Eleanor StoneLee Mack's BBC One sitcom Not Going Out returned on 23 September 2026 for its landmark 15th series and its 20th anniversary. But the occasion came with a candid admission: in an interview with Radio Times timed to the premiere, Mack said there are "certain things" he "probably wouldn't say now" if he were writing the sitcom today. The comment landed quietly. Its implications for anyone who works, manages, or employs in 2026 are anything but quiet.
Twenty Years On: How the Rules Changed
When Not Going Out first broadcast on BBC One in September 2006, workplace banter existed in a considerably looser regulatory environment. The Equality Act 2010 had not yet been written. Employers largely set their own standards through internal codes of conduct, with legal action seen as a last resort reserved for the most egregious cases.
Twenty years later, the legal landscape has transformed. According to ACAS, the UK's employment relations advisory service, workplace harassment complaints rose by 34% between 2022 and 2025. In the first six months of 2026 alone, employment tribunals in England and Wales received over 12,000 claims citing harassment or discrimination under the Equality Act — a record high for a six-month period.
Mack's self-reflection mirrors a shift that anyone writing, managing, or working in a professional environment has felt: language carries legal weight in 2026 in a way it simply did not two decades ago.
The show itself has evolved alongside British society. The sitcom that began as a loose flatshare comedy in the mid-2000s — with gags that traded on relationship dynamics, gender roles, and the frictions of domestic life — has gradually recalibrated its humour for each new era. Season 15 continues that adjustment. That Mack is willing to say so publicly, as a successful and experienced broadcaster, signals something important: the shift in standards is not perceived as censorious by professionals who have lived through it. It is, increasingly, understood as overdue.
The Expert Angle: Employment Law and the Words That Now Carry Consequences
Employment lawyers across the UK have watched this evolution closely. What was once dismissed as harmless banter — the kind of remark Mack describes scripting without hesitation in 2006 — can now trigger formal grievances, disciplinary proceedings, and ultimately employment tribunal claims worth tens of thousands of pounds.
The governing legal framework is the Equality Act 2010, which defines harassment as unwanted conduct related to a "protected characteristic" — age, disability, gender reassignment, race, religion or belief, sex, or sexual orientation — that has "the purpose or effect of violating a person's dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment."
Crucially, intent does not determine outcome. A worker who makes a joke they believe to be harmless can still be found to have harassed a colleague if the effect on that colleague was one of the above — regardless of whether any offence was meant. This gap between intent and legal consequence is the source of most workplace disputes that employment solicitors encounter in 2026.
The expansion of hybrid and remote working since 2020 has widened this exposure significantly. Digital communications — Teams messages, WhatsApp groups, email threads — leave permanent, retrievable records. A message sent on a company platform at 11pm on a Friday carries identical legal status to one written on formal letterhead during office hours.
Note: This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. If you are facing a workplace conduct issue, consult a qualified employment solicitor.
When the Joke Lands in a Tribunal: A Concrete Case
Consider a situation that employment solicitors across England and Wales are dealing with regularly in 2026.
A 42-year-old regional manager at a logistics company in Leeds sends a message on the company's internal chat platform. The message includes a joke referencing a colleague's age — something he genuinely meant as good-natured ribbing in the spirit of the monthly golf round they share. The recipient, a 58-year-old accounts supervisor, does not find it funny. She finds it humiliating. She raises a formal grievance.
Under the Equality Act 2010, age is a protected characteristic. The manager's intent is legally irrelevant — the test is whether the message had "the effect of violating her dignity." The tribunal finds that it did.
If a comment creates a hostile environment for a colleague, even unintentionally, then both the individual employee and the employer can face legal liability — with financial consequences running to tens of thousands of pounds. The average payout for a successful harassment claim in England and Wales in 2025 was £28,700. In severe cases, awards have exceeded £100,000.
If the employer is found to have failed to take "all reasonable steps" to prevent harassment — for example, if no current workplace conduct policy exists, or if previous complaints went unaddressed — they face vicarious liability. The company pays alongside, or in place of, the individual employee.
In this case, the consequences extended beyond the tribunal itself. Internal disciplinary proceedings were initiated. The manager's career progression at the firm stalled for 18 months. Reputational and professional damage outlasted the legal process by a significant margin.
For HR teams and line managers, the arithmetic is straightforward: the cost of a one-day employment law training session and an updated conduct policy is a fraction of the average tribunal payout — and a fraction of the cost in management time, legal fees, and staff disruption that a contested claim demands.
What This Means for Employees and Employers in 2026
Lee Mack's candour about the evolution of comedy is, in a quiet way, a public acknowledgment of what employment lawyers have been telling clients for years: context and intent do not automatically insulate you from legal consequence.
For employees, the guidance is specific:
Know the protected characteristics. If a remark touches on someone's age, disability, race, religion, sex, or sexuality in a way that could reasonably be experienced as demeaning — even if meant as a joke — it carries legal risk. The test is the recipient's experience, not your intention.
Digital messages are permanent evidence. Group chats, direct messages, emails, and voice notes sent via workplace platforms can all be retrieved in discovery proceedings. The informal register of a lunchtime WhatsApp does not change its admissibility.
A single remark can be sufficient. Unlike constructive dismissal claims, harassment under the Equality Act does not require a pattern of behaviour over time. One remark, in one communication, can be enough to meet the legal threshold.
For employers, the obligations have grown considerably. The Worker Protection (Amendment of Equality Act 2010) Act 2023 — which came into force in October 2024 — introduced a new proactive duty on employers to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace. Employment tribunals can now increase compensation awards by up to 25% if an employer is found to have breached this duty. Legal advisers recommend that all UK businesses review and update their harassment prevention and conduct policies before the end of 2026.
For detailed official guidance on what constitutes workplace harassment and what both parties can do, the UK government's resource on workplace bullying and harassment is an authoritative starting point.
What to Do If You Are Facing a Workplace Conduct Issue
Not Going Out has run for twenty years because it finds comedy in the friction of ordinary life: between generations, between expectations, between what was once said freely and what now carries consequence. That friction is real, and it plays out in workplaces across Britain every day — not as a sitcom subplot, but as a formal legal process with documented outcomes and significant financial stakes.
Mack's admission that he would not write the same material today is not a statement about censorship. It is an honest acknowledgment that professional standards evolve — and that awareness of where the line sits is no longer optional for anyone working in a team environment.
If you are dealing with a workplace harassment or conduct issue — whether as an employee who has experienced unwanted behaviour or as an employer managing a grievance — the complexity of employment law in 2026 makes professional advice essential. An employment solicitor can assess whether conduct meets the legal threshold under the Equality Act, advise on the correct grievance procedures, and represent your interests if a tribunal claim is filed.
The same cultural shift reflected in Lee Mack's comedy is playing out in boardrooms, open-plan offices, and group chats across the UK. Understanding where you stand legally is no longer something to defer until it becomes urgent.
For further context on how public figures are navigating this moment in British entertainment, our recent coverage of Mackenzie Crook's return to British comedy in 2026 examines how the industry's long-running personalities are adapting to the same evolving standards.
