Fire & Rehire WHAT THE IMPENDING BAN MEANS FOR AESTHETIC CLINICS
James Twine, Partner and Head of Business Services at leading South West law firm Wolferstans delves into the impending Fire & Rehire ban set to be restricted by the forthcoming Employment Rights Bill and how aesthetic clinics must adapt to a new model of employment relationships
The aesthetics sector thrives on adaptability, whether it’s responding to the evolving needs of patients, managing seasonal fluctuations T in demand, or adapting staff hours around treatment bookings and clinic footfall. But that agility, particularly in how employers structure and amend staff contracts, is about to come under intense legal scrutiny. The long-criticised practice of “Fire and Rehire” – dismissing employees and offering re-engagement on revised terms – is set to be heavily restricted by the forthcoming Employment Rights Bill, which could take effect as soon as October 2025.
For clinics and practitioners already juggling tight margins, staff availability, and patient expectations, this change demands attention. It will significantly reduce the ability of employers to introduce contractual changes without agreement and introduce new risks for those who fail to consult transparently. While the headlines have focused on large corporations and public sector disputes, this legislation carries very real consequences for small and medium-sized aesthetic businesses.
THE LEGAL SHIFT
At present, the law permits an employer to dismiss and rehire an employee on new terms if agreement can’t be reached on contractual changes. While this has always carried reputational risk, and has been discouraged, it remains lawful if handled fairly. In many cases, it’s used as a last resort when consultations stall, particularly around changes to hours, locations, or responsibilities.
But the new framework will make this route virtually unavailable. Under the Bill, dismissals carried out for the purpose of imposing new terms will be automatically unfair unless the employer can prove two things. First, that the variation was essential to address serious financial difficulties. Second, that no reasonable alternatives existed.
This is not a test of convenience, efficiency, or even competitiveness. It’s a test of survival. An aesthetics clinic cannot rely on the fact that it wants to standardise appointment slots, adjust weekend cover, or balance patient demand between practitioners. It would have to show that without the change, its ability to continue operating would be materially threatened and that every other option had been exhausted.
That’s a high bar. And even where it is met, employers will need to show they followed all procedural obligations, particularly when it comes to consulting with affected staff.
THE ROLE OF THE NEW CODE OF PRACTICE
Alongside the legislative change, a statutory Code of Practice will be introduced to shape the process around contractual changes. Though not binding in its own right, the Code will be taken into account by tribunals, who will have the power to increase compensation if an employer fails to follow its expectations.
That means employers must demonstrate not just necessity, but procedural integrity. They will need to consult openly, engage meaningfully, and document every step of the process. For smaller aesthetic clinics, where HR functions are often outsourced or informal, this may require a rethinking of how change is proposed and recorded.
It also means the familiar top-down model of announcing new terms, however well-intentioned, will no longer be tenable. Staff input, negotiation, and collaboration will be essential.
WHY THIS MATTERS IN AESTHETIC MEDICINE
The aesthetics industry is often built around dynamic employment models. Some practitioners are self-employed, others are on flexible part-time contracts, and support staff may work variable hours depending on treatment flow. Clinics sometimes amend terms to reflect shifts in peak periods, opening hours, or pricing strategies.
Under the current system, if staff do not agree to a change, say, to shift schedules or bonus structures, employers have the fallback of dismissal and re-engagement. That’s about to disappear. Once the Bill becomes law, such changes will require consent, and attempting to impose them unilaterally will expose clinics to legal claims for unfair dismissal.
Moreover, the reputational damage that flows from such disputes can be particularly acute in the aesthetics sector. Patients are loyal not just to clinics, but to individuals. A public employment dispute, or even a sense that a practice is not treating staff fairly, can undermine patient trust. In a sector where word-of-mouth and online reviews shape business success, this reputational element is arguably more significant than in any other clinical field.
WORKAROUNDS COME WITH SERIOUS RISKS
Some employers may be tempted to seek alternative routes to achieve the same outcomes. But each comes with serious drawbacks. For instance, disguising a contractual change as a redundancy will only succeed if the redundancy is genuine. Tribunals will look behind the label to determine whether the dismissal was in fact a means of enforcing change.
Others may try to rely on variation clauses in contracts. But such clauses, particularly where they purport to allow employers to make changes unilaterally, are routinely struck down by courts when used to impose disadvantageous terms. That trend will only harden under the new regime.
Replacing dissenting employees with agency staff also carries risks. It could engage TUPE protections, lead to disputes about continuity of terms, and in some cases attract the attention of regulators or the media. Not to mention the cost implications – agency labour is rarely cheaper, and often less consistent with a practice’s brand or ethos.
Ultimately, all of these approaches are likely to be viewed as circumventions of the new law. And while the legislation itself targets Fire and Rehire specifically, the associated Code of Practice makes clear that courts will assess the spirit of employer behaviour, not just the form.
WHAT CLINICS SHOULD BE DOING NOW
With the clock ticking, aesthetic clinics have a limited window to futureproof their employment strategies. This begins with a review of all existing contracts. Employers should identify any variation clauses, assess their enforceability, and consider whether existing terms reflect the flexibility they actually need.
If changes to working patterns, locations, or hours are on the horizon, now is the time to begin a consultation process, while the current framework still offers a wider margin for lawful change. But that consultation must be genuine. Clinics must listen, consider alternatives, and approach the process as a negotiation, not a formality.
About the Author: James Twine is a Partner and Head of Business Services at Wolferstans; he is an employment law and education specialist who acts for both employers and employees in relation to all aspects of employment law, delivering support to businesses and schools throughout England & Wales.
It’s also essential to train anyone responsible for employment matters on the implications of the new law. Whether that’s a practice manager, HR consultant, or business owner, everyone involved in employment decision-making should understand the risks, limits, and expectations the legislation creates.
RETHINKING FLEXIBILITY
The broader challenge for the aesthetics sector is cultural. Many practices have evolved organically, with flexible staffing and informal arrangements. That approach has offered agility, but also risk. As the law changes, informal practices may no longer offer sufficient protection. What’s needed is a framework that allows change through agreement, not imposition.
Voluntary variation may be part of the solution. By offering incentives or entering into time-limited changes, employers can preserve flexibility while staying compliant. Likewise, investing in workforce planning rather than last-minute scheduling fixes can help clinics maintain service levels without breaching employment law.
LOOKING AHEAD
The Fire and Rehire ban marks a turning point in how UK employers can manage contractual change. For aesthetic clinics, it means adapting to a new model of employment relationships -one built on agreement, clarity, and accountability.
Handled well, this change can strengthen clinic culture and staff loyalty. Handled poorly, it could lead to costly claims, damaged reputations, and disruption to patient care. The message is clear: take stock now, plan ahead, and lead with transparency.
Because flexibility in the aesthetics sector isn’t going away, but how it’s achieved is about to change.