The good, the bad, and the ugly of Equality Action Plans
The proposed regulations and the accountability factor
At Pathlight, we welcome the concept of Equality Action Plans set out in the Employment Rights Bill – after all, we have been advocating inclusion initiatives based on logic and data with effective and measurable actions since our company was founded. But as always with government proposals, the devil hides in the detail. Before organisations start preparing for the soft launch expected in 2026, it’s worth taking a measured look at what’s planned… and at a few areas where the current thinking may not quite hit the mark.
Let’s start at the beginning:
Why Equality Action Plans Are Being Introduced
The case for intervention in gender equality in the workplace is laid out clearly in the government’s impact assessment. From a negative perspective, the gender pay gap hasn’t closed at anything like the pace hoped for since reporting began in 2017. The underlying drivers: occupational segregation, part-time work, caring responsibilities and a relative dearth of women in senior roles, remain deeply entrenched in many UK businesses.
Layer onto this the macroeconomic picture, which thankfully has a more positive, opportunity based lens: Women’s economic empowerment will boost national productivity (and therefore have a significant positive impact on GDP) - but if UK employers don’t take serious, evidence based steps to improve gender equality, the UK economy will continue to pay the price.
What, Exactly, Is Being Proposed?
The government’s proposal has several clear pillars:
1. Mandatory Gender Equality & Menopause Action Plans
Employers with 250+ staff will need to publish both a gender pay gap action plan and a menopause support plan annually, alongside gender pay gap figures. A list of evidence-based initiatives with proven success will be provided by the government for employers to choose from.
Plans must be submitted through the existing GPG reporting portal, which will be updated to host them.
2. Public Accountability (the “Naming” Mechanism)
A new public list will identify organisations that fail to submit plans, which will act as a compliance leaderboard.
3. Enforcement by the EHRC
The Equality and Human Rights Commission will enforce non-reporting, as it already does for gender pay gap figures. Employers who fail to report could therefore face regulatory contact or even sanctions.
4. Annual Review & Update Requirement
Organisations will need to refresh and re-submit plans every year.
Where the Proposal Falls Short
First, the Government requires action plans, but does not make implementation of the actions mandatory. The assumption that all companies will implement actions without a compliance imperative to do so seems a little naïve. A cynic could say that all these measures do is create another box to tick and some more red tape for businesses, without requiring them to follow through and make real change - an administrative burden for business without the corresponding positive business and societal impact.
However, the government has clearly stated its assumption that once employers must select evidence-based actions, they will:
Gain a better understanding of their own drivers of inequality.
Start adopting practices with a measurable effect.
Build momentum year on year.
Let’s hope they are right.
Secondly, the government’s time and cost assumptions are… optimistic. The impact assessment estimates:
£122.51 per employer in the first year for familiarisation with the [entirely new] regime.
£78.56 to produce an action plan in year one, based on 30 minutes per action plan.
£61.26 annually thereafter.
Those figures are only possible because the government assumes:
Employers already have a detailed understanding of their pay gap drivers.
Employers already have high-quality equality data and have spent time analysing it to understand root causes of inequality.
Picking actions from a list with no internal analysis required and no legal obligation to then undertake those actions is sufficient to effect change.
This is where reality and policy drift apart. In our work at Pathlight, we work with organisations who have the best of intentions, but even they generally do not yet have the data analysis in place that will allow them to choose interventions that will make the most impact for their particular business. When we start work with our clients we normally find that they haven’t had the time or resource to analyse the data to help them understand the critical points in the employee lifecycle that have a profound impact on gender equality, including hiring, promotion, performance management and exit data. To do this work properly, clients need to undertake:
Data collection and analysis.
Identification of root causes.
Ideally, modelling the impact of possible interventions.
Integrating actions into organisational strategy.
That work typically takes months and requires multiple stakeholders and data sources. 30 minutes to achieve all this is nothing short of impossible.
The focus on menopause ignores the inequality prevalent throughout many women’s careers. Menopause support is essential, but by calling out a specific need for a menopause support plan, the proposal ignores all that comes before this life stage. By the time many women reach menopause, the inequality gap has already been widening for two decades or more.
Let’s zoom out:
Early career (20s–30s):
Gender + youth = vulnerability
Higher rates of harassment.
Assumptions about credibility.
Childbearing and caregiving years (30s–40s):
Gender + caring responsibilities = career penalty
Interrupted career progression.
Part-time work limiting access to senior roles.
Assumptions about commitment, mobility or leadership potential.
Mid-career (40s–50s):
Gender + organisational design = attrition
Structures built for linear, uninterrupted careers that often leave those with a more ‘squiggly’ career out in the cold.
Underrepresentation in leadership pipelines already entrenched.
Gender + health = retention challenges
Menopause symptoms affecting confidence, performance and wellbeing.
Lack of support, lack of awareness, lack of flexibility.
The proposed plans risk treating menopause as the primary failure point rather than one stage of a much longer, systemic pattern, created by outdated structures that haven’t evolved to meet the needs and opportunities of our modern society.
Of course, the government points out the increased protections for women on and after maternity leave that they have also put in place, along with other initiative like the right to request flexible working from day one of employment – but again, these address only part of the picture and don’t fundamentally change the systems and structures that create inequality.
Where This Leaves Employers
Despite its flaws, the arrival of Equality Action Plans represents a pivotal moment for UK business. The direction of travel is positive and should be supported, even if the map could do with some redrawing.
There is an opportunity for forward-thinking organisations to choose to see these new obligations not as a tick box compliance exercise but as a strategic opportunity to improve and become a market leader for gender equality with a clear compliance-based reason for doing so. Employers who choose to do more than the minimum based on this mandate will be the ones who ultimately see the benefits of increased talent, retention, reputation and performance.
A Final Thought
The government’s intentions are good. The economic case is clear. But unless employers are supported to do the work to really understand why their gaps exist - and unless the action plan framework recognises the complexity of women’s career journeys – the government’s plans risk increasing compliance requirements without improving outcomes.
At Pathlight Inclusion Solutions, we help organisations do this kind of work properly: grounded in data, shaped by evidence, and designed for real-world impact. If you’re looking to get ahead of the curve, we’d love to help you build an Equality Action Plan that does more than tick a box.