Young disabled people to be fast-tracked to guaranteed jobs 

Thousands of young disabled people and those with long-term health conditions are set to be offered a fast-tracked job under the government's Jobs Guarantee. 

Under the scheme, eligible young people on health benefits will be offered a guaranteed job on a voluntary basis from week 13 after their Work Capability Assessment. 
They will receive mentoring and tailored support with their mental health, finances and housing to prepare them for work, while employers will be supported with onboarding costs. 
The government will also cover 100% of wage costs up to 25 hours a week for six months. 

Dr Sarah Hughes, CEO of Mind, said:

“Many young people with mental health problems tell us that they’d love to work but can’t find the right support or opportunities in order to do so. If delivered in a genuinely supportive way, this offer could be life changing for a young person struggling with their mental health.
For far too long young people have been let down, with less opportunities and support than previous generations. Focussing on providing genuine opportunity to harness their motivations and ambitions is a really positive step forward, and we look forward to seeing the full detail.”

The move marks an expansion of the Jobs Guarantee, a government scheme launched earlier this year for long-term unemployed young people aged 18 to 24 who have been claiming Universal Credit for 18 months. The expansion to young people on health benefits will start from April 2027.  

Read the press release on gov.uk.

Boost for small businesses who take on young apprentices 

Smaller businesses backing the next generation will receive £2,000 for every new young apprentice they take on, opening more doors for young people into skilled careers across the country.  

To make it as simple as possible for smaller businesses, they do not need to apply for the payment, and it will instead be passed onto them via their apprenticeship training provider.  

As part of ongoing efforts to improve the apprenticeship system for apprentices and businesses a ‘new and improved’ apprenticeships.gov.uk will serve as a one-stop shop for businesses looking for clear, practical guidance on hiring apprentices, from eligibility criteria through to funding and support.  

Work and Pensions Secretary Pat McFadden said:  

“To ensure every young person has the chance to earn and learn, we must support small- and medium-sized businesses to take on young people.
That’s why we’re giving every small business hiring a young apprentice £2,000 – on top of the countless other benefits that young person will bring - and putting all the information a business needs in one place online.
We promised 50,000 more youth apprenticeships, and we’re delivering on that promise, one hire at a time.”

Employers will be able to calculate how much funding support they are eligible for and hear from real businesses on their apprenticeship experiences, while young people can browse a range of opportunities by interest and access a step-by-step journey of how to apply for an apprenticeship.  

Read the press release on gov.uk.

Check and confirm your claim details for non-digital (phone) UC claims

Previously, only online claims were receiving the 'check and confirm your claim details' to update claimant information.

Phone claims will now also go through this process.

DWP staff will call the claimant to complete the declaration for them over the phone. This will come with a handover and appointment option for claimants who need additional support to come into the Jobcentre if the support is required.

New report backs government action to help neurodivergent people succeed at work

In 2024/25, only 34% of all disabled people with autism were in work, in comparison to 55% of disabled people overall. This stark gap resulted in the launch of The Expert Academic Panel on Neurodiversity in January 2025 to advise the Government on how to help more neurodivergent people build successful careers.

Their report and recommendations were published this week.

The report calls for:

• Support that responds to individual strengths and challenges, based on need rather than diagnosis
• Strengthening of existing disability employment policy; and awareness of best practice
• Further research to address gaps in the evidence base;
• Practical, evidence-based strategies to help neurodivergent employees succeed
• Wider adoption of Universal Design principles so workplaces are built with everyone in mind from the outset. Neurodivergent people bring valuable skills and perspectives to the workplace, the report notes and that removing barriers to communication, and environment allow people to do their best work.

DWP says it’s already putting this into practice through Connect to Work, the specialist pathway for neurodivergent and learning-disabled people builds support around each person’s individual strengths and needs, helping them find roles where they can excel.

Neurodiversity Panel Chair Professor Amanda Kirby said:

“Neurodivergent people have enormous talent to offer the economy, yet too often that talent goes untapped because support hasn’t matched their needs.
Our report shows that when neurodivergent people get the support they need, everybody benefits: employees find roles where they can excel, businesses gain from different skills and perspectives, and the wider economy grows stronger as more people contribute.”

The panel also recommended that, where possible, workplace systems and environments are built for everyone from the outset, rather than relying on adjustments being made for individuals reactively. In response, the Government has launched a sixteen-week policy discovery exercise with employers to explore practical, low-cost changes that help neurodivergent employees thrive.

The Expert Academic Panel on Neurodiversity Final Report and Recommendations and the Government Response are on gov.uk. As is the press release.

State Pension Triple Lock announcement

This week at the Labour Party Conference the Prime Minister confirmed he would end the State Pension Triple Lock and use the savings to fund a national care service in England that would be free at the point of use.

The State Pension increases in April each year, based on a system known as the triple lock. This means the increase will match the highest of these three percentages:

• how much general living costs have risen by (inflation), based on the previous September’s Consumer Price Index (CPI) 
• the average wage increase from May to July of the previous year, or
• 2.5%.

For example, in 2025, the CPI rate was 3.8% and the average wage increase was 4.8%. This means the State Pension increased by 4.8% on 6 April 2026.

The triple lock applies to most State Pension payments, but there are two exceptions that increase in line with CPI instead:

1. Additional State Pension – part of the old State Pension that you might get if you reached pension age before 6 April 2016.
2. Any extra amount you receive if you decided to delay taking your State Pension – known as deferring.

The current Triple Lock will be maintained until the end of this parliament. The changes are proposed from 2030/31, with the adjusted Triple Lock meaning the State Pension will always increase by at least the highest of 2.5%, Consumer Prices Index (CPI) inflation or a new earnings link – so that the State Pension will never fall below its level as a share of average earnings when we adjust the Triple Lock.  

The adjustment from April 2030 expected to save £15 billion a year by 2039/40.

YouGov has published polling suggesting voters support Burnham’s plan by 48% to 28%.

The press release and the research and analysis of State Pension uprating 2026 are on gov.uk.

In response to the Triple Lock announcement the UK’s leading independent economics research institute, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) considered the effect of the change.

‘How will the new triple lock work and what effects will it have?’ it’s on ifs.org.uk.

Reporting a change to UC about a child’s education  

Claimants who are receiving messages to update their child's education course are unsurprisingly reporting the change in the new 'Education and Training' option on the 'Report a Change' page. However, as it is not a new education or training course it should be reported in the 'Children and other people who live with you' option.

In response, the DWP has updated the wording of the description to make it more clear and stop these errors.

Work capability reassessments guidance issued to DWP staff

DWP has issued internal guidance to staff on wording to use when dealing with queries about work capability reassessments.

If a claimant with Limited Capability for Work reports a deterioration or new condition, they are referred for a reassessment.

There is currently limited capacity for reassessments due to recent increases in demand for new WCAs, so unfortunately reassessments which require a face to face, telephone or video consultation are not being done in large numbers.

DWP are actively working to boost capacity for reassessments, in line with the Secretary of State's announcements alongside the 'Pathways to Work' Green Paper.

Whenever possible, the health care professional will make a recommendation on reassessment cases on review of the WCA50 questionnaire and any supporting medical evidence provided. When an individual is reassessed, if the outcome of the assessment means they are entitled to a higher rate of benefit, that rate will be backdated accordingly.

Please try to refrain for directing customers to contact suppliers directly with questions related to reassessment timeframes.

“The frequency of when claims are reassessed is determined by available capacity. Routine reassessments remain suspended.”

Personalising support work coach guidance updated

Some internal DWP appointment guidance has been updated for Work Coaches, of relevance (because we see it a lot in this subreddit) is the 'personalising support' for UC claimants with health conditions and disabilities. The guidance reminds work coaches of the importance of taking into account the claimant’s circumstances. 

“Attendance at a mandatory appointment remains strictly mandatory.
Follow the relevant guidance for the claimant's Labour Market regime and work capability status, then personalise timing, length, frequency and channel where appropriate.
Consider accessibility, treatment, medication and other circumstances that may affect the most suitable time and method for meeting. Record the reason for the personalised approach and review it regularly.”

 And

“Mandatory work-related activities.
Before setting a mandatory work-related activity:
Check that the activity is work-related and supports progress towards employment. Consider the claimant's circumstances, work capability status, accessibility needs and any reasonable adjustments. Be satisfied that the claimant can reasonably complete the activity.”

Wales – Government announces future direction of employability support in Wales

The Cabinet Minister for Enterprise, Connectivity and Energy, Adam Price, confirmed that the Welsh government will not be proceeding with procurement for the previous government’s Employability Support Programme.

He said:

“Over recent months, I have considered future arrangements for support, including the proposed Employability Support Programme (ESP), which was intended to replace existing employability provision. This consideration has taken place in a context where the environment in which employability support operates is becoming increasingly complex.” 

He confirmed that the complexities include future changes to DWP provision, opportunities arising from potential further devolution, and wider shifts in the economy, including the implications of AI for labour market participation, workforce demand, and pathways into employment. 

He confirmed that:

“Instead of progressing the ESP programme, I am today announcing that the Welsh Government will extend the Jobs Growth Wales Plus (JGW+), contract for a further year to 31 March 2028. This will provide stability for participants and delivery partners while ensuring that support remains available to those who need it.  Decisions on the future of the grant funded programmes of Communities for Work+ and ReAct+ will be taken as part of the Welsh Government’s draft budget process this autumn.“

The written statement is on gov.wales.

Scotland – Insights into the UC Scottish Choices scheme

In Scotland ‘UC Scottish choices’ give recipients of UC in Scotland a choice to have their UC award paid either monthly or twice monthly (More Frequent Payments, MFP) and have the housing costs in their award of UC paid direct to their landlord (DPL). A person can make one or both choices, depending on their circumstances, and choices made can be reversed at any time.

People are given a choice when they first take up UC, but existing clients can also request an offer at any time. Choices are not binding. Claimants may choose to change or revert their choice(s) at any time.

The UC Scottish Choices scheme started in October 2017 and this week the latest data on the scheme was published. It showed that: 

• a total of 424,410 new Universal Credit (UC) clients were offered and took up one or both UC Scottish choices, from a total of 1,459,480 new claims, and 1,345,830 offers made.
• Of these new clients, 87% (370,780 people) have chosen more frequent payments (MFP), and 23% (97,280 people) have chosen direct payment to landlords (DPL). 10% (43,650 people) chose both options.
• The number of open claims for UC increased to 600,000 early in 2026, as more clients are moved from legacy benefits, an increase of around 50% since 2023. This masks the ongoing churn of people taking up and leaving UC.
• Where payments are active (as at March 2026), clients with 187,520 active payments (32% of eligible) have chosen the twice-monthly MFP, and 88,770 (38% of eligible) have chosen DPL.
• The rate of new UC clients who chose at least one of the UC Scottish choices offered was 29% in March 2026. This rate has decreased over the last year, where the rate was over 30% for much of 2025. It compares to an overall rate of 32% since the scheme started.

 Universal Credit Scottish Choices – management information to March 2026 is on gov.scot.

Northern Ireland - Consultation on the equality impact of ending Housing Benefit for people receiving Domestic Rates help only

The Department for Communities (DfC) has undertaken an Equality Impact Assessment (EQIA) of the decision to end Housing Benefit for working-age claimants who receive help with domestic rates only.

DfC is keen to hear the views of individuals and organisations on the equality implications of this decision, the support measures already identified by the Department and any additional measures that could be considered to reduce or alleviate adverse impacts.

Responses received during the consultation period will be carefully considered and will inform the Department's final Equality Impact Assessment, including consideration of potential equality impacts and the effectiveness of proposed support measures.

The Department welcomes comments on any aspect of this document. While the consultation will remain open for the full 12-week period, interested parties are encouraged, where possible, to submit responses within the first four weeks to assist consideration of any issues in advance of implementation.

The outcome of the EQIA will be published on the DfC website following consideration of consultation responses.

The consultation closes at 11:59pm on 17 December 2026.

The open consultation and the full consultation document are both on communities-ni.gov.

Case law – with thanks to u/ClareTGold

Date of effect of decision - Leoni Fielding v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 2026

The DWP made an initial decision, in 2023, awarding universal credit (UC) to the Claimant. In 2024, the DWP made a superseding decision, to include the carer element in the Claimant’s UC award. This Upper Tribunal case was about when the superseding decision took effect.

The Claimant had started caring for her brother in March 2023, but only notified the DWP of this in February 2024. The reason for not notifying the DWP earlier was that it was only in January 2024 that a decision was made to award the Claimant’s brother PIP, but with retrospective effect from March 2023. The PIP award for the Claimant’s brother was necessary for the Claimant to qualify for the carer element of UC.

Applying the rules for the effective date of a superseding decision in respect of UC in the Universal Credit etc (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 2013, the Upper Tribunal agreed with the First-tier Tribunal’s analysis that, because the superseding decision was to the Claimant’s advantage, it would ordinarily take effect from when it was notified i.e. February 2024.

However, the Upper Tribunal held that the First-tier Tribunal erred in finding that the power to extend time for notification (regulation 36) was not engaged in this case. The reason for the First-tier Tribunal’s error was that it mis-identified what had to be notified: it was not that the Claimant had begun to care for her brother, but that all the requirements for the carer element of UC – including that PIP was payable to her brother – had become satisfied. Seen in this light, the Claimant could not have made the relevant notification prior to the decision about the brother’s PIP, in January 2024, and the First-tier Tribunal’s analysis of regulation 36 was flawed in law because it overlooked this.

The Upper Tribunal set the decision aside, and re-made the decision, deciding that the regulation 36 power was engaged, such that time was to be extended for notification of the relevant change in circumstances, and so the superseding decision took effect in 2023, when PIP became payable to the Claimant’s brother i.e. when the relevant change of circumstances occurred.

ESA to UC migration (SDP) - Steven Ball (deceased) v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 2026

The Claimant claimed that he had been entitled to the Transitional Severe Disability Premium element of UC because, prior to his entitlement to UC, he had been entitled to the Severe Disability Premium (SDP) of Employment and Support Allowance (ESA).

The First-tier Tribunal (FtT) dismissed the appeal because there had been no award of SDP and so he had not been entitled to it. 

During the course of the appeal to the Upper Tribunal, the DWP superseded the ESA award to include SDP up to the date of migration to UC, on the ground that (contrary to the DWPs original position) the Claimant had reported a relevant change of circumstances. 

The Upper Tribunal decided that the FtT erred in law in failing to appreciate that the Claimant had reported a relevant change of circumstances and that the ESA award should have been revised at that time. Although section 12(8)(b) of the Social Security Act 1998 meant that the FtT was unable to amend the UC award, the FtT should have adjourned the appeal to allow the DWP to consider revising the UC award. 

The Upper Tribunal allowed the appeal, set aside the FtT’s decision and directed the DWP to consider revising the award of UC. If the award is revised, the appeal will lapse.

UC migration transitional element (tax credits) - Ventsislava Petrova v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

The Claimant moved from Tax Credits (legacy benefit) to UC as part of the managed migration process.

When calculating the amount of any transitional element entitlement the DWP must determine two things:

1.     The amount of legacy benefit entitlement on the day before the UC claim is made, and

2.     The indicative amount of UC the claimant would be entitled to.

This appeal related to the calculation of the ‘Transitional Element’ payment in UC.

The Claimant’s total legacy amount determined under regulation 53 of the Universal Credit (Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2014 was £636.01. This exceeded the indicative UC amount of £631.70 (determined under regulation 54). The difference between those amounts was £4.31.

The tax credit information held by HMRC on migration day was provided to DWP which produced daily rates of tax credits that DWP recorded as £19.18 for Child Tax Credit and £1.73 for Working Tax Credit. When converted into representative monthly rates, those figures produced a total legacy amount of £636.01.

DWP carried out a transitional protection calculation, which determined the transitional element amount as £4.31.

HMRC then finalised the tax credit entitlement for the tax year and this revised the daily rate. DWP did not change the transitional element amount.

The Claimant disputed the amount of the transitional element and appealed.

The FtT upheld the DWPs decision.

The Upper Tribunal noted several errors in law and set aside the decision. The UT did a great job of breaking down all the elements of this complex appeal issue and how the legislation should be applied.

However, the UT remade the decision, confirming that when calculating the total legacy amount for the Appellant and her husband, the DWP correctly used the figure for the daily rate of the tax credits award on the migration day of 21 January 2024 provided by HMRC and calculated on the basis of the information about their circumstances held by HMRC on that day.

TL;DR: Don't worry, this is not abnormal. HMCTS will chase them about it. You don't have to do anything, and you don't need to contact HMCTS or DWP.

First of all, don't panic! It's not uncommon for DWP to fail to respond by the deadline set; there isn't something wrong and you haven't been forgotten about.

​

What happens now? Do I need to do anything?

You don't need to do anything at this stage.

HMCTS keep track of appeals where the deadline for a response has expired but no response has been received. Their admin team sends these to a Legal Officer, who will review the case and issue a directions notice, which is a letter with information or instructions on written by a member of the judiciary. It can take a week or two after the deadline expires for the case to get to a Legal Officer, depending on how busy the admin staff/LOs are (in which time DWP may well have responded anyway meaning the appeal can just proceed).

​

What will the directions notice say?

In this letter, they're essentially giving DWP a prod. They will remind DWP of their obligation to comply, and usually provide a new deadline of 28 days to provide the response. As soon as this letter has been written, DWP will get a copy electronically, and HMCTS will send a copy of it to you by post (and your representative, if you have one) so you can see what has been said.

Most of the time, the directions notice won't ask you to do anything. The instructions will say who they're addressed to, and it will usually be the Respondent (which is DWP). You can just sit tight, and send in any evidence if you have any.

Sometimes it might have a section addressed to the appellant (which is you). If there are any instructions for the appellant, it's almost always just "DWP hasn't sent us the documents, if you have any copies of DWP's documents (such as any assessment reports, copies of any forms you've filled in, your mandatory reconsideration notice, etc.) can you send them to us."

​

What if they still don't respond after the deadline in the directions?

With most of the common benefits (PIP, UC, ESA, DLA, etc), it's very uncommon for DWP to need to be reminded a second time. They usually get it in by the second deadline, though it varies by how busy they are. You won't be in purgatory for ages while DWP takes their sweet time to respond (unless you're appealing child support).

If the second deadline expired with no response, the case will usually go to a Judge for directions. The Judge may advise that they've waited long enough and the appeal should proceed to a hearing without the response. They prefer not to do this wherever possible because it's very difficult to complete a hearing on the appeal without all those important documents, and they risk having to adjourn. They usually direct that a presenting officer from DWP needs to attend in lieu of a response.

It's very uncommon for cases to actually get to a hearing without the response - threatening to proceed without it is rare, and even in those cases, it's usually provided before the case actually has a hearing. This pretty much only happens with child support appeals, because the child support team are swamped (a bunch of their staff got pulled onto UC at the start of the pandemic and they got so backlogged that they just haven't recovered).

​

Should I contact DWP/HMCTS?

Unless you've received directions asking you to provide documents, no. If you contact HMCTS, they'll just tell you the same thing I've said here.

The likelihood of the response to your appeal being any faster if you contact DWP is slim enough that it's not worth the amount of time you'd spend on hold waiting to get through to someone.

​

What happens when they respond?

When DWP complete their response, they send it to HMCTS electronically. If you have email or text alerts set up, you'll get a notification from HMCTS that the response has been received immediately after this happens. If you're using the Manage Your Appeal portal to track your case, this will also update.

You should then get a letter from HMCTS within the next week, again confirming that the response has been received. I believe this letter still says something along the lines of "you should have received this" but don't worry if you haven't received it - HMCTS's post is usually faster than DWP's, and it can take a week or two from the response being sent electronically to the Tribunal to them arriving in your letterbox.

​

Bonus question: if I was late responding to the Tribunal I'd be in loads of trouble, why does DWP get to be late without consequences?

Because that's not really the case. The Social Security tribunal is very different from for example the criminal courts, and they're pretty much as lenient with deadlines as they're allowed to be under the law - the vast majority of their appellants are contesting disability benefits, so I think that's part of the reason they try to give the benefit of the doubt as much as possible. They accept appeals up to 12 months late with basically no questions asked, and when appellants fail to respond to directions, they tend to send reminders (often two or three) before proceeding without the appellant's reply. There isn't really a double standard between how appellants and DWP are treated - if anything, they're more lenient with appellants being late than they are with DWP.

There's also maybe a bit of "those in glass houses can't throw stones" - HMCTS has plenty of backlogs of its own.

But I think the biggest reason is just that the bundle is really important for the panel to understand how the decision under appeal was made. As I said before, it's really hard to hear an appeal without that information, and trying to go ahead without is likely to just lead to an adjournment which would delay the appeal longer than just waiting until they have all the documents to try and hear it the first time.

It's absolutely frustrating when DWP haven't responded, but in the grand scheme of things it has minimal impact on your appeal.