Background:

The Worker was dismissed by the Employer after four months of employment and while on probation. The Worker alleged that she was stressed, untrained, and unsupported in her role, and that no concerns regarding her work were brought to her attention by the Employer prior to her dismissal. The Worker attempted to request additional training from her line manager on several occasions but these requests were not acted upon in any way. On the day of dismissal, the Worker was told by her line manager to return to her work station from the stationery room, as it was “not her allotted printing time” and that she needed to be present to answer the telephone. The Worker broke down and became very distressed, and at the end of this day, the Group Training Manager of the Employer advised the Worker that he would either accept the Worker’s resignation or terminate the Worker.

The Employer responded that concerns regarding the Worker’s performance had been communicated to her through informal meetings which were not documented. These concerns included that the Worker had difficulty working within a team and with managers, and she constantly created difficult conversations. This was taken to be evidence that she did not fit into the culture of the company. Regarding training, the Employer claimed that training was necessarily on-the-job as it was a small team of working in one room and that observation and initiative was required.

Outcome:

While the Adjudication Officer observed it was likely the Worker’s approach and the Employer’s work environment may not have been a good fit, the Employer did not do what it needed to set the Worker up for success. The Employer failed to meet its basic obligations or follow procedures and did not proactively address the challenges the Worker was facing. The Adjudication Officer found the Employer’s processes fell short of the standards of the S.I 146/2000 Industrial Relations Act in terms of processing the Worker’s concerns and as a result found in favour of the Worker. The WRC recommended payment of €5,000 in full and final settlement.

Practical Guidance for Employers:

This is an example of “cultural fit” not being a good enough reason to adequately explain and justify a probationary dismissal. Even though the Adjudication Officer agreed that this was a cultural mismatch, the failure of the Employer to follow robust procedures and make efforts to assist the Worker resulted in a recommendation in the Worker’s favour.

The full case is here:
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2023/august/adj-00046968.html