Unfair Dismissal under 1 year..
Discussion
I understand that an employee with under 1 year's service can be dismissed under 1 of 5 'fair' categories;
According to ACAS:
"Dismissal is normally fair only if your employer can show that it is for one of the following reasons:
* a reason related to your conduct
* a reason related to your capability or qualifications for the job
* because you were redundant
* because a statutory duty or restriction prohibited the employment being continued
* some other substantial reason of a kind which justifies the dismissal
and that they acted reasonably in treating that reason as sufficient for dismissal."
Does the company still have to follow 'fair' procedure or can they simply arrange a meeting, say your dismissed based on 1 of the 5 reasons and give no supporting evidence or written warning this was going to happen?
If the above were the case, could you still file for Unfair dismissal? It's not very clear.
As it otherwise appears you can simply dismiss someone under a year's service, give a one of the above reasons, even if that is blatantly untrue and simply get away with it with no come back.
Confused..
According to ACAS:
"Dismissal is normally fair only if your employer can show that it is for one of the following reasons:
* a reason related to your conduct
* a reason related to your capability or qualifications for the job
* because you were redundant
* because a statutory duty or restriction prohibited the employment being continued
* some other substantial reason of a kind which justifies the dismissal
and that they acted reasonably in treating that reason as sufficient for dismissal."
Does the company still have to follow 'fair' procedure or can they simply arrange a meeting, say your dismissed based on 1 of the 5 reasons and give no supporting evidence or written warning this was going to happen?
If the above were the case, could you still file for Unfair dismissal? It's not very clear.
As it otherwise appears you can simply dismiss someone under a year's service, give a one of the above reasons, even if that is blatantly untrue and simply get away with it with no come back.
Confused..
If an employee has worked for less than 1 year then they can still be unfairly dismissed BUT they have no right to compensation.
The employer must be able to demonstrate that the dismissal is not as a result of pregnancy, sexual discrimination, sexuality, race, religion, disability or trade union activity (I think that is all, but check on direct.gov website.
HTH
The employer must be able to demonstrate that the dismissal is not as a result of pregnancy, sexual discrimination, sexuality, race, religion, disability or trade union activity (I think that is all, but check on direct.gov website.
HTH
You will typically find a comment along the lines of "the disciplinary procedure does not apply within the probation period/first year of service" within the employee handbook. Ultimately, an employer can dismiss you for any reason by any method within this period. If you feel it is discriminatory then that is for a Tribunal to decide.
Cheeky Jim said:
Do they still need to follow a correct procedure? i.e. indicate a problem, opportunity to discuss/state case to respond etc?
Or can they simply dismiss with no reason and no procedure?
No, the procedure is part of the ERA and you don't have the protection of the ERA until 12 months service.Or can they simply dismiss with no reason and no procedure?
Most employers will have given you fair chance to 'buck up' have meaningful chats about any problem areas,etc before they wield the axe.
It's always better (cheaper) to keep an existing employee than to sack and have to replace.
However, as has been said before, if it really isn't working then under 12 months and no reason required.
It's always better (cheaper) to keep an existing employee than to sack and have to replace.
However, as has been said before, if it really isn't working then under 12 months and no reason required.
Cheeky Jim said:
well, thats all rather disappointing then...
Yep, I am afraid that you pretty much have no rights at all until you have 12 months worth of continuous service - there is a fairly well known "tactic" used by some employers where they hire and then fire at 11 months service..... All to avoid the ERA.. And if you are dismissed unfairly (i.e. after 1 year of service) then the court will recompense you for the fact that you have no protection for 12 months at your next employer, with the bank busting sum of around £300 (IIRC it was £250 last time I looked but that was a while ago so I expect it's gone up since then).
Tyre Smoke said:
Most employers will have given you fair chance to 'buck up' have meaningful chats about any problem areas,etc before they wield the axe.
Well if you go from having company wide praise for your commitment, tenacity and hard workin launching a brand new service to 7 weeks later being accused by your new boss of 'not being capable' of doing your job and then being dismissed.Buck up me laddo!
Cheeky Jim said:
Tyre Smoke said:
Most employers will have given you fair chance to 'buck up' have meaningful chats about any problem areas,etc before they wield the axe.
Well if you go from having company wide praise for your commitment, tenacity and hard workin launching a brand new service to 7 weeks later being accused by your new boss of 'not being capable' of doing your job and then being dismissed.Buck up me laddo!
"I understand you have made this decision, and I have no comeback, but where exactly did I go wrong?"
To be honest it might just be a smokescreen to get rid of staff and save money. The tragedy is, you might not have done anything wrong.
Cheeky Jim said:
just 6 months...
New Director arrived.... got his feet under the table and then that was it..... usual story of new bloke flexing his muscles and I'm the unfortunate victim...
Anyway, can't sit and complain, best get on with getting a new role!
It won't help, but I would guarantee you are the 'cost saving'.New Director arrived.... got his feet under the table and then that was it..... usual story of new bloke flexing his muscles and I'm the unfortunate victim...
Anyway, can't sit and complain, best get on with getting a new role!
Jasandjules said:
There is no unfair dismissal with less than 1 year in the job. The employer need not give a reason nor a "fair" reason - you have no protection in law with less than 12 months employment.
Discrimination however is protected from the moment you submit an application for the job.
Generally, correct. However, as long as the employee has served 1 month of employment, then if the employee is dismissed as a result of, for example, sexual discrimination, racial discrimination, attempts to enforce statutory rights (insisting on minimum wage, for example) then the dismissal is automatically unfair, irrespective of employment length. Ultimately this is for a tribunal to decide but the short answer is , yes, you can.Discrimination however is protected from the moment you submit an application for the job.
Jasandjules said:
Cheeky Jim said:
well, thats all rather disappointing then...
Yep, I am afraid that you pretty much have no rights at all until you have 12 months worth of continuous service - there is a fairly well known "tactic" used by some employers where they hire and then fire at 11 months service..... All to avoid the ERA.. And if you are dismissed unfairly (i.e. after 1 year of service) then the court will recompense you for the fact that you have no protection for 12 months at your next employer, with the bank busting sum of around £300 (IIRC it was £250 last time I looked but that was a while ago so I expect it's gone up since then).
One of the lads where I work was recently dismissed for 'not performing' and a couple of days later our bosses began having quiet words with us individually, telling us that although he'd passed his 6 month probation period he'd been warned that they were extending it, (the probation), as they were unsure as to his suitability. Now I and a couple of the others are all at manager level and we know for a fact that, not only did they not extend his probation, they never even gave him his probation interview.
As this probation is in the company handbook we are now wondering if they are trying to cover themselves in case he brings an action against them by having us say that he did have his probation reviewed. Is that what they're doing, and if they are where do we stand if a tribunal asks us? Is a missed probation review a problem?
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff