Employment advice needed

[duchy]

That's just lazy management or there's more to it. Ultimately you can give notice in the first two years for any reason provided it isn't discriminatory.
They don't want to get rid of her !

Originally Posted by bonnies mum

I am retired but keep up to date with ex-colleagues.
A new staff member was taken on, by regional manager not branch management. Branch staff says she is lazy, unhelpful & apparently off a lot after her night out.
At the end of probationary period branch did not want to keep her on but were told that there was insufficient grounds to dismiss her.
She is still there & apparently not meeting standards other staff have to and do.

See more...

[Guest]

Originally Posted by bonnies mum

I am retired but keep up to date with ex-colleagues.
A new staff member was taken on, by regional manager not branch management. Branch staff says she is lazy, unhelpful & apparently off a lot after her regular nights out.
At the end of probationary period branch did not want to keep her on but were told that there was insufficient grounds to not ratify her employment
She is still there & apparently not meeting standards other staff have to and do.
Seems like whst constitutes the meaning of a trial period is arbritary, and down to the employer.

See more...

That is incorrect. Anyone can have employment terminated within the first two years for any reason (unless it is discriminatory). For whatever reason, the HO didn't want to get rid of her.

I would also say that even if she had been there for two years, there sounds like ample reason for her termination, so long as a proper procedure is followed.

A probationary period has no specific meaning in employment law. In law, somebody in a probationary period has no more or less legal rights than somebody in their first two years of employment. However in practice the probationary period is used to enable a company to remove somebody more quickly as the notice period is likely to be shorter.

[THOscar]

Originally Posted by Claudette

That is incorrect. Anyone can have employment terminated within the first two years for any reason (unless it is discriminatory). For whatever reason, the HO didn't want to get rid of her.

I would also say that even if she had been there for two years, there sounds like ample reason for her termination, so long as a proper procedure is followed.

A probationary period has no specific meaning in employment law. In law, somebody in a probationary period has no more or less legal rights than somebody in their first two years of employment. However in practice the probationary period is used to enable a company to remove somebody more quickly as the notice period is likely to be shorter.

See more...

Too many companies in the UK are fearful of sacking people. My wife constantly tells me about people she manages being useless but her company are too scared to do anything most of the time. Poor HR departments don't help matters.

[bonnies mum]

Thanks Claudette and THOscar tbh I think you both make good points.
They could have let her go but they were either scared or too lazy to go through another recruitment process.

[Zomax25]

Something that might help your son. I have had many graduates working with and for me over the years. The ones that we keep on are the ones that try to make themselves useful. You say he never had to use the software. Ideally he should have found ways of learning it himself.
I’d also like people to seem vaguely enthused. A current team member turns up after 10 whenever his manager isn’t there. Takes several smoke breaks, long lunches and leaves as soon as he can. I wouldn’t employ him in my team long term. Another grad once spent his evenings solving a problem we had. I wouldn’t expect this but he got a glowing reference and if I could have I would have employed him without a second thought.

[djewkes]

In my current job all call centre staff are taken on probation. There’s a 2 weeks intensive training with 3 tests at the end, staff have 2 chances but have to pass all 3 or they’re out. Following that they have more training and the probation period, staff may have their probationary period extended or they might be “let go” if they don’t meet standards, fail audits (pass rate 86%) or have too much time off sick... it weeds out some of the unsuitable but doesn’t guarantee... there’s always the one that gets signed off and then goes off long term sick...
my firm view probation as just that, you don’t have a permanent job until you’ve been signed off...
Although he must be disappointed he can use this experience moving forward...

[novocastrian]

i think her should consider the more junior role, show he is keen to improve and take on the feedback

its a foot in the door & he can always look elsewhere for any openings, its always said getting a new job whilst your working is easier than not working*



* never been in that position but seems to the consensus...

[itsrachelhere]

Originally Posted by Andybear

I've always assumed probationary periods were trial periods. Certainly that's been the case at every company I've worked for including my current one.

See more...

Of course. I didn't phrase it very well. They didn't really have a very rigorous application process, and it seemed that instead of really scrutinising to see if someone were right for the role, they were just taking on anyone who might fit and then using that time to assess their fit. I appreciate in more casual work settings you might have that kind of trial process, but for a more professional role, goodness of fit should primarily be determined through interview, tests, etc.