Sick Pay Disputes: An Employer's Guide to Getting SSP Right

Statutory Sick Pay is one of the most disputed areas of employment law — not because the rules are complicated, but because a lot of employers are still working from outdated assumptions, especially since the Lower Earnings Limit was abolished on 6 April 2026. A wrongly refused SSP claim is a genuinely easy route to an employment tribunal, and it's almost always avoidable with the right process. Here's how to handle a sick pay dispute properly, from the employer's side.

Why SSP disputes happen

Most disputes come down to one of three things: the employer applying rules that no longer exist (like the old earnings threshold), a genuine disagreement over an employee's "qualifying days" on a zero-hours or irregular contract, or simply not following the correct process when refusing a claim. None of these need to end in conflict — they usually escalate because the employer doesn't put their reasoning in writing early enough, and the employee is left assuming the worst.

The rule that catches employers out most often

Since 6 April 2026, the earnings threshold for SSP no longer exists. Every employee is entitled to SSP from their first day of sickness, regardless of how little they earn — low earners simply get 80% of their average weekly earnings instead of the flat £123.25 rate, rather than getting nothing at all. If your payroll software or HR process still has an earnings cut-off built in, it's out of date, and refusing SSP on that basis is now a common — and easily challenged — mistake. See our full breakdown in Statutory Sick Pay 2026: The Day-One Right Explained for the exact figures and thresholds.

If you genuinely believe SSP isn't owed

There are legitimate reasons an employee might not qualify — they're self-employed, they've exhausted their 28-week entitlement within the last 8 weeks, they're in the first 18 weeks of maternity leave, or they simply don't have any qualifying days under their contract. If that's the case, the process matters as much as the decision:

• Give the employee a written explanation of exactly why SSP isn't being paid — legally, this should be provided within 7 days of them going off sick, usually via form SSP1.
• Reference the specific rule you're relying on, not a general statement. "You don't qualify" invites a dispute. "You don't qualify because you've already had 28 weeks of SSP that ended within the last 8 weeks" gives them something concrete to check.
• Keep a copy of what you sent and when. If this escalates to HMRC's Statutory Payment Dispute Team or a tribunal, your paper trail is what protects you.

Zero-hours and irregular shift patterns

This is where most genuine, good-faith disputes happen. SSP is calculated based on "qualifying days" — the days an employee would normally be expected to work. On a zero-hours or highly irregular contract, that's not always obvious.

The safest approach is to look at the actual pattern of recent shifts — if someone's worked the same days consistently over recent weeks, those become their qualifying days, even without a fixed contract saying so explicitly. If there genuinely is no consistent pattern, you're entitled to make a reasonable judgement, but you should explain that judgement in writing if the employee disputes it, rather than just asserting a number. Refusing to explain your reasoning at all is what typically turns a query into a formal grievance.

Contractual sick pay vs SSP — get the wording right

If your organisation offers enhanced company sick pay (CSP) on top of SSP, remember that CSP includes the SSP element — it isn't paid separately on top. This matters when disputes arise: an employee comparing their payslip to what they expected can get confused if it's not clear the SSP is baked into the total figure rather than additional to it. A short line in your sick pay policy clarifying this upfront avoids a lot of unnecessary back-and-forth later.

What tribunals actually look at

If an SSP dispute does escalate, the tribunal isn't just looking at whether you were technically right about eligibility — it's looking at whether your process was fair and transparent. Employers who can show a written explanation was given promptly, using the correct form, referencing a specific and current rule, are in a far stronger position than employers who simply stopped paying or went quiet. Disputes about pay you were legally entitled to withhold can still go badly if the process around the refusal looks evasive or inconsistent.

If an employee raises a grievance or claims they've been treated unfairly for asking about SSP, that's worth taking seriously and handling formally — see our Employer Obligations Guide for the wider picture on handling workplace grievances correctly.

A simple checklist to reduce dispute risk

• Confirm your payroll system reflects the 6 April 2026 change — no earnings threshold, day-one entitlement for everyone on PAYE
• Have a clear, written sick pay policy, even if you only pay the statutory minimum
• Always respond to an SSP query in writing, referencing the specific rule involved
• Issue SSP1 forms promptly when refusing a claim — within 7 days of the employee going off sick
• Keep records of shift patterns for zero-hours and irregular workers, so qualifying days can be evidenced if disputed

What this means practically

Most SSP disputes aren't adversarial by nature — they're the result of unclear communication or outdated assumptions on either side. A quick, specific, written explanation resolves the overwhelming majority of them before they go anywhere near a tribunal. Our free Employer Rights & Obligations Checker covers this alongside wider statutory pay and leave obligations, and our letter templates include SSP-related correspondence templates if you need a starting point for a written explanation.