TUPE, or the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006, protects employees when the business or service they work for transfers to a new employer. For UK HR managers, a TUPE transfer requires careful planning, consultation, secure data handling, and payroll continuity to protect both compliance and employee trust. 

The legal obligations are substantial: affected employees must be informed and consulted; Employee Liability Information must be provided to the incoming employer at least 28 days before the transfer; and employment terms must transfer intact from day one. Failure on any of these fronts creates direct financial and legal exposure. A failure to consult can result in a penalty of up to 13 weeks’ pay per affected employee, jointly shared between transferor and transferee. 

Beyond the legal framework, the operational execution of a TUPE transfer — mapping employee data, ensuring payroll continuity, migrating records, and managing the employee experience on both sides — is where most organisations encounter the greatest difficulty. This guide covers both dimensions. 

Sources: Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (as amended); Collective Redundancies and Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) (Amendment) Regulations 2014; GOV.UK TUPE guidance; ACAS 

TUPE at a glance: four questions every HR manager must answer 

1. Does TUPE apply? — Two scenarios: a business transfer or a service provision change. Both require the relevant legal test to be met. 
2. Which employees are affected? — Those assigned to the transferring business or organised grouping of employees. 
3. What must both employers do? — Inform and consult; share Employee Liability Information at least 28 days before transfer; ensure continuity of terms from day one. 
4. How do HR systems support the transfer? — Centralised employee data, secure ELI handling, payroll configuration, and audit trails are the operational foundations of a compliant transfer. 

What TUPE Covers 

TUPE applies in two distinct scenarios. The type of transfer determines which legal tests must be met and, in some cases, what obligations apply. Both types carry the same core employee protections, but the way the affected population is identified differs between them. 

When TUPE applies 

A business transfer occurs when an economic entity — a business, part of a business, or undertaking — transfers from one employer to another, and that entity retains its identity after the transfer. The key question is whether what is transferred is an economic entity — an organised grouping of resources with the objective of pursuing an economic activity — rather than simply a collection of assets. The courts assess this holistically, looking at factors including whether employees, assets, and customers transfer. 

A service provision change (SPC) covers three situations: a client outsources a service to a contractor; a client switches from one contractor to another on re-tender; or a client brings a contracted service back in-house (insourcing). For TUPE to apply to an SPC, there must be an organised grouping of employees in the outgoing business whose principal purpose is carrying out the activities that are transferring. A deliberately assembled group, or a situation where no such identifiable grouping exists, will not satisfy the SPC test. 

When TUPE does not apply 

TUPE does not apply in the following situations: 

• Share sales: where a company is sold through a transfer of shares rather than assets, the employing entity does not change. Employees remain employed by the same legal entity; TUPE does not apply. This is one of the most common misconceptions and should be clarified at the outset of any transaction. 
• One-off or short-term tasks: a service provision change requires an activity that is intended to be carried out in connection with the client’s purposes on a not merely temporary basis. A single short-term project does not qualify. 
• Supply of goods only: TUPE’s SPC provisions do not apply to contracts for the supply of goods, even where those contracts involve significant workforce activity at the supplier’s end. 
• No organised grouping: an SPC where employees are assigned to a particular client on an ad hoc basis, rather than as a structured grouping, is unlikely to meet the test. 
• Transfers that fail the economic entity test: for business transfers, the entity must retain its identity post-transfer. A transfer that amounts to no more than a reallocation of assets without continuity will not qualify. 

The question of whether TUPE applies is a legal determination that depends on the specific facts of the transfer. HR teams should not make this assessment independently. Early engagement with employment legal counsel — before the transaction is structured, not after it is agreed — avoids the most costly TUPE mistakes. 

Core Employee Protections Under TUPE 

TUPE’s protections operate automatically from the moment the transfer takes effect. The incoming employer inherits the employment relationship with all its associated rights, obligations, and liabilities. Understanding the scope of those protections — and their limits — is essential for managing post-transfer integration lawfully. 

• Automatic transfer of employment: employees assigned to the transferring entity transfer automatically to the incoming employer. No new contracts are required; employment continues on existing terms. Employees do not need to consent to the transfer, though they have the right to object (see below). 
• Continuity of service preserved: employees’ continuous employment is not broken by the transfer. Length of service, which affects statutory entitlements including redundancy pay and unfair dismissal qualifying periods, continues uninterrupted from the original start date. Incoming employers who make redundancies without recognising transferred service will face incorrect statutory payments and, where the dismissal is connected to the transfer, automatically unfair dismissal claims. 
• Terms and conditions carry over: the employee’s contract transfers in its entirety: salary, working hours, holiday entitlement, benefits, and all other contractual terms. Terms deriving from collective agreements also transfer, subject to the rules on variation. 
• Protection against dismissal connected to the transfer: where the sole or principal reason for a dismissal is the transfer itself, the dismissal is automatically unfair regardless of length of service (regulation 7). This applies on both sides of the transfer. An outgoing employer who dismisses an employee to avoid their liabilities transferring, or an incoming employer who dismisses immediately post-transfer to reduce headcount, is exposed to automatic unfair dismissal claims. 
• Right to object: an employee can object to the transfer under regulation 4(9). If they do, they are treated as having terminated their own employment; they are not dismissed and are not entitled to redundancy pay. The exception is where the transfer involves a substantial change to working conditions to the employee’s material detriment, in which case the employee may be entitled to treat themselves as constructively dismissed. 

Limits on post-transfer variation 

A contractual variation connected solely to the transfer is void under regulation 4(4), even if the employee agrees to it. An employer cannot ask employees to accept a pay cut or change their working hours on the basis that the transfer is the reason, and expect that variation to be valid. 

Variations may be lawful where there is an economic, technical, or organisational (ETO) reason that entails changes in the workforce — that is, changes in the numbers or functions of employees. The ETO reason must be genuine and must involve workforce change; a desire to harmonise terms across the incoming employer’s existing staff is not an ETO reason. 

For terms derived from collective agreements, the 2014 amendments introduced a more flexible position: where the collective agreement was negotiated before the transfer, terms may be varied after 12 months post-transfer provided the overall package remains no less favourable than the pre-variation position. This is a narrow exception and should be approached with legal advice. 

Employer Obligations in a TUPE Transfer 

TUPE imposes distinct obligations on the outgoing employer (transferor) and the incoming employer (transferee). Both carry independent compliance duties; both can be held jointly liable where they fail to meet their information and consultation obligations. The following table summarises the key responsibilities. 

Transferor duties in detail 

The outgoing employer’s primary obligations are to identify the affected employee population correctly, prepare and deliver accurate Employee Liability Information, fulfil consultation obligations in respect of any measures it envisages, and maintain compliant employee records for handover. 

Identifying affected employees requires a clear assessment of which employees are assigned to the transferring entity. This is straightforward for a whole-business transfer but can be contested in an SPC where employees work across multiple clients. The outgoing employer must be able to identify, document, and defend the assignment of each employee to the transferring grouping. Errors at this stage propagate through every subsequent step. 

The outgoing employer must also ensure that the records being transferred are accurate, complete, and current. Inaccurate records — incorrect start dates, missing disciplinary records, undisclosed grievances or tribunal claims — expose the outgoing employer to a claim from the incoming employer under regulation 12, which allows the incoming employer to seek compensation for loss caused by a failure to provide accurate ELI. 

Transferee duties in detail 

The incoming employer’s obligations begin before the transfer date. Reviewing ELI, planning payroll configuration, preparing systems for the incoming workforce, and communicating with affected employees are all pre-transfer tasks that cannot safely be deferred to the day of transfer itself. 

From day one, the incoming employer must ensure: employees are paid on their existing terms; contracts and policies from the outgoing employer are held on file; any collective agreements that affect terms and conditions are acknowledged; and the employees’ continuous service is recorded correctly from their original start date. A payroll system that does not recognise the transferred employees’ original start dates will produce incorrect statutory entitlements from the first pay run. 

Where the incoming employer intends to make changes post-transfer — to headcount, roles, or working arrangements — it must ensure those changes are driven by a genuine ETO reason and managed through a proper process. Post-transfer redundancies that are connected to the transfer remain subject to challenge as automatically unfair dismissal unless the ETO test is met. 

The TUPE Transfer Timeline 

A well-managed TUPE transfer follows a structured sequence across three phases. Compressed timelines are one of the most common causes of compliance failure; the legal obligations require lead time that must be built into the transaction timetable, not shoe-horned in at the end. 

Pre-transfer 

1. Confirm TUPE applies: take legal advice early; do not structure the transaction on the assumption that TUPE does or does not apply before that assessment has been made.
2. Identify affected employees: document which employees are assigned to the transferring entity; agree this with the incoming employer before ELI is prepared. 
3. Prepare Employee Liability Information: compile the required fields for every affected employee; allow sufficient time for review before the 28-day minimum deadline. 
4. Elect or identify employee representatives: where there is no recognised trade union, affected employees must be given the opportunity to elect representatives before the information and consultation process begins. 
5. Deliver information to representatives: provide the required statutory information to employee representatives in writing in good time for meaningful consultation. 
6. Consult on measures: both employers must consult with representatives on any measures they envisage taking in connection with the transfer. Consultation must be with a view to reaching agreement. 
7. Data mapping and system readiness: the incoming employer should map incoming employee data to its own HR and payroll systems before the transfer date; identify gaps, mismatches, or validation issues that need resolution. 
8. Payroll configuration: the incoming employer must set up payroll for the transferring employees — including PAYE references, bank details, pay rates, benefit deductions, and pension arrangements — before the transfer date. 

Transfer day 

The transfer date is not the end of the compliance process; it is the point at which the incoming employer assumes full responsibility for the transferred employees. Practical actions for transfer day: 

• Confirm all transferred employees are set up in the HR and payroll system with correct terms, start dates, and entitlement records 
• Issue written confirmation to each transferred employee of their continuation of employment, their terms as transferred, and who to contact with questions 
• Ensure access to IT systems, premises, and working resources is operational from the first working day 
• Brief line managers and operational leads on the transferred employees: their roles, their terms, and the legal restrictions on post-transfer variation 
• Establish a contact point for employee queries and escalate issues promptly; employee anxiety on transfer day is predictable and manageable if it is anticipated 

Post-transfer 

The weeks immediately after a transfer are operationally intensive and legally sensitive. The incoming employer should: 

• Conduct a records audit: validate that all transferred records are complete, accurate, and correctly filed; identify any gaps from the ELI that need to be chased with the outgoing employer under regulation 12 
• Run a payroll reconciliation: confirm that the first pay run for transferred employees reflects the correct rates, correct start dates for statutory entitlement calculations, and correct deductions 
• Manage policy alignment carefully: do not impose harmonised policies without legal advice; communicate any changes transparently and only where lawfully permitted 
• Monitor employee relations: the period after a transfer carries elevated risk of grievances, tribunal claims, and disengagement; early and proactive communication reduces this risk materially 
• Complete integration tasks within agreed timelines: where organisational change is planned post-transfer for a genuine ETO reason, follow a proper process with appropriate consultation 

Information and Consultation 

The duty to inform and consult is one of TUPE’s most operationally significant obligations and one of the most frequently breached. Both employers carry independent duties. Both can be ordered to pay compensation if those duties are not met. There is no minimum period specified in the Regulations — the obligation is to consult “in good time,” which in practice means as early as feasible given the transaction timetable. 

Who must be informed and what must be covered 

The information must be given to appropriate employee representatives — either a recognised trade union or, where none exists, elected employee representatives. Where no representatives exist and the employer fails to invite elections, each affected employee can be informed directly, but this does not remove the penalty exposure for failing to facilitate representation. 

The required information covers: 

• The fact that the transfer is to take place and, so far as is known, the approximate date 
• The reasons for the transfer 
• The legal, economic, and social implications of the transfer for affected employees 
• Any measures the outgoing employer envisages taking in relation to affected employees 
• Any measures the incoming employer envisages taking — note that the outgoing employer must pass this information to representatives, which requires the two employers to communicate before the information session 

Where no measures are envisaged, that must still be communicated explicitly. A failure to provide any of the required information is a breach, even where the omission is deemed immaterial. 

Consultation requirements 

Consultation is required where either employer envisages taking measures in connection with the transfer. Measures include restructuring, redundancy, relocation, changes to working arrangements, or changes to terms following transfer. The consultation must be undertaken with a view to reaching agreement, not merely to inform employees of a predetermined outcome. 

Consultation that is demonstrably tokenistic — where the decision has already been made and the meeting is a formality — will not satisfy the obligation. Employment Tribunals look at whether the employer genuinely considered the representatives’ views and whether those views were capable of influencing the outcome. 

⚠️  The cost of failing to consult 

A failure to comply with the information and consultation obligations under regulation 13 can result in a penalty of up to 13 weeks’ gross pay per affected employee. Both the outgoing and incoming employer can be held jointly liable. In a transfer involving 50 affected employees at an average gross weekly pay of £600: 13 weeks × 50 employees × £600 = £390,000 maximum exposure. This is in addition to any unfair dismissal claims arising from the transfer. There is no upper cap on the total award across all affected employees. 

Employee Liability Information 

Employee Liability Information (ELI) is the structured data package that the outgoing employer must provide to the incoming employer under regulation 11 of the TUPE Regulations. It exists so that the incoming employer can understand the employment liabilities it is inheriting and prepare accordingly. ELI must be provided at least 28 days before the transfer takes effect. 

The 28-day minimum is a floor, not a target. In a complex transfer, the incoming employer needs time to review ELI, raise queries, configure its HR and payroll systems, and prepare for day-one readiness. Transferors who deliver ELI at the last possible moment create operational and legal risk for the incoming employer and expose themselves to claims under regulation 12 if errors surface after the transfer. 

What ELI must contain 

ELI must cover each employee assigned to the transferring entity and include the following: 

• Identity: full name and any relevant identifying information 
• Age: date of birth 
• Written employment particulars: the information required under section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 — job title, pay, working hours, holiday entitlement, place of work, and other terms 
• Disciplinary record: details of any disciplinary action taken in respect of the employee in the two years preceding the notification 
• Grievance record: details of any grievances raised by the employee in the two years preceding the notification 
• Legal proceedings: any proceedings brought by the employee against the outgoing employer in the two years preceding the notification, and any proceedings that the outgoing employer has reasonable grounds to believe may be brought after the transfer 
• Collective agreements: details of any collective agreements that will have effect in relation to the employee after the transfer 
• ELI must be in writing (or in a reasonably accessible electronic form) and must be accurate. An incoming employer that suffers a loss because ELI was inaccurate or incomplete can seek compensation from the outgoing employer under regulation 12. This is not a theoretical risk; undisclosed tribunal claims or incorrect start dates are common causes of post-transfer disputes between the two employers. 

GDPR and ELI 

The transfer of employee data as part of ELI must be handled in compliance with UK GDPR. Employers typically rely on legitimate interests as the lawful basis for processing and sharing employee data in a TUPE context, where the transfer of data is necessary for the compliance and continuity purposes TUPE requires. A data protection impact assessment (DPIA) is good practice for any transfer involving significant employee data volumes. 

Data minimisation applies: only the data required for ELI purposes should be shared. Bulk export of HR files containing sensitive personal data beyond the ELI requirements creates unnecessary risk for both parties. The outgoing employer should share ELI through a secure, access-controlled channel — not by email attachment — and both parties should retain a record of what was shared, when, and to whom. 

Data, Payroll, and Records 

The operational risk in a TUPE transfer is concentrated in three areas: the accuracy and completeness of employee data, the continuity of payroll, and the integrity of records. Each is manageable with the right systems and processes. Each becomes a compliance liability without them. 

Data gaps and payroll continuity 

Common data quality issues discovered at ELI stage include: missing or incorrect start dates (affecting statutory entitlement calculations); incomplete disciplinary or grievance histories; outstanding pay disputes not flagged in ELI; pension arrangements not fully documented; and contractual benefits — company car, private healthcare, enhanced leave entitlement — not captured in the written particulars. 

Each gap creates a downstream problem. An incorrect start date in the incoming payroll system produces incorrect statutory redundancy calculations from day one. An undisclosed grievance that escalates post-transfer may result in the incoming employer defending a claim for which it received no prior notice. A pension arrangement not captured in ELI may require a backdated employer contribution once it surfaces. 

⚠️  The risk of manual data handling in TUPE 

Transferring employee data via spreadsheet, email, or document packs creates multiple failure points: version control errors, field mapping mismatches between the outgoing and incoming system, and sensitive personal data exposed in transit. 

Common results: 

• Incorrect pay on first payroll run for transferred employees. •  Missing entitlements (holiday accrual, benefits) from day one. 
• GDPR exposure from unsecured data transmission. 
• Regulation 12 claims where ELI errors are discovered post-transfer. 

A centralised HR platform with structured data export eliminates format errors, maintains field-to-field mapping integrity, and provides an audit trail of what was shared and when. 

Day-one payroll readiness 

Payroll continuity is a day-one legal obligation, not an operational aspiration. Transferred employees must be paid on their existing terms from the first pay run after the transfer. An incoming employer whose payroll system is not configured for the transferred population before the transfer date will either miss the pay run or pay employees incorrectly — both of which are unlawful deductions from wages. 

📌  Day-one payroll readiness: minimum requirements 

Before the transfer date, the incoming employer’s payroll must be configured with:

• Each transferred employee’s full details: name, National Insurance number, tax code, bank details. 
• Correct employment start date (original, not transfer date). 
• Correct pay rate, pay frequency, and any variable pay components. 
• Benefit deductions: pension, healthcare, childcare vouchers, salary sacrifice arrangements. 
• Holiday entitlement and accrual as at transfer date. 
• Any outstanding SSP, SMP, or statutory pay obligations mid-period. 
• PAYE reference and RTI submission setup with HMRC. 

A payroll reconciliation on the first post-transfer pay run should be treated as a mandatory control, not an optional check. 

Why HR Technology Matters in a TUPE Transfer 

A TUPE transfer concentrates a large volume of HR and payroll activity into a compressed timeframe. Employee records must be extracted, validated, transferred, and integrated across two organisations. Consultation documentation must be created, delivered, and retained. Payroll configuration must be completed before day one. And all of this must be done while maintaining normal HR operations for the rest of the workforce. 

Manual processes — spreadsheets, email chains, shared drives — introduce version-control errors, create data mapping mismatches, and leave no clear audit trail of what was done, when, and by whom. In a TUPE context, that audit trail is not merely good governance; it is the evidence base that protects both employers against regulation 12 claims, Employment Tribunal proceedings, and Fair Work Agency scrutiny. 

Centralised HR and payroll software supports TUPE execution in six specific ways: 

• Consolidating employee records: a single source of truth for employment terms, start dates, contract history, disciplinary and grievance records, and benefits eliminates the data reconciliation task that manual systems require before ELI can be prepared 
• Structured ELI export: HR platforms that support TUPE data packages can export ELI in a structured, validated format that maps directly to the incoming employer’s system fields, reducing manual re-keying and the version-control errors it produces 
• Secure data transfer: a system-to-system data transfer with access controls and an audit log is safer than email attachment and satisfies the UK GDPR security obligations more cleanly than manual file transfer 
• Payroll configuration support: integrated HR and payroll platforms allow the incoming employer to validate pay data against system fields before the transfer date, identifying configuration errors before they produce incorrect payments
• Consultation documentation: HR document management tools support version-controlled drafting, delivery, and retention of consultation letters, representative election records, and consultation minutes 
• Post-transfer reporting: audit-ready reporting on leave balances, continuous service records, contract terms, and pay history gives the incoming employer the visibility needed to manage the transferred population and respond to any post-transfer claims 

How IRIS Supports TUPE Transfers 

IRIS HR and Staffology HR are cloud-based HR platforms that centralise employee records, support document management, and integrate with payroll to provide the operational infrastructure that TUPE transfers require. 

For the outgoing employer, IRIS HR provides a complete employee record set from which ELI can be prepared accurately. Employment start dates, written terms, disciplinary and grievance history, tribunal claim records, and collective agreement details are held centrally and can be exported in a structured format. Consultation documents can be drafted, version-controlled, and retained within the platform, creating the audit trail that protects against penalty claims. 

For the incoming employer, Staffology HR provides the HR data foundation for day-one readiness. Incoming employee records can be onboarded from ELI data, mapped to the platform’s field structure, and validated before the transfer date. Leave entitlement and continuous service records are set correctly from original start dates, ensuring that statutory calculations are accurate from the first pay run. 

For payroll continuity, Staffology Payroll integrates directly with the HR data layer, applying transferred employee pay rates, deductions, and benefit arrangements to the first post-transfer pay run without manual re-entry. PAYE and RTI setup is managed within the system, ensuring that the compliance connection with HMRC is established before transfer day. 

Software supports the operational execution of a TUPE transfer. It does not make the legal judgements that TUPE requires: whether TUPE applies to a particular transaction, whether a proposed variation has an ETO reason, or whether consultation has been adequate are employer and legal counsel decisions, not system outputs. What centralised HR and payroll platforms do is reduce the data quality risk, the payroll configuration risk, and the audit-trail gap that convert avoidable operational errors into compliance liabilities. 

Common TUPE Mistakes 

The following failure modes recur in TUPE transfers across all organisation sizes. Most are avoidable with adequate preparation and early legal engagement. 

• Assuming TUPE does not apply: particularly common in service provision changes where the parties believe the transaction is structured to avoid TUPE. Incorrect assumptions at the outset mean consultation is never commenced, ELI is never prepared, and employees who should have transferred retain claims against both employers. 
• Missing consultation obligations: beginning information distribution too late, failing to elect employee representatives, or providing information that is incomplete or inaccurate. Each element of the consultation duty is independently assessable by an Employment Tribunal. 
• Attempting to harmonise terms too quickly: an incoming employer that imposes or negotiates standardised terms in the weeks after a transfer, without legal advice on whether an ETO reason exists, will find those variations void under regulation 4(4). The temptation to resolve contractual differences quickly frequently creates unlawful variation claims that persist for years. 
• Failing to map liabilities correctly: undisclosed or unidentified liabilities — outstanding tribunal claims, pay disputes, undocumented enhanced contractual terms — transfer to the incoming employer regardless of whether they were disclosed. Due diligence that relies on self-certification by the outgoing employer, without verification against the ELI, is not adequate. 
• Delaying payroll setup: the incoming employer has a legal obligation to pay transferred employees on their existing terms from day one. A payroll system that is not configured before the transfer date will either miss the pay run or produce incorrect payments. Both outcomes are unlawful. 
• Overlooking records and retention: transferred records should be integrated into the incoming employer’s system and retained in compliance with the applicable retention periods. Records that are lost in the transition — or that were never properly held by the outgoing employer — create gaps that surface in subsequent employment claims. 
• Underestimating employee anxiety: employees on both sides of a TUPE transfer are aware that their employment is changing hands. Uncertainty about pay, benefits, management, and future plans generates disengagement and attrition. Early, clear, and honest communication — to the extent permitted by the transaction timetable — reduces this risk significantly. 

TUPE Transfers: Frequently Asked Questions 

What happens if an employer fails to consult during a TUPE transfer? 

A failure to comply with the information and consultation obligations under regulation 13 of the TUPE Regulations can result in a penalty of up to 13 weeks’ gross pay per affected employee. Both the outgoing and incoming employer can be held jointly liable, and the Employment Tribunal may apportion the award between them based on their respective failures. The total penalty is calculated per affected employee with no upper aggregate cap, meaning a large-scale transfer with widespread consultation failures can generate very significant financial exposure. 

The tribunal assesses both the fact of the failure and whether there was any just and equitable reason to reduce the award. A failure caused by the other employer’s withholding of information may lead to the tribunal adjusting the apportionment. However, an employer cannot avoid liability for its own consultation failure by pointing to the other party’s conduct alone. 

Can an incoming employer change terms and conditions after TUPE? 

Not freely. A contractual variation made by reason of the transfer is void under regulation 4(4), even where the employee agrees to it. Post-transfer variations are only lawful where there is an economic, technical, or organisational reason that entails changes in the workforce — a genuine restructuring, a change in roles or functions, or a business need that exists independently of the transfer. 

Terms derived from collective agreements can be renegotiated after 12 months post-transfer, provided the employee’s overall package is no less favourable than before. This is the one area where time creates some flexibility; it does not apply to individually negotiated terms. Any variation process should be conducted with employment legal advice and documented fully, as the burden of demonstrating an ETO reason lies with the employer. 

What is Employee Liability Information? 

Employee Liability Information (ELI) is the structured data set that the outgoing employer must provide to the incoming employer under regulation 11 of the TUPE Regulations, at least 28 days before the transfer. It covers each affected employee’s identity, age, written employment particulars, disciplinary and grievance history from the preceding two years, any legal proceedings brought or anticipated, and details of collective agreements. 

ELI exists so that the incoming employer can understand the liabilities it is taking on. If ELI is inaccurate or incomplete and the incoming employer suffers a financial loss as a result, it can seek compensation from the outgoing employer under regulation 12. The 28-day minimum is a floor; in complex transfers, earlier delivery is strongly advisable. 

Does TUPE apply to service provision changes? 

Yes, provided the legal test is met. A service provision change occurs in three situations: a client outsources a service to a contractor for the first time; a client re-tenders an outsourced service and a different contractor takes it on; or a client brings a previously outsourced service back in-house. For TUPE to apply, there must be an organised grouping of employees whose principal purpose is carrying out the activities that are transferring. 

The organised grouping test requires more than employees having worked on the relevant client account. They must constitute a structured grouping with that work as their principal activity. A group assembled specifically for the purpose of the transfer, or employees who work across multiple clients without a defined principal assignment, may not satisfy the test. This is one of the most frequently litigated areas of TUPE case law, and legal advice should be taken before concluding that an SPC does or does not apply. 

How can HR software help during a TUPE transfer? 

HR software supports TUPE execution by centralising employee data, enabling structured ELI export in a validated format, providing secure data transfer with an audit trail, and integrating with payroll to support day-one configuration. For the outgoing employer, a complete and accurate central record set makes ELI preparation more reliable and reduces the risk of regulation 12 claims. For the incoming employer, structured onboarding of transferred employee data, with correct continuous service dates and contractual terms, produces accurate statutory calculations from the first pay run. 

Software does not determine whether TUPE applies, validate whether consultation has been legally adequate, or substitute for employment legal advice on post-transfer variations. The employer remains responsible for all compliance decisions. What well-configured HR and payroll platforms provide is the data quality, process consistency, and audit trail that support compliant execution and protect the employer if those decisions are challenged. 

Stephanie Coward

Managing Director, HCM

Stephanie Coward is Managing Director for HCM at IRIS, where she leads the strategy, innovation and growth of the organisation’s HR and payroll portfolio. She is responsible for positioning IRIS as a trusted partner to HR professionals and ensuring its solutions support the evolving needs of modern workforces.

With more than 25 years’ experience in the technology sector, Stephanie brings deep commercial and operational expertise, with a passion for improving the employee experience through technology.

Stephanie is committed to advancing IRIS’ HCM offering and helping organisations build more resilient, empowered workforces.

PakarPBN

A Private Blog Network (PBN) is a collection of websites that are controlled by a single individual or organization and used primarily to build backlinks to a “money site” in order to influence its ranking in search engines such as Google. The core idea behind a PBN is based on the importance of backlinks in Google’s ranking algorithm. Since Google views backlinks as signals of authority and trust, some website owners attempt to artificially create these signals through a controlled network of sites.

In a typical PBN setup, the owner acquires expired or aged domains that already have existing authority, backlinks, and history. These domains are rebuilt with new content and hosted separately, often using different IP addresses, hosting providers, themes, and ownership details to make them appear unrelated. Within the content published on these sites, links are strategically placed that point to the main website the owner wants to rank higher. By doing this, the owner attempts to pass link equity (also known as “link juice”) from the PBN sites to the target website.

The purpose of a PBN is to give the impression that the target website is naturally earning links from multiple independent sources. If done effectively, this can temporarily improve keyword rankings, increase organic visibility, and drive more traffic from search results.

Jasa Backlink

Download Anime Batch

IRIS Firm Management unifies time recording, work in progress, invoicing and financial reporting on a single platform, providing mid- and large-sized firms with real-time information allowing them to grow more profitably.

London, United Kingdom, May 12, 2026 – IRIS Software Group (IRIS), a leading global provider of accounting, HR, payroll and training software, today announced the launch of IRIS Firm Management (IFM), a next-generation practice management platform specifically designed for mid-to-large UK accounting firms.

With an average gap of 105 days between completing work and receiving payment*, firm profitability is under serious pressure: in a survey of 140 UK accounting firms, 37% identified time tracking as a major challenge, with only 33% using tracking, and 76% using only basic work in progress tracking, manual or no tracking**. This situation is compounded by the increasing regulatory burden imposed by changes such as Making Tax Digital on changing business requirements.

IFM brings together practice management, time and billing, work-in-progress management and financial reporting into a single integrated solution. It provides practice leaders with real-time visibility into utilization, capacity, scope creep and margin erosion, with workflows designed to reduce administrative burden, allowing senior team members to focus on high-value work. Businesses using IFM have reported up to a 25% reduction in write-offs and two to four hours per person per week recovered from billing administration.

Modern business management

Most practice management tools were designed for compliance, not business performance. IFM fills this gap by acting as a financial controls layer on top of compliance software.

Jonathan Priestley, Managing Director of Global Accounting Solutions and Transformation, said: “Accounting practices are at an inflection point and the businesses that will thrive are those that can turn their operational data into business decisions. IFM is a demonstration of our long-term commitment to UK accountants: we have listened to them, we understand the pressures they face and we have built a solution that will evolve alongside them as they grow. The accounting profession supports businesses in every the UK economy, and these businesses deserve technology that matches the vital role they play.”

Support for diverse businesses with complex needs

IFM is available in two configurations: IFM Core designed for businesses needing foundational visibility with rapid deployment, with the system up and running within two to three weeks, and IFM Advanced for businesses with multiple offices, multiple entities, or governance complexity. Importantly, both configurations have the ability to scale as businesses grow, eliminating the need to reconfigure the platform as headcount, customer volume or structural complexity increases, while protecting margins.

Main advantages of IFM***:

• Real-time information to support accurate, data-driven decision-making with improved tracking, reporting and resource allocation – with estimation five percent or more leak recovery time.

• Automation recover between two to four hours per person per week for higher value-added work by reducing administrative work on invoicing, reporting and spreadsheet validation.

• Boosted profitability by reducing radiation 15 to 25 percent with early visibility into scope creep and margin erosion before it’s too late.

Top 50 ranked Larking Gowen has selected IFM as its practice management platform and is considering migrating from its current system following an evaluation of leading cloud solutions in the market. Richard White, chief information officer at Larking Gowen, said: “We needed confidence in three things: a robust data migration from our existing system, extensive APIs to power our Power Platform applications and reports and connect the growing ecosystem of cloud applications across the business, and the assurance of a platform designed specifically for accounting practices. IFM delivered on all three of these criteria.”

Long-time IRIS client Morgan Griffiths LLP chose to migrate to IFM after using IRIS office solutions to manage tax, accounting, practice management, time recording and task tracking. IFM transformed the company’s operational efficiency, giving it greater reliability and control over critical functions. Director Andrew Hunt said: “Invoicing can be so tedious, which you don’t want because it ends up eating into your profits. These things should be very simple to do, and we’ve definitely achieved that now. This is IFM’s biggest success for us so far.”

Beyond daily efficiency, IFM has created a stronger foundation for Morgan Griffiths LLP to evolve. Accelerated digitalization and improved real-time data accessibility have enabled partners to recognize strategic growth opportunities. Andrew said: “I think MTD presents a huge opportunity for us, particularly in putting customers in a much better place where they get closer to real-time insights into how their business is progressing. »

IFM Core and IFM Advanced are now available – find out more here.

END

*Nawest 2024 accounting benchmarking report.

**These figures come from the IRIS Discovery Tool questionnaire completed by 140 UK accounting firms who are IRIS clients.

***These figures are based on an ROI calculator that evaluates adjustable assumptions, using a combination of industry benchmarks and early adopter feedback.

About IRIS Software Group

IRIS Software Group is a global provider of mission-critical software and one of the UK’s largest privately owned software companies. IRIS provides software solutions and services to finance, HR and payroll teams, educational institutions and accounting firms that simplify processes and allow professionals to focus on the work they love. By simplifying, automating and providing insight into critical daily tasks for organizations of all shapes and sizes, IRIS ensures its customers can look to the future with certainty and confidence.

IRIS is the largest third-party online filer to the UK government. Ninety-three of the UK’s 100 largest accountancy firms use IRIS software. One in six employees in the UK are paid through IRIS payroll offerings, and globally, six million employees receive their payslips through IRIS software each month. More than 850,000 employees in the UK are managed by IRIS HR solutions. More than 12,000 UK schools and academies use IRIS, and four million parents and carers use IRIS apps to connect with their child’s school; 300 million messages are sent between schools and parents each year, and over £15 million in transactional payments are processed each month. IRIS is a Great Place to Work® certified and recognized as one of the Times 50 Best Employers for Gender Equality in 2023. IRIS is also recognized as a Best Workplace for Wellbeing, a Best Workplace in Technology, and a Best Workplace for Women.

To see how IRIS helps organizations get it right the first time, every time, visit www.iris.co.ukor follow IRIS Software Group on LinkedIn, Twitter And Instagram .

Media contact:

Jennifer Peters | News@irisglobal.com

PakarPBN

A Private Blog Network (PBN) is a collection of websites that are controlled by a single individual or organization and used primarily to build backlinks to a “money site” in order to influence its ranking in search engines such as Google. The core idea behind a PBN is based on the importance of backlinks in Google’s ranking algorithm. Since Google views backlinks as signals of authority and trust, some website owners attempt to artificially create these signals through a controlled network of sites.

In a typical PBN setup, the owner acquires expired or aged domains that already have existing authority, backlinks, and history. These domains are rebuilt with new content and hosted separately, often using different IP addresses, hosting providers, themes, and ownership details to make them appear unrelated. Within the content published on these sites, links are strategically placed that point to the main website the owner wants to rank higher. By doing this, the owner attempts to pass link equity (also known as “link juice”) from the PBN sites to the target website.

The purpose of a PBN is to give the impression that the target website is naturally earning links from multiple independent sources. If done effectively, this can temporarily improve keyword rankings, increase organic visibility, and drive more traffic from search results.

Jasa Backlink

Download Anime Batch