Asked, answered, no spin.

Yes. Even if you only have one employee, you still have legal HR responsibilities around contracts, right-to-work checks, payroll, pensions, and basic policies. You do not need an in-house HR department, but you do need someone competent keeping you compliant.

Most SMEs bring in external HR when DIY spreadsheets and Googling start to feel risky, typically from around 5 to 10 employees, or when the first serious issue appears, such as a grievance, sickness absence, performance problem, or dismissal. It is usually cheaper to get advice early than to fix a messy process later.

You need written employment terms from day one, right-to-work checks, payroll and pensions set up correctly, and clear policies on things like disciplinary, grievance, sickness and holiday. You also need to keep proper records of employment, absence and pay.

HR advice focuses on people processes and what is practical day to day, while employment law advice focuses on legal risk, tribunal exposure and how a judge may view your decisions. With Electra HR you get both perspectives aligned, HR from us, and legal advice from Bonsai Law, an SRA-regulated firm, when a matter needs it.

For most small businesses, outsourced HR is far more cost-effective than hiring a full-time HR manager on £30k to £50k. You pay for the level of support you actually need, instead of carrying a permanent salary before it is justified.

Electra HR is built for founders, startups and SMEs, typically 5 to 50 staff, who want straight-talking HR support that matches how they actually run the business. Our roots are in Kent and we work with businesses UK-wide. We mainly work with employers, but we can occasionally help employees in a genuine bind who need clear, commercial guidance.

Electra HR is led by a practising solicitor and backed by Bonsai Law, an SRA-regulated firm, so your HR and legal strategy can join up from the start instead of being bolted together once things escalate. You get prevention-first HR with a real route to legal backup, rather than being handed off to a stranger the moment things get serious.

Our roots are in Kent and the South East, and we work with startups and SMEs across the UK. Plenty of what we do works remotely. If in doubt, ask. If we are not the right fit, we will say so.

Yes. If a people issue is snowballing into a dispute, director exit or shareholder tension, we can step in quickly and get HR and legal strategy pointing in the same direction. We would still rather help you early, but we are used to firefighting when needed.

No. We are female-founded and female-led, but our focus is on working with businesses that want fair, sane workplaces and are not trying to brush problems under the carpet. If you want honest advice rather than someone to rubber-stamp bad behaviour, you are in the right place.

No, and we won't pretend to be. Electra HR is an HR consultancy led by a practising solicitor. When a matter needs legal advice, representation or the protection of legal professional privilege, we route you directly into Bonsai Law, a separate SRA-regulated law firm. You get the right level of firepower at the right moment, without paying lawyer rates for HR questions.

No long, auto-renewing retainers. You buy a block of hours, commonly 3, 5 or 8, and use them when you need to across the year. Some months you will, some months you will not, and we think that is fairer. The more hours you buy, the better the rate. We keep you updated on usage, so there are no surprises.

We will give you a heads up before you run out. You can top up with another block or agree a fixed fee for whatever specific thing you need. Simple.

Urgent things get a same-day response. Everything else, within one working day. If we need more time, we will say so.

Legal professional privilege is what can keep your advice emails and notes out of disclosure if a dispute ends up in tribunal or court. If communications are not privileged, they can be ordered to be handed over and put under a microscope.

Often they are not, because legal advice privilege normally applies to confidential communications between a client and a qualified lawyer, not a generic HR adviser. That means HR advice you thought was just between you and your consultant can end up as evidence.

No. Copying a lawyer into an ordinary HR discussion does not make the email privileged. Legal advice privilege depends on confidentiality and the dominant purpose being legal advice, not on who is copied in.

No. Legal professional privilege attaches to advice from regulated lawyers, and Electra HR is an HR consultancy, not a law firm. Where privilege matters, for example when a dispute is likely, we involve Bonsai Law, an SRA-regulated firm, from the start so your position is protected. That clear route into privilege is something most HR consultancies simply cannot offer.

If there is any realistic risk of dismissal, discrimination, whistleblowing, complex sickness, TUPE, or serious allegations, it is safer to bring a solicitor into the conversation early. Getting the legal framing right up front often reduces both risk and cost later. With us, that handover into Bonsai Law is immediate.

Yes. You do not have to retell the story to a new law firm when things escalate, because Bonsai Law is already in the picture. We can dial legal input up or down depending on how spicy the situation becomes.

Typical outsourced HR includes contracts and onboarding, policies, handbooks, performance and absence management support, and advice when issues crop up. Electra HR adds solicitor judgement and a prevention-first approach on top of that core support.

Every piece of work is quoted as a fixed fee before we start. Blocks of hours, startup packages, health checks and project work all come with a clear price, so there are no meter-running surprises. Ask us. The quote is free and fast.

Yes. We can audit what you already have, tidy up contracts and policies, and then give you a clear, manageable HR framework that fits the size and pace of your business. The idea is to give you enough structure to stay safe without drowning you in paperwork.

You might save a bit of time now, but you are increasing the chances of costly disputes, fines, reputational damage and painful exit negotiations later. Most nightmare cases started as small, fixable issues that no one dealt with properly.

You send us the basics of what is going on, we sanity-check the situation, and we agree the lightest-touch way to help that still keeps you safe. Sometimes that is a quick call; sometimes it is a bit more involved, but you will know where you stand quickly.

Raise it in writing to your employer, setting out what's happened, when, and what outcome you want. Most employers have a grievance procedure in their staff handbook. Check that first, since it usually tells you exactly who to send it to. If there isn't one, send it to your manager or HR contact directly. Keep it factual and dated; this becomes the document everyone refers back to if things escalate.

An informal grievance is usually a conversation: raising a concern directly with a manager without putting it in writing, aiming to sort it out quickly. A formal grievance is a written complaint that triggers your employer's official grievance procedure, including an investigation and a formal outcome meeting. Most workplaces expect you to try informal resolution first, but you're not obliged to if the issue is serious enough to go straight to formal.

There's no fixed legal timeframe, but Acas guidance expects it to happen "without unreasonable delay". In practice, most straightforward grievances should be investigated and concluded within a few weeks. Complex cases involving multiple witnesses or overlapping disciplinary issues can take longer, but the employer should keep the employee updated if it's dragging on.

No. Dismissing or treating someone unfairly for raising a grievance in good faith is unlawful victimisation, and can itself form the basis of a tribunal claim. This protection applies regardless of how long someone's worked for you.

You should be given a written outcome explaining the decision and the reasoning behind it, along with the right to appeal. If you're not satisfied with the appeal outcome either, and the underlying issue relates to something like discrimination or a contractual dispute, you may have grounds for a tribunal claim, so this is worth getting advice on rather than assuming the door's closed.

There's no strict legal requirement for a written procedure if you have very few employees, but following the Acas Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures is expected regardless of size. If a tribunal claim follows and you didn't follow a reasonable process, compensation can be increased by up to 25% for failing to follow the Code, so "informal by necessity" still needs to be fair.

Yes. Employees have a statutory right to be accompanied at a formal grievance hearing by a colleague or a trade union representative.

Don't respond to or investigate it yourself if you're the subject of the complaint. Someone independent, such as another manager or an external HR adviser for very small teams, needs to run the investigation to keep it fair and defensible.

You can, but it's high-risk and rarely straightforward. Dismissing someone purely because they're off sick, without a fair process, is very likely to be unfair dismissal, and if the sickness relates to a disability, it can also be discrimination. If genuine long-term ill health means someone can't do their job even with reasonable adjustments, dismissal can be fair, but only after a proper, documented process: occupational health input, consultation, and consideration of alternatives.

Having a valid sick note doesn't make someone immune from dismissal, but it does mean any dismissal decision needs to be handled carefully and fairly. You can't simply ignore medical evidence. Acting without following a fair process, sick note or not, is what usually causes these dismissals to be found unfair.

There's no fixed number of weeks in law. What matters is whether you've followed a fair process: getting occupational health advice, consulting the employee, exploring reasonable adjustments or alternative roles, and giving genuine consideration before reaching a decision. Dismissing too early, without that groundwork, is a common and expensive mistake.

Since 6 April 2026, Statutory Sick Pay is payable from the first day of sickness absence, with the previous three-day waiting period removed. The earnings threshold that used to exclude lower earners has also been scrapped, so more employees now qualify. SSP is calculated as either the flat weekly rate or 80% of average earnings, whichever is lower.

Yes, in principle. Being off sick doesn't protect someone from a genuine redundancy process, provided the redundancy is real and they're treated the same as anyone else in the selection pool. Singling someone out because they're off sick, dressed up as redundancy, is a common source of successful tribunal claims.

Short-term, frequent absences are usually managed through your standard capability or attendance procedure: trigger points, review meetings, warnings. Long-term absence (typically several months of continuous sickness) is managed differently, usually involving occupational health assessment and a decision about whether the person will realistically return to work in a reasonable timeframe.

It's not a strict legal requirement in every case, but proceeding without it is risky and makes a dismissal much harder to defend if challenged. Occupational health advice on prognosis and reasonable adjustments is usually the single most important piece of evidence in an ill-health dismissal case.