No. No UK law requires employers to provide unconscious bias training, and the government phased it out of the Civil Service after a 2020 evidence review found “no evidence that this training changes behaviour in the long term or improves workplace equality”. That does not make bias a free pass. Decisions influenced by a protected characteristic can still be unlawful discrimination under the Equality Act 2010, and employers are liable for their staff’s discriminatory acts unless they took “all reasonable steps” to prevent them. The evidence points one way: change how decisions are made — structured interviews, clear criteria, written reasons — and use awareness training to support that, not replace it.
At a glance: Nexis CPD’s £9 Unconscious Bias course covers how bias forms, common types at work such as affinity and confirmation bias, the link with the Equality Act and practical debiasing strategies. It is CPD accredited and 100% online with a verifiable e-certificate, and any three courses cost £18. It is awareness training, not a regulated qualification — and, as this guide explains, it works best alongside changes to your processes.
Is unconscious bias training a legal requirement in the UK?
No. The Equality Act 2010 makes discrimination, harassment and victimisation unlawful, but it does not require any particular training, and it does not mention unconscious bias. The same is true for the public sector. The public sector equality duty in section 149 requires public authorities to “have due regard” to eliminating discrimination, advancing equality of opportunity and fostering good relations — including the need to “tackle prejudice, and promote understanding” — but it leaves the method to each authority.
Where training does become legally relevant is as evidence. Two duties make it important:
- The employer’s defence in section 109(4). Employers are liable for discrimination and harassment by their employees in the course of employment, whether or not they knew about it or approved it. The only defence is to show they “took all reasonable steps to prevent” it. Training is often part of those steps — but the question is whether it was likely to work (see below).
- The duty to prevent sexual harassment. Since 26 October 2024, section 40A has required employers to “take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment” of their employees. Acas’s Employment Rights Act 2025 page says that from 30 October 2026 this becomes “all reasonable steps”, and employers will be liable for harassment by third parties such as customers unless they have taken all reasonable steps to prevent it.
Some sectors and employers set their own mandatory training lists, and a contract, policy or professional body may require equality training. But a legal duty to provide unconscious bias training specifically does not exist.
What is unconscious bias?
Acas’s guidance on unconscious bias explains that people sometimes hold beliefs and views about others “that might not be right or reasonable”, including when a person thinks:
- “better of someone because they believe they’re alike”
- “less of someone because that person is different to them, for example, they might be of a different race, religion or age”.
As a result, “they could make a decision influenced by false beliefs or assumptions”. Acas stresses that “Everyone can think in a way that involves unconscious bias at some point.” Its example is a manager who ignores an idea from a woman, later accepts the same idea from a man, and does not realise until colleagues point it out.
Commonly described forms at work include:
- Affinity bias — warming to people who share our background, school, accent or interests.
- Confirmation bias — noticing evidence that supports a first impression and discounting evidence that does not.
- The halo and horns effects — letting one good or bad trait colour the judgement of everything else.
- Stereotyping — assuming someone will behave or perform in a certain way because of a group they belong to, such as assuming an older worker will struggle with new technology or a mother will not want to travel.
The key point for employers is that bias is most dangerous where decisions are quick, unstructured and unrecorded — shortlisting from a pile of CVs, a “gut feel” interview, or promotions decided in an informal conversation.
Can unconscious bias be unlawful discrimination?
Yes, if it leads to a decision that treats someone less favourably because of a protected characteristic. Direct discrimination is defined in section 13 of the Equality Act: “A person (A) discriminates against another (B) if, because of a protected characteristic, A treats B less favourably than A treats or would treat others.” The nine protected characteristics in section 4 are age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation.
Acas puts it plainly: apart from very limited exceptions, “employers and employees must not make decisions about job applicants or staff based on a protected characteristic. Doing so could lead to a discrimination claim to an employment tribunal.” Acas’s guide to discrimination and the law adds: “It can still be discrimination even if the less favourable treatment was not intended.”
The burden of proof also matters. Under section 136, if there are facts from which a tribunal could decide, without another explanation, that discrimination happened, it must find that it did — unless the employer shows it did not. An employer with a clear, consistently applied process and written reasons for its decisions is far better placed to give that explanation than one relying on a manager’s recollection of an informal chat. Our guide to equality, diversity and inclusion explains the types of discrimination in more detail.
Why did the government stop unconscious bias training in the Civil Service?
In a written ministerial statement laid in the House of Commons on 15 December 2020, the Cabinet Office announced that unconscious bias training “will therefore be phased out in the Civil Service”, adding: “We encourage other public sector employers to do likewise.”
The decision relied on a report the Government Equalities Office commissioned from the Behavioural Insights Team, Unconscious bias and diversity training – what the evidence says. The statement quoted its central finding that “there is currently no evidence that this training changes behaviour in the long term or improves workplace equality in terms of representation of women, ethnic minorities or other minority groups”, and said the report “also states that there is emerging evidence of unintended negative consequences”.
The statement gave three further reasons:
- a systematic review of 492 studies involving more than 87,000 participants found that changes to unconscious bias measures “were not associated with changes in behaviour”;
- the Equality and Human Rights Commission had found that evidence for its ability to change behaviour is limited, and that “there is potential for back-firing effects when UBT participants are exposed to information that suggests stereotypes and biases are unchangeable”;
- “there is no recognised way of assuring the quality of unconscious bias training”, so organisations risk paying for poor-quality courses.
It said an internal review had decided in January 2020 to phase the training out, and that the government expected other parts of the public sector, “including local government, the police, and the NHS”, to review their approaches. Importantly, the statement did not say inclusion training was worthless: it said the Civil Service would instead build “principles for inclusion and diversity into mainstream core training and leadership modules”, because standalone diversity training can backfire “if it appears to be a ‘tick box exercise'”.
What does the evidence say about unconscious bias training?
The Behavioural Insights Team report is short and worth reading in full. Its summary of the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s 2018 assessment, which examined 18 papers, found that unconscious bias training:
- “is effective for awareness raising” when well designed, for example using an implicit association test followed by a debrief, or interactive workshops and longer programmes;
- “can be effective for reducing implicit bias, but there is no evidence that it can eliminate it”;
- is not generally designed to reduce explicit bias, and attempts to do so have had mixed results or very small effects;
- has limited evidence of changing behaviour — “Most of the evidence reviewed did not use valid measures of behaviour change.”
The report lists reasons training can backfire: people resent being made to do something; training can bring stereotypes to mind; and it can make people think the organisation “has now solved its diversity problems”. It also describes “moral licensing” — someone who has attended training feels freer to make a decision that does not improve diversity, such as hiring a candidate with a similar profile to their existing team.
The report was candid about the limits of the research too. It noted that samples in one large meta-analysis were disproportionately students (82%), female (66%) and White (76%); that US studies are over-represented; and that there appears to be publication bias. Its overall conclusion was that, despite a huge number of studies of interventions that seek to reduce bias and prejudice, “no reliably effective approaches have been established”. It did not recommend “prioritising the use of resources on unconscious bias or diversity training over alternative interventions which have a more promising evidence base”.
We sell an unconscious bias course, so it is fair to say so plainly: awareness training on its own is unlikely to change your organisation’s outcomes. Where it helps is in giving managers a shared language for the process changes below, and in making sure people understand what the law expects.
Does training help an employer defend a discrimination claim?
It can, but only if it was likely to be effective. The leading example is Allay (UK) Ltd v Gehlen (Employment Appeal Tribunal, 4 February 2021). An employee had suffered racist remarks from a colleague. The employer relied on section 109(4), pointing to equality and harassment training that the staff involved had received. The tribunal rejected the defence, finding that “the training which had been delivered was several years before the events in question and was clearly stale”, and that “a reasonable step would have been to refresh that training”. The EAT upheld that decision.
The EAT’s reasoning is a useful checklist for any employer relying on training:
- “It is not sufficient merely to ask whether there has been training, consideration has to be given to the nature of the training and the extent to which it was likely to be effective.”
- “Brief and superficial training is unlikely to have a substantial effect in preventing harassment.”
- Training that amounts to “don’t harass people, now everyone back to work” “is unlikely to be effective, or to last”.
- If staff have attended training but “have not understood it, or have chosen to ignore it”, that may show further steps — such as refresher training — were needed.
In practice, “all reasonable steps” usually means a combination: clear policies that people have actually read, training that is relevant and refreshed, managers who act on complaints, and processes that make biased decisions harder to make in the first place. See our guides to sexual harassment in the workplace and whether bullying is illegal at work for how the same defence works in harassment claims.
What actually reduces bias in recruitment and promotion?
The government’s current guidance, How to improve gender equality in the workplace: actions for employers (published 11 August 2025, carried out by the Behavioural Insights Team), grades actions by strength of evidence. Its “effective actions” focus on processes rather than attitudes, including:
- Structured interviews for recruitment and promotion — asking every candidate exactly the same questions in a predetermined order and format, and grading answers against pre-set, standardised criteria. The guidance says “Evidence shows no differences in interview scores for candidates based on gender or ethnicity when structured interviews are used.”
- Offering flexible working by default in job adverts.
- Making salary expectations and negotiation clear.
- Transparency in promotion, pay and reward, so managers know their decisions can be reviewed and must be evidence-based.
Its “promising” actions include skill-based assessment tasks with pre-specified scoring, clear behaviour-based job requirements, neutral language in adverts, and assessing applicants in batches rather than one at a time.
Acas adds practical steps any employer can take tomorrow:
- advertise vacancies “in at least 2 different places” to reach a wider range of people;
- hold back details such as name or sex from application forms during shortlisting (“blind sifting”);
- have more than one person sifting applications, interviewing and deciding who gets the job;
- allow time to make decisions on recruitment, promotions, grievances and disciplinaries;
- get recruiting managers to tell each other if they notice signs of bias;
- keep “a written record of why decisions were made”.
That last point links back to the law. A written reason recorded at the time, against criteria set in advance, is exactly the kind of explanation that answers the burden of proof under section 136.
How should you run unconscious bias training if you use it?
If you decide awareness training has a place — for example as part of manager induction or before a recruitment round — the Behavioural Insights Team report suggests some design principles, while noting the evidence is limited:
- Avoid one-off sessions. Training “should be an ongoing process, involving multiple sessions and different formats”.
- Think carefully about making it mandatory. The report notes evidence that “mandatory training can result in backfire”, but also that voluntary training may only attract people who are already engaged.
- Tie it to process change. Integrate training “with wider organisational initiatives that seek to debias processes themselves” — for example, train interviewers on structured interviews rather than on bias in the abstract.
- Do not present bias as fixed. The EHRC finding quoted by the government warns of back-firing when people are told biases are unchangeable.
Then measure outcomes, not satisfaction. The 2025 government guidance recommends comparing results before and after an initiative — for example application numbers or performance scores by group — and warns that feedback on whether staff liked a session does not tell you whether it changed anything. Refresh training when practice shows people have not understood it, as Allay makes clear, and record who was trained, when and on what.
Which courses support fair, lawful decision-making?
These three £9 courses work well together for managers, recruiters and HR teams, each with a verifiable certificate:
- Unconscious Bias — how bias forms, common types at work, the Equality Act link and practical debiasing strategies.
- Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Awareness — the protected characteristics and the types of discrimination.
- Sexual Harassment in the Workplace — the law, the preventative duty and how to build a respectful culture.
Disability Awareness and Bullying and Harassment in the Workplace are useful alternatives. Any three courses cost £18 with the pay-for-2-get-3 offer — add them to the cart and the discount applies automatically. These are awareness courses and not regulated qualifications. Used on their own they will not change outcomes; used with structured, recorded decision-making and refreshed regularly, they can form part of the reasonable steps the law expects. HR professionals can log them as CPD — see our guide to CPD requirements for HR professionals.
Frequently asked questions
Is unconscious bias training mandatory in the UK?
No. The Equality Act 2010 does not require any particular training, including unconscious bias training. Employers must avoid discrimination and can defend claims by showing they took all reasonable steps to prevent it, which may include effective, up-to-date training alongside fair processes.
Why did the UK government scrap unconscious bias training?
In December 2020 the government said a Behavioural Insights Team review found no evidence that the training changes behaviour in the long term or improves workplace equality, with emerging evidence of unintended negative effects. It phased the training out of the Civil Service and encouraged other public sector employers to review their approach.
Does unconscious bias training work?
The evidence reviewed by the government and the Equality and Human Rights Commission suggests it can raise awareness and may reduce implicit bias in the short term, but there is little evidence it changes behaviour or workplace outcomes on its own. Changing processes, such as using structured interviews, has stronger evidence.
Can unconscious bias be discrimination?
Yes. If bias leads someone to treat a person less favourably because of a protected characteristic, that can be direct discrimination under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010, even if it was not deliberate. Employers can be liable for their employees’ discriminatory acts.
Is equality training enough for the reasonable steps defence?
Not automatically. In Allay (UK) Ltd v Gehlen the Employment Appeal Tribunal said tribunals must consider the nature of the training and how likely it was to be effective. Training delivered years earlier was stale, and refreshing it would have been a reasonable step.
What is the best way to reduce bias in recruitment?
Government guidance rates structured interviews as effective: ask every candidate the same questions in the same order and score answers against criteria set in advance. Acas also recommends blind sifting, more than one decision-maker, taking time over decisions and keeping written records of why decisions were made.
Make fair decisions, and be able to show it
£9 per course. CPD accredited, 100% online, verifiable e-certificate. Pay for 2, get 3 — any 3 courses for £18.
This article is general information, not legal advice. It describes the Equality Act 2010, which applies in England, Wales and Scotland (Northern Ireland has separate equality law), and government, Acas and Employment Appeal Tribunal sources at the time of writing. Employment law is changing under the Employment Rights Act 2025, so check current Acas guidance for commencement dates. The Equality and Human Rights Commission’s own pages could not be opened directly when this guide was written, so its findings are quoted as reported in government publications. A Nexis CPD awareness course is CPD accredited but is not a regulated qualification.