Why this catches employers out

There are plenty of bank holidays across 2026, which means the same questions will keep coming up for employers. What do you do with part time staff? What happens if someone does not usually work Mondays? How do you deal with holiday for people whose hours change from week to week?

This is where things can get messy. Not because the rules are impossible to understand, but because holiday arrangements are often badly worded in contracts, applied inconsistently, or based on a system nobody has reviewed for years.

A lot of people assume staff are automatically entitled to bank holidays off on top of their annual leave. That is not the case. Workers are entitled to 5.6 weeks of paid holiday each year. Bank holidays can be included within that entitlement, or an employer can choose to give them in addition. The important thing is what the contract says.

There is a real difference between 20 days plus bank holidays and 28 days including bank holidays. Those two arrangements are not the same, and if the wording is unclear, confusion usually follows quite quickly.

Part timers and bank holidays

The issue is often less about the bank holiday itself and more about whether the overall entitlement is fair.

Take a part timer who works Tuesday to Thursday. If most bank holidays fall on a Monday and the business closes on those days, a full timer may seem to get the benefit every time while the part timer gets very little. If holiday has not been calculated properly on a pro rata basis, that can cause problems.

Part time workers are still entitled to 5.6 weeks’ holiday, just reduced in line with the number of days or hours they work. So, for example, someone who works 3 days a week is entitled to 16.8 days’ holiday a year.

Where employers go wrong is treating bank holidays as though they only matter if they fall on a day the employee normally works. That can leave part time staff at a disadvantage if the arrangement is not backed up by a fair pro rata calculation overall. If full time staff receive the benefit of bank holidays through the way leave is structured, part time staff need an equivalent entitlement on a pro rata basis.

In many cases, hours work better than days. For staff with a fixed pattern, calculating holiday in days may be perfectly fine. But where someone works longer days, shorter days, compressed hours or a pattern that changes, using hours is often much easier and much fairer.

It also makes bank holidays easier to manage. If the business closes on a bank holiday and that employee would normally have worked 6 hours that day, you deduct 6 hours from their holiday balance. If they would not normally have worked that day, you would not deduct anything, but their annual entitlement still needs to have been set correctly in the first place.

Irregular hours and common mistakes

For workers whose hours vary, holiday calculations need more care. For leave years starting on or after 1 April 2024, irregular hours workers and part year workers generally accrue holiday at 12.07 per cent of the hours worked in each pay period.

So if someone works variable shifts each month, their entitlement should be based on the hours they have actually worked, not a rough estimate and not whatever was done for someone with a completely different pattern. This often applies to casual workers, zero hours staff and other workers whose hours are not fixed.

Even where entitlement has been worked out properly, employers still need to think about how holiday pay is calculated. If someone’s pay varies, holiday pay may need to reflect their average pay rather than just their basic hourly rate. That is especially important where overtime or variable shifts are part of normal earnings.

We still see the same issues coming up again and again. Contracts that are out of date or unclear. Payroll and managers applying different rules in practice. Part timers only getting bank holidays if they happen to be rostered on that day. Irregular hours staff being squeezed into a system designed for fixed hours employees. And sometimes the biggest problem is simply that nobody can clearly explain how the calculation works when an employee asks.

If the answer is vague, that is usually a sign the process needs looking at.

A good time to review it

With Easter, the May bank holidays and the summer bank holiday all coming round in 2026, this is a good point to review how holiday is being handled.

Check what contracts say about bank holidays, whether part time staff are receiving a fair pro rata entitlement, and whether holiday would be better tracked in hours rather than days. If you have staff with irregular hours, it is also worth checking that the accrual method and holiday pay calculation are up to date.

Holiday entitlement is one of those things that often gets left until someone queries it. By that point, it is usually more awkward than it needed to be. If you have part timers, variable hours staff or contracts that have not been reviewed for a while, now is a sensible time to check that everything stacks up before the busy run of bank holidays really kicks in.

Sickness absence has always been one of the trickiest areas for employers to manage. It sits at the crossroads of wellbeing, legal compliance and operational pressure, and when it is not handled consistently, it can quickly become a source of risk and frustration.

Recent changes to sickness absence and Statutory Sick Pay rules are intended to encourage earlier intervention and better support for employees. In practice, however, many employers are finding that expectations on them are increasing, while clarity on how to manage absence day to day is still lacking.

Why sickness absence is under the spotlight

There is a growing recognition that long term sickness absence benefits no one. Employees can become disconnected from work, while businesses struggle with reduced capacity, increased costs and uncertainty around next steps.

The direction of travel is clear. Employers are expected to engage earlier, communicate more clearly and take a more structured approach to managing absence. This means informal arrangements and ad hoc decision making are no longer enough.

What this means for employers

For employers, the biggest risk is not the sickness itself, but inconsistency. Treating similar cases differently, missing key conversations or failing to keep proper records can quickly lead to employee relations issues or legal exposure.

A clear absence management process helps by setting expectations from the start. Employees know what is required of them, managers know what steps to follow, and the business can demonstrate that it has acted fairly and reasonably.

Good absence management is not about being heavy handed. It is about early conversations, appropriate support and clear documentation. When done well, it can reduce absence levels, improve morale and give managers confidence when dealing with difficult situations.

Do your current processes still work?

Many businesses have absence policies that were written years ago and rarely looked at. Others rely on informal practices that exist only in people’s heads. With sickness rules evolving, now is a sensible time to review whether your current approach is still fit for purpose.

Ask yourself whether managers know when to hold return to work meetings, how to handle repeated short-term absence or when medical advice should be sought. If the answer is unclear, that is often a sign the process needs tightening up.

A practical resource to help

To support employers, I have created a free Managing Absence downloadable, designed to be practical, clear and easy to use. It focuses on what businesses actually need to do, rather than theory or legal language.

You can access the guide by scanning the QR code below.

If you would like tailored support reviewing your absence procedures or managing a current sickness issue, please get in touch. A short conversation now can prevent much bigger problems later.

Artificial intelligence is rapidly reshaping how HR functions operate. For small and medium sized businesses in particular, the appeal is obvious. AI promises speed, efficiency and access to insights that once required large in house teams or expensive systems. Used well, it can remove friction from everyday HR activity and free up valuable time.

But while AI is a powerful enabler, it is not a replacement for human judgement. The most effective HR models do not choose between technology and people. They combine both, using AI to support experienced human expertise rather than replace it.

What AI Does Well in HR

AI is particularly effective when dealing with high volume, data driven tasks. These are often the areas that consume time without necessarily adding strategic value, especially for SMEs with limited internal resource.

In practice, AI can support HR teams by streamlining recruitment activity such as CV screening, candidate matching and interview scheduling. It can provide interview insights by identifying patterns in responses, language or skills alignment. It can also produce real time reporting on workforce data, recruitment pipelines and absence trends.

Beyond recruitment, AI is useful for spotting emerging risks or skills gaps, flagging potential compliance issues and handling repetitive administrative tasks. For smaller businesses, these capabilities can feel transformative, creating structure and visibility where previously there was little.

Where AI Has Clear Limits

Despite its strengths, AI has important limitations, particularly in people centered environments. One of the biggest risks is over reliance on data that may be incomplete, outdated or biased. AI tools can only work with the information they are given, and if that information reflects existing inequalities or flawed assumptions, the output will too.

There are also significant legal and compliance considerations. Poorly implemented tools can create GDPR risks or lead to decisions that are not aligned with current employment law. Without proper oversight, SMEs may not realise where accountability sits or how decisions have been reached.

Crucially, AI does not have human judgement, empathy or cultural awareness. It cannot read the room, understand nuance or respond appropriately to sensitive situations. This matters because HR decisions often involve emotion, context and trust.

Employee confidence is another factor. If AI is introduced without transparency or human involvement, trust can quickly erode. And there is also the simple reality that large language models can be wrong. Confident sounding output does not always equal accurate or lawful guidance. Without experienced interpretation, misinformation can easily slip into decision making.

A Real World Example: When AI Output Creates Risk

Last week I had a call from a new client that brought this to life in a very practical way. They had invited an employee to a disciplinary hearing using a letter generated by ChatGPT. When the employer read it out to me, I could not clearly tell what the meeting was actually about, and if I could not understand it, the employee certainly would not have been able to.

ChatGPT had taken the prompt and produced something that sounded formal, supportive and polished. That is exactly what it is designed to do. It takes your input, mirrors your tone, and gives you something that feels reassuring. The problem is that a disciplinary process is not about sounding reassuring. It is about clarity, fairness and legal accuracy.

The letter did not properly set out that the meeting was a disciplinary hearing, and it missed key language that should be included so the employee understands the purpose of the meeting, what is being considered, and what the possible outcomes could be. That is not just a technical issue. It goes to the heart of procedural fairness. If the process is challenged later, that kind of failure can undermine the whole case.

The same client also told me they were using ChatGPT for what they described as their policies. In reality, what they had was a one page Code of Conduct. A Code of Conduct can be a useful document, but it is not a substitute for a proper set of policies and procedures. Without clear processes for disciplinary, grievance, absence, capability, and other common issues, managers will fill the gaps with guesswork, and that is where risk grows quietly.

Privacy, Prompts, and the Myth of “ChatGPT Will Sort It”

There is another point that often gets missed in the rush to save time. If you are using free tools, you should assume what you type in is not private in the way a confidential HR conversation is private. Even where providers offer business plans with stronger controls, you still need to think carefully about what you are inputting, particularly if it includes personal data, sensitive context, or anything that could identify an employee. HR is not just admin. It is a compliance area, and confidentiality is part of the job.

Then there is the issue of prompts. AI output is only as good as the input and the judgement behind it. If you do not understand employment law and you do not understand the process you are trying to follow, the tool cannot fix that for you. It will not pause and say, “Before we write this letter, have we established whether this is misconduct or capability, whether an investigation is needed, whether suspension is appropriate, whether the employee has the right to be accompanied, and what timescales are reasonable?” It will simply generate something that sounds plausible.

And if things escalate, a tribunal defence will not be “we used ChatGPT”. Judges will not care. The responsibility sits with the employer. You are expected to follow a fair process, apply the law properly, and treat people reasonably. Technology does not change that accountability.

The Human Touch: Why HR Consultants Still Matter

This is where experienced HR professionals continue to play a critical role. Human expertise provides the judgement, accountability and ethical oversight that technology cannot.

HR consultants ensure that policies and documents are legally compliant and kept up to date with evolving employment legislation. They support managers through performance issues, conflict and absence in a way that balances fairness with commercial reality. They handle sensitive conversations around wellbeing, conduct and capability with empathy and professionalism.

They also play a key role in onboarding, leadership support and career development discussions, areas where trust and understanding are essential. Importantly, human professionals interpret AI generated insights and translate them into practical, lawful action. AI may highlight patterns or risks, but it is people who decide what those insights mean and how to respond appropriately.

A Balanced Approach

AI should support HR decision making, not replace it. When used thoughtfully, it can improve efficiency, consistency and visibility. But without experienced human judgement guiding its use, it can just as easily create risk.

For SMEs, the strongest outcomes come from balance. Technology provides the tools, human expertise provides the judgement. Together, they allow businesses to innovate while maintaining empathy, ethics and trust, the foundations of effective people management.

Keeping Contracts Up to Date

Employment contracts are one of the most important documents a business will ever issue. They set the foundation for the working relationship between employer and employee, defining rights, responsibilities, and expectations on both sides. Yet once signed, many organisations rarely look at them again until something goes wrong. In reality, contracts of employment should be reviewed regularly to ensure they remain accurate, compliant, and fit for purpose.

There are several key moments when a review is particularly important. A promotion, a shift to a different department, or an increase in responsibilities should all be reflected in an updated contract that clearly sets out new terms such as salary, benefits, and duties. Changes to working arrangements, including hybrid or remote work, can also affect contractual obligations and need to be documented properly. Legislation around holiday pay, flexible working, or working time can alter the legal landscape, and contracts that are not updated may unintentionally breach new requirements. Organisational changes such as mergers, acquisitions, or restructures are further trigger points that call for careful review to ensure consistency across the workforce.

Reducing Risk and Building Trust

Failing to update contracts can expose a business to unnecessary risk. Outdated or unclear clauses can lead to misunderstandings, grievances, or even tribunal claims. Employers may also face penalties if contracts fail to meet statutory requirements or do not include mandatory written statements of employment particulars. Beyond compliance, outdated contracts can damage trust between employer and employee. When a contract no longer reflects reality, it sends the message that the business is not keeping pace with its own policies or people.

Regular reviews are the simplest way to prevent these issues. Many businesses find it helpful to schedule a review annually or every two years, ideally alongside a wider HR audit. This proactive approach keeps documentation current and ensures contracts align with company policies and evolving legislation.

Expert Support and Clear Communication

For small and medium-sized businesses, keeping up with these obligations can be challenging. Working with an HR consultant ensures that every clause is legally compliant and tailored to your needs. A consultant can identify risks, draft clear updates, and advise on whether an addendum or a new contract is required. For many organisations, this is a cost-effective way to manage compliance without taking time away from operations.

At EC Human Resources, we also support businesses by helping to communicate these updates effectively. Some employers prefer an independent professional to explain changes directly to their team. Emma Cromarty can meet with staff to talk through contractual updates, answer questions, and ensure everyone understands what the changes mean in practice. This approach helps maintain transparency, reduces resistance, and builds trust.

A well-written, up-to-date contract protects both parties and strengthens the employment relationship. By reviewing contracts regularly and seeking expert advice, businesses can avoid future complications, maintain compliance, and give employees confidence that their terms of employment are fair and clearly understood.