By Jane Bodkin, Head of Operational Readiness, Zellis Managed Services
Over the past few weeks, I’ve found myself talking about Statutory Sick Pay almost constantly. With significant changes coming into force from April 2026, that’s perhaps inevitable, but it has also reinforced just how much these reforms matter for employers once you move beyond the headline announcements and into the day-to-day reality of running payroll.
At a high level, the changes are straightforward to describe. The Lower Earnings Limit is being removed, and SSP will become payable from the first day of sickness absence rather than after waiting days. However, while those changes sound simple, together they fundamentally alter who qualifies for sick pay, how it is calculated, and what employers are likely to see in terms of absence patterns.
Historically, lower-earning workers were simply not eligible for SSP at all. If they were off sick, there was no statutory payment from their employer. From April 2026, that position changes entirely. Many people who previously fell outside the system will now receive some level of sick pay while they are off, which represents a significant shift both financially and culturally.
The same is true of waiting days. For years, SSP only started on the fourth qualifying day of absence, meaning employees absorbed the cost of short illnesses themselves. Moving to day-one entitlement removes that gap, and while it is designed to provide greater security for employees, it also changes expectations around taking time off when unwell.
How absence patterns are likely to change
One of the most immediate effects employers will notice is an increase in short-term absence. When sick pay is available from the first day, some employees who previously would have struggled into work while ill, may now feel able to take the time they need to recover.
That shift isn’t necessarily a negative one, but it does require preparation. Employers will need clear, up-to-date absence policies and managers who understand how sick pay is calculated, so they can explain outcomes confidently and consistently. As eligibility widens, being able to articulate how decisions are reached becomes just as important as the calculation itself.
From binary rules to more nuanced judgement
Another important change sits slightly below the surface. In the past, SSP eligibility was largely a binary decision: an employee either earned above the Lower Earnings Limit and received the flat rate, or they did not qualify at all. Removing that threshold introduces a more nuanced approach.
Under the new rules, employees will receive either SSP calculated at 80% of their AWE or the flat rate, whichever is the lowest. While that approach is more proportionate, it also introduces complexity, particularly where there is limited pay history to work from. New starters are the prime example of where historic data may not tell the full story.
In those situations, employers will be asked to provide an expected level of earnings so that the correct SSP can be applied. That requires judgement and collaboration, and it’s an area where clarity and communication become especially important.
Managing the transition carefully
There is also transitional guidance to consider. Employees who are already off sick when the new rules take effect will continue to receive the existing flat-rate SSP for the duration of that absence, even if the new calculation would otherwise reduce their entitlement.
From an employee perspective, that protection is important. From an employer perspective, it adds another layer of detail that needs to be handled carefully. Absence periods must be reviewed, and the correct rules applied at the correct time, particularly where older and newer SSP regimes overlap.
This is often where complexity creeps in. In my experience, the biggest risks rarely come from misunderstanding the headline rules, but from edge cases and transitions – people who sit just outside the standard scenarios, or absences that span a change in legislation. That’s where attention to detail really counts.
A practical reality, not just a compliance exercise
When we talk about changes like this, it’s easy to frame them purely in terms of compliance, but SSP is one of the areas of payroll where mistakes are felt most personally. If someone’s sick pay is wrong, it’s immediately obvious to them, and it matters in a very real way.
There is also more scrutiny now than there used to be, with wider changes in employment regulation and a growing expectation that employers can clearly demonstrate they are paying people correctly. That makes it even more important that absence policies, payroll processes and day-to-day decisions all line up with the legislation and with current guidance.
Payroll has very little tolerance for error in this space. While most payments will be processed correctly without issue, the impact of getting one case wrong can be significant, especially when it affects someone’s income while they are unwell.
Thinking ahead to April
With the 6 April 2026 deadline fast approaching, preparation is less about learning something new on the day and more about making sure the foundations are already in place. That means reviewing absence policies, checking that payroll processes can cope with more varied SSP outcomes, and making sure there’s a shared understanding of how decisions are made.
It also means being ready for more questions from employees. As eligibility widens, people will quite reasonably want to understand what they are entitled to and how their pay has been calculated. Being able to explain that clearly and confidently makes a huge difference, both for trust and for day-to-day payroll operations.
In payroll, it’s often said that the devil is in the detail, and that’s especially true with sick pay. Getting those details right is what ensures people are paid accurately, on time and in line with the rules, even as those rules change.
Employers who find the transition easiest will be those who treat these changes as something to plan for thoughtfully, rather than something to react to at the last minute.
