW1A 2DY
15 January 2026
Dear Women’s Workplace Protections & Support,
Employment Rights Directorate
Consultation: Enhanced dismissal protections for pregnant women and new mothers
This response is submitted by the Local Government Association (LGA) on behalf of local authorities. The LGA is a cross-party organisation that is the national voice of local government. We work with councils and central government to support, promote and improve local government. The LGA covers every part of England and Wales (through the WLGA) and includes county and district councils, London boroughs, metropolitan and unitary councils.
The Workforce Team of the LGA offers advice on employment issues and represents local government employer interests to central government, government agencies, trades unions and other interested parties. The LGA’s Local Government Resources Committee, whose remit includes workforce issues, comprises elected members from the LGA’s political groups providing cross party leadership to the LGA’s policy input. This submission has the support of all the political groups at the LGA.
The LGA manages sectoral collective bargaining in local government and national collective bargaining arrangements for fire, education and related sectors, covering, in total, over two million employees. Elected councillors (and other employer organisations where appropriate) and nationally recognised trade unions work together in a positive way to reach collective agreements on key employment issues such as pay and other terms and conditions. This helps to ensure that councils, and other employers, have pay, terms and conditions that are compliant with legislation and, where possible, model best practice.
The LGA works closely with member organisations and provides advice and support on employment matters. Given the context outlined above, it is vital that the views of councils are given full and careful consideration in the consultation.
This submission is based on our knowledge of the issues as they impact on local government. We have not answered every question in the consultation but have, instead, focused on those areas that are of particular interest and importance to the local government sector, and on which we have sought the views of local authorities.
We wish to make the following points:
In what circumstances should dismissals be allowed?
Question 12: What kind of test should be used to decide whether a pregnant woman or new mother was fairly dismissed during the protected period?
A. Replace the current ‘range of reasonable responses’ test for fairness with a new stricter standard that employers must meet, alongside proving a fair reason.
B. Narrow the scope of the existing five fair reasons, and/or remove some of them altogether.
C. Other
D. Don’t know.
Question 13: If ‘A’ to question 12, what should that new test be? (Please select all that apply)
A. Continuing the employment of the pregnant woman or new mother would have a significantly detrimental effect on the business.
B. Continuing the employment of the pregnant woman or new mother poses a health and safety risk to customers, staff, or the public.
C. Continuing the employment of the pregnant woman or new mother has a serious negative impact on the wellbeing of others.
D. Other.
E. Don’t know.
LGA preferred approach: C
Option B in question 12 may initially seem the most straight forward approach, as the test of unfair dismissal would continue to apply to the remaining reasons for dismissal in a way with which employers are familiar. However, as the examples that the consultation document set out demonstrate, determining how the current fair reasons should be adapted in a way that strikes the right balance between providing protection for this group, while at the same time maintaining the ability of employers to dismiss where necessary, would be very complicated.
In our view, an approach which would perhaps be more likely to achieve the desired outcome would be to apply an amended version of option 1. If a test similar to justification in discrimination cases, for example a requirement for dismissal to be a necessary and proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, was introduced this could be applied to any set of circumstances and would set an appropriate bar for dismissals while at the same time protecting employers by allowing dismissal in all appropriate circumstances. This ‘necessity test’ could be backed up by a statutory code of practice which would give guidance for both employers and tribunals as to the circumstances in which dismissal may be considered necessary and the various steps that an employer may have to take to try to avoid a dismissal occurring. Many employers will already take a similar approach (of considering available options and only dismissing if necessary) when determining the appropriate course of action in relation to issues arising in this context, so this approach would reflect existing good practice.
Should the protections be a ‘day one right’?
Question 19: When should employees be entitled to the enhanced dismissal protections?
A. When the employment relationship begins (when they agree with an employer that they’ll start work for them, e.g. when a contract is signed).
B. From the day they start work.
C. After an initial period of employment of between 3-9 months, aligned with a typical probation period.
D. Other – please specify.
LGA preferred option: C
Given that the qualifying period for unfair dismissal will be six months from 1 January 2027, we consider that it would be appropriate to apply the same qualifying period to the enhanced dismissal protections. This would allow an employer to be able to have sufficient time to determine the suitability of an employee for their role and would ensure that an employer was not in the position where they may be required to retain and pay employees throughout pregnancy, maternity leave, and for at least six months thereafter in cases where dismissal would otherwise have occurred.
When should the protected period start?
Question 20: At what point should the enhanced dismissal protections start for pregnant women?
A. When the employee becomes pregnant.
B. When the employee becomes aware that she is pregnant.
C. When an employee informs her employer that she is pregnant.
D. Other - please specify.
LGA preferred option: C
Introducing enhanced protection from dismissal will mean that there is a different approach to dismissal for this group of employees. In our view, it would not be appropriate to make an employer potentially liable for unfair dismissal under this stricter regime before they are aware that they are in this position. The enhanced protection should not therefore start until the employer has been informed of the pregnancy.
When the protection ends
Question 21: When should the protection ‘window’ for new mothers entitled to maternity leave end?
A. 18 months from the birth of the child – aligning with the 2023/24 redundancy protections.
B. Six months from the return to work (the ‘return to work’ being the end of the Maternity Leave period).
C. Don’t know.
LGA preferred option: A
It would seem appropriate to apply the same protection ‘window’ as currently applies in relation to redundancy protection.
Other parents
Question 27: Do you think the enhanced dismissal protections should also
cover employees taking these other types of long family leave? (Please select all that apply):
A. Adoption Leave.
B. Shared Parental Leave.
C. Neonatal Care Leave.
D. Bereaved Partner’s Paternity Leave.
LGA preferred option: all of the above
We believe that all of the above should be covered by the same protection as pregnant women and new mothers due to the fact that parents taking the above types of leave may also be away from work for extended periods of time and may therefore face similar vulnerabilities to pregnant women and new mothers. It would therefore be appropriate to provide comparable protection from dismissal for this group.
Mitigating unintended consequences
Question 33: What unintended consequences, if any, do you think could arise
from the enhanced dismissal protections? (Please select all that apply):
A. Increased discrimination – hesitancy in or avoiding hiring women of childbearing age.
B. Negative perception of workplace fairness/culture.
C. Employers delay dismissal decisions until after protection period lapses.
D. Negative impact on hiring generally.
E. Legal uncertainty - employers avoid fair dismissal due to risk.
F. Administrative burden (e.g. additional documentation).
G. Unsustainable or unrealistic asks on small businesses.
H. Other - please specify.
I. None.
LGA view: A, B, C, E and H
As the consultation document acknowledges, there is the potential for this policy to have unintended consequences. Some employers may try to avoid hiring women of childbearing age and some may also try to avoid risk by either deciding not to carry out a dismissal which would in fact be legitimate or by delaying dismissal until the protected period has ended. It is also possible that some employers may, when carrying out a restructuring exercise, try to avoid dismissing those they perceive as being potentially ‘protected’, with the result that redundancies fall unjustifiably on those who are seen as not falling within this group. For local government employers, the key issue may be the perception of unfairness among some of the workforce.
Protecting a wider group of employees (as discussed in question 27), other than solely pregnant women and new mothers, may help to mitigate against the latter issue. The provision of clear guidance explaining the rationale for the policy, which could be used to help dispel this perception, could also be a useful means of trying to address this potential problem.
If you would like to discuss our submission further, please contact [email protected]
Yours faithfully
Cllr Pete Marland
Chair, Local Government Resources Committee
Local Government Association