Government consultation: Draft Code of Practice on Electronic and Workplace Balloting for Statutory Union Ballots

Publication details

• Publication date: 19 November 2025
• Closing date for responses: 28 January 2026 (11:59pm)
• Link to consultation: Consultation: Draft Code of Practice on Electronic and Workplace Balloting for Statutory Union Ballots
• Link to draft Code of Practice: Draft Code of Practice on Electronic and Workplace Balloting for Statutory Union Ballots
• Relevant Bill provisions: Clause 76 (Electronic Balloting)

Purpose of the consultation

The government plans to introduce electronic and workplace balloting for statutory union ballots, alongside existing postal methods. These changes will be delivered through secondary legislation, supported by a statutory Code of Practice. The consultation seeks views on whether the draft Code provides clear and practical guidance to ensure ballots conducted using the new methods remain secure, secret and fair. It does not revisit the policy decision to permit electronic and workplace balloting.

Summary of content and scope

The draft Code explains how pure electronic, hybrid electronic and workplace balloting should operate once authorised. It sets out the responsibilities of unions, employers, scrutineers and, where relevant, the Central Arbitration Committee, and provides a framework for choosing an appropriate voting method. The Code includes detailed operational and technical standards, particularly for electronic balloting, covering distribution of voting materials, cybersecurity requirements and the management of audit logs and voter data.

Key proposals or areas for comment

The consultation focuses on whether the draft Code offers sufficiently clear guidance on the new methods. Electronic balloting attracts the most detailed requirements, with strict standards on encryption, system access, data storage and audit trails. The government is seeking feedback on the clarity and practicality of these requirements, including for hybrid balloting, where postal and electronic processes operate alongside each other.

Workplace balloting is addressed separately. It applies only to industrial action ballots and requires the employer’s voluntary agreement. The Code sets out expectations around voting locations, neutrality and secure handling of physical ballot papers. Views are invited on whether these safeguards are workable and adequately described. Respondents are also asked to comment on the factors the responsible person should consider when selecting a balloting method and whether the proposed reporting requirements for scrutineers are appropriate.

Practical and policy considerations

The reforms will introduce new operational demands for unions and scrutineers, particularly in meeting the cybersecurity, data integrity and audit standards required for electronic balloting. The need for accurate personal contact information may present practical challenges, and hybrid balloting may add complexity where postal and electronic processes must be aligned.

Employers’ direct responsibilities are limited, but workplace balloting requires careful planning to provide suitable voting facilities that protect neutrality and secrecy. Adjustments to usual site security (for example, avoiding CCTV coverage) may be necessary. As workplace balloting depends on voluntary agreement, employers will need to understand what is expected before consenting.

Selecting a voting method requires balancing security, accessibility and feasibility. Documenting these decisions clearly will be important, particularly if a method is challenged.

Unresolved or omitted issues

The draft Code provides detailed requirements but leaves some areas unclear. The monitoring and enforcement of the electronic balloting standards is not explained beyond scrutineer reporting. The Code does not describe what should happen if unions cannot supply sufficient personal contact information for electronic balloting, or how system failures during a ballot should be managed in practice.

For workplace balloting, the consequences of an employer withdrawing consent late in the process are not explored in detail. Although contingency planning is expected, the practical implications for ballot timings and previously cast votes remain uncertain. The interaction between the new methods, existing statutory ballot requirements and evidential expectations in litigation is not addressed.

Analysis and observations

The draft Code provides substantial detail on how electronic and workplace balloting should operate and reflects a strong focus on cybersecurity, auditability and ballot integrity. While this level of prescription may support confidence in the new system, it may also increase cost and complexity for scrutineers and unions. Electronic balloting will depend on the availability of providers capable of meeting the technical standards.