Dismissed during probationary period, is it fair?

[A olive]

Hi guys,

I have been reading your posts and find the info really useful.

I have currently been dismissed from my job on the grounds of they did not feel the position was right for me and was dismissed immediately.

I had just started the job 3 weeks ago and the contract states. 26 week probation period with 1 week notice.

I was not given a disiplinary hearing, warning or anything and I don't feel this is ok.

I did not do anything wrong, no lateness,absence or breach of contract the decision was based on "feelings".

This has never happened to me before and I would like some advice on what to do next. Please advise!!!

[A olive]

Thanks for the advice

[honeybee13]

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

I've started a new thread for you because you had tagged on to someone else's.

 

Hopefully the guys will be back to advise on your issues and not the other person's now you have a thread.

 

My best, HB

[firstclassx]

Probably best to move on, so long as they:

 

a) Gave you the 1 week notice or;

b) Paid you for 1 week instead of notice.

 

Not really got any rights until after a year.

 

You obviously didn't perform how they expected you to, maybe reflect on that for the future?

[BazzaS]

Good advice given so far.

 

Sadly, it doesn't "matter" from the legal perspective if it was fair or not, only if their actions are compliant with employment law.

 

If they've given you the required minimum notice or "pay I'm lieu of notice" (PILON), there is little you can do : but hold your head up high, move on, and remind yourself "much as it was a job : if they can behave like that - don't I deserve a job with a better employer?".

[A olive]

Good advice given so far.

 

Sadly, it doesn't "matter" from the legal perspective if it was fair or not, only if their actions are compliant with employment law.

 

If they've given you the required minimum notice or "pay I'm lieu of notice" (PILON), there is little you can do : but hold your head up high, move on, and remind yourself "much as it was a job : if they can behave like that - don't I deserve a job with a better employer?".

 

Regardless of the short amount of time I was there that ain't even the issue, the issue is a contract is a contract. You can't just dismiss someone because you feel the position is right for them. My contract states "26 week probation period with 1 week notice" i wasn't given any notice what so ever ,1 week notice could have given me the opportunity to find another job, I turned down 3 other position to work here

[Emmzzi]

If they can't let you go, then what do you think the point of probation is?

[firstclassx]

Regardless of the short amount of time I was there that ain't even the issue, the issue is a contract is a contract. You can't just dismiss someone because you feel the position is right for them. My contract states "26 week probation period with 1 week notice" i wasn't given any notice what so ever ,1 week notice could have given me the opportunity to find another job, I turned down 3 other position to work here

 

They don't have to give you notice. They can usually give you 1 weeks pay INSTEAD of notice.

 

You can't just dismiss someone because you feel the position is (not) right for them.

 

You certainly can dismiss someone in these circumstances, especially during a probation period.

You think it is acceptable for a company to have to employ someone who isn't up to the required standard?

 

This "feel position is not right" is probably a red herring to try and let you down easily. Translated it could mean that you are not capable of performing the work they expected you to do, to a good enough standard.

[BazzaS]

Regardless of the short amount of time I was there that ain't even the issue, the issue is a contract is a contract. You can't just dismiss someone because you feel the position is right for them. My contract states "26 week probation period with 1 week notice" i wasn't given any notice what so ever ,1 week notice could have given me the opportunity to find another job, I turned down 3 other position to work here

 

Then you can (and should) take action to recover your loss : 1 weeks pay in lieu of notice.

[Atlas01]

You may be right on the breach of contract side with that view even though the legal or statutory minimum notice period from the employer is nothing in the first month

 

Problem is who would care about a case worth £250-£300

 

I'd certainly shoot a letter their way but unless a gift horse came back i'd be letting it go

[assisted blonde]

for whatever reason they obviously felt that the position wasnt right for you, prehaps they just didnt like you, thats the point of probation periods to see if you suit, all you are entitled to is the weeks pay in leiu of notice. just chalk it up to experience its all you can do, better that they got rid of you npow than 26 weeks down the line when they had spent money and resorces training you and you had got into the habit of working there

[altobelli]

I don't think there's much you can do legally, except for the pay in lieu of notice. I would understand the 26 week probationary period to mean your probation lasts 26 weeks, but within this period they can let you go with a weeks notice, not that you're guaranteed 26 weeks before they make a decision. Does your contract say anything about a process which must be followed prior to termination, or does it just mention the one week's notice.

 

The real reason may be nothing to do with you, so I wouldn't worry too much about what you could have done better. I've seen situations like this where the employer needs to cut positions for financial reasons, contractors are an easy target so that may well be what has happened here, especially as no problems were mentioned prior to termination.

[Skinnered]

Hello A Olive;

 

Here are a few questions the answer to which might influence your next move. You may be able to answer some of them but I’m hoping that the other contributors to your thread so far might have a go too with references.

 

1. What do you take ‘probation period’ to mean?

 

2. Could it mean a period where your performance in the job was to be assessed?

 

3. Did it involve any sort of supervision to monitor performance or progress?

 

4. Was any training given or corrective actions suggested?

 

5. Is it not still the case that a contract of employment exists from the time the offer of employment is accepted?

 

6. Is it not still the case that the terms and conditions of an employment contract apply from the moment the contract comes into existence irrespective of when a written copy is received?

 

7. Does that not include terms relating to the procedures to be followed in the event of an employee being dismissed?

 

8. Is it not still the case that an employee is entitled to a written copy of terms and condition on request, especially when facing disciplinary action or dismissal?

 

9. Where the contract term categorically says ‘1weeks’ notice’ can it be altered arbitrarily to ‘1 weeks’ notice or anything else we choose to add’?

 

10. Is it not still the case that there is no requirement that an employee should have been employed for any particular period of employment before bringing a claim of Breach of Contract before a tribunal?

 

I would advise you get answers to those questions from Citizens Advice or an employment solicitor if you can afford it. I could answer them here and now for you but you can’t imagine the convulsions of apoplexy that would be liable to cause.

[honeybee13]

Hello A Olive;

 

Here are a few questions the answer to which might influence your next move. You may be able to answer some of them but I’m hoping that the other contributors to your thread so far might have a go too with references.

 

1. What do you take ‘probation period’ to mean?

 

2. Could it mean a period where your performance in the job was to be assessed?

 

3. Did it involve any sort of supervision to monitor performance or progress?

 

4. Was any training given or corrective actions suggested?

 

5. Is it not still the case that a contract of employment exists from the time the offer of employment is accepted?

 

6. Is it not still the case that the terms and conditions of an employment contract apply from the moment the contract comes into existence irrespective of when a written copy is received?

 

7. Does that not include terms relating to the procedures to be followed in the event of an employee being dismissed?

 

8. Is it not still the case that an employee is entitled to a written copy of terms and condition on request, especially when facing disciplinary action or dismissal?

 

9. Where the contract term categorically says ‘1weeks’ notice’ can it be altered arbitrarily to ‘1 weeks’ notice or anything else we choose to add’?

 

10. Is it not still the case that there is no requirement that an employee should have been employed for any particular period of employment before bringing a claim of Breach of Contract before a tribunal?

 

I would advise you get answers to those questions from Citizens Advice or an employment solicitor if you can afford it. I could answer them here and now for you but you can’t imagine the convulsions of apoplexy that would be liable to cause.

 

Hello Skinnered.

 

Would you be able to reference us to relevant legislation, as regards your post please?

 

HB

Edited March 24, 2013 by honeybee13

[Skinnered]

I would. Let me know which questions you seek clarification on and why you believe clarification is necessary.

 

This is the first time I've seen such a request from the sit team despite the fact that there has been serious misrepresentations of the law by some.

 

I have been uber careful in this post not to give anyone any false sence of hope. If the questions can be answered and the answers backed up then this OP will have his/her advice.

[becky2585]

The only question there with one iota of relevance to the OP is question 7...

[BazzaS]

 

I would advise you get answers to those questions from Citizens Advice or an employment solicitor if you can afford it. I could answer them here and now for you but you can’t imagine the convulsions of apoplexy that would be liable to cause.

 

I'm always willing to learn from those with greater expertise / knowledge than me.

 

Why not answer them, since you seem to be claiming you could. It might lead to a robust discussion where the OP gets to decide which is the advice they'll rely on, instead of "convulsions of apoplexy".

 

Otherwise who is to know who will place credence on your post(s) : some might conclude it is a wind-up or a case of "I know the answer and you don't, ner ner de ner-ner"

[Skinnered]

BazzaS,

 

If you care to read the thread 'Overtime not offered to all' you may appreciate my reluctance to comply with your request. I was treated with what can only be described as vilification and abuse. No attempt was made to qualify the comments of those who scorned mine despite several requests to do so. By the end of the exchanges some comments led me to the view that continuing our 'robust discussion' might lead to my being silenced permanently.

 

I thought that if I set out my response as I have done it would allow those who I am advised are more qualified and knowledable to give considered, qualified responses. We shall see if their credentials live up to their boasts.

 

 

I thought that if I set out my response as I have done it would allow others who I am advised are more knowledgable than I to give considered, qualified responses.

[BazzaS]

BazzaS,

 

If you care to read the thread 'Overtime not offered to all' you may appreciate my reluctance to comply with your request. I was treated with what can only be described as vilification and abuse. No attempt was made to qualify the comments of those who scorned mine despite several requests to do so. By the end of the exchanges some comments led me to the view that continuing our 'robust discussion' might lead to my being silenced permanently.

 

I thought that if I set out my response as I have done it would allow those who I am advised are more qualified and knowledable to give considered, qualified responses. We shall see if their credentials live up to their boasts.

 

 

 

I've looked at that thread & unless posts have been hidden, the "vilification" appears to be "people disagreeing with you & asking you to justify a position they have argued against".

If that is vilification : I fear you will often feel "vilified".

No doubt this means I am part of "The Cabal"

 

However, backing up one's argument with relevant supporting sources would allow discussion : that option should be open to all. If you have valid points that you can support : why not?

[steampowered]

10. Is it not still the case that there is no requirement that an employee should have been employed for any particular period of employment before bringing a claim of Breach of Contract before a tribunal?

 

Hi Skinnered,

 

The contract provides that A olive may be dismissed with one week's notice. If he/she was given 1 week's notice there is no breach of contract. If she was not given one week's notice then all he/she would be entitled to is one week's notice pay.

[firstclassx]

I will add that "Probation Period" has no real legal standing in the UK.

 

It may well be that terms of a new employee's contract aren't as favourable during a probation period as they are once it is over. Nevertheless, the terms can never be worse or take away from an employee's statutory rights.

 

While all employees need to qualify with a year's continuous service (two years for those starting employment after 6 April 2012) before making a complaint to an employment tribunal for unfair dismissal, there are situations classed as 'automatically unfair' which do not have any length of service requirements. Automatically unfair grounds include those relating to maternity or family reasons, discrimination and the NMW among others.

 

Unfortunately until after 2 years service, unless you are disabled, you have no right to a tribunal, unless you can prove you were discriminated against owing to a disability/pregnancy etc.

[A olive]

Thanks again for all the advice, but certain people don't get where I'm coming from.

I don't even want the job back, Its just i don't think they should be able to treat people this way.

I did everything they asked of me, plus they were forcing us to do something we weren't even suppose to doing ( selling insurance products)without completing relevant FSA examinations

[honeybee13]

Thanks again for all the advice, but certain people don't get where I'm coming from.

I don't even want the job back, Its just i don't think they should be able to treat people this way.

I did everything they asked of me, plus they were forcing us to do something we weren't even suppose to doing ( selling insurance products)without completing relevant FSA examinations

 

Hello there.

 

Maybe we've missed what type of advice you're looking for. What would be your ideal outcome please?

 

My best, HB

[ericsbrother]

Employment contracts are different from other contracts in that they are legally one-sided. It doesnt matter why your employer let you go unless they are breaking discrimination laws, they can if they satisfy that condition. One of the reasons that the super salaried captains of industry and football managers have 1 or 2 year notice period contracts is beacuse they are sacked without notice and that is their payoff. No entitlement to anything else so it is weighted that way on signing up.

[assisted blonde]

The employer can employ you on pretty much any terms he likes within reason and can dismiss for any reason (except discrimination) no one says work has to always seem fair its just one of those things, its not fair sometimes but it may be legal, not really anything that you can do about it, just have to move on.