Changes introduced by the Employment Rights Act 2025 came into force on 6 January 2026 and affect how zero-hours working operates in practice. The reforms apply across sectors and are relevant to both employers and individuals working on flexible or variable hours.
The changes focus on two areas. One removes a short-lived statutory framework that some organisations had begun to plan around. The other significantly widens restrictions on exclusivity in zero-hours working.
What changed on 6 January 2026
Two linked legal changes took effect from 6 January 2026.
The Workers (Predictable Terms and Conditions) Act 2023 was repealed. Any procedures or policies built specifically around that legislation no longer have a statutory basis and should be reviewed to avoid confusion or inconsistency.
At the same time, the legal ban on exclusivity terms was widened. The restriction no longer applies only to zero-hours contracts. It now applies to all zero-hours arrangements, regardless of how the working relationship is described or documented.
The focus has shifted away from labels and towards how work is offered and accepted in reality.
What is meant by a zero-hours arrangement
A zero-hours arrangement exists where there is no guarantee of work and hours are offered on an ad hoc or as-needed basis. This can apply even where there is no single overarching contract.
Arrangements can include casual worker pools, bank staff, platform-based work, seasonal work, agency-style engagement and other flexible models where availability is expected but hours are not guaranteed.
The law now looks at how the arrangement operates in practice, not whether it is formally described as zero-hours.
What the changes mean for employers
Employers can no longer restrict individuals working under zero-hours arrangements from taking other work. This applies even where restrictions are indirect rather than written into a contract.
Risk does not arise only from formal clauses. It can also arise from how work is allocated and how expectations are communicated. Reducing shifts, delaying work offers or removing someone from a rota because they have taken another job is likely to attract challenge.
Flexible staffing models across retail, hospitality, care, logistics and similar sectors are particularly affected. Agency and outsourced models are also within scope where the end user influences availability or penalises secondary work.
Employers that relied on exclusivity to manage cover or ensure priority availability will need to adjust their approach.
What the changes mean for workers
Individuals working under zero-hours arrangements have clearer protection when seeking or taking work with more than one employer.
They should not be prevented from accepting other work simply because they are engaged on a flexible basis. They should also not be treated less favourably for doing so, for example through loss of shifts or reduced opportunities.
The changes recognise that where hours are not guaranteed, workers need the freedom to secure sufficient income elsewhere.
Workers should still expect to comply with reasonable requirements around performance, safety and conflicts of interest when they are working, but flexibility outside working time is now more clearly protected.
What employers can still manage lawfully
The changes do not remove all employer controls.
Employers can still address genuine conflicts of interest, protect confidential information and manage health and safety risks such as fatigue or working time limits.
They can also set clear expectations around performance and conduct when work is accepted. The distinction is that these controls should not be used to pressure individuals into prioritising one employer over others where hours are not guaranteed.
Clear wording and consistent application are important to reduce dispute risk.
What employers should review now
Employers should review all documents and practices affecting variable-hours working, including contracts, worker agreements, handbooks, rota policies and manager guidance.
Any language that restricts outside work across zero-hours arrangements should be removed or rewritten. Managers responsible for allocating shifts should be trained to apply objective and consistent criteria and to avoid informal practices that could be seen as punitive.
Agency and supplier arrangements should also be reviewed to ensure that expectations placed on workers do not undermine compliance with the updated rules.
7. What this means in practical terms
Zero-hours working has not been removed, but it has been reshaped. The law now draws a clearer line between flexibility and control.
For employers, the main risk lies in outdated assumptions about availability and priority. For workers, the change strengthens the ability to combine flexible roles without penalty.
Organisations that adapt their workforce models early are more likely to avoid disputes and retain staff. Those that rely on informal exclusivity or pressure are likely to encounter problems once the new rules are tested in practice.
Author
Gill Laing is a qualified Legal Researcher & Analyst with niche specialisms in Law, Tax, Human Resources, Immigration & Employment Law.
Gill is a Multiple Business Owner and the Managing Director of Prof Services - a Marketing Agency for the Professional Services Sector.
