A friend began at an organisation in October 2005 on a part time, fixed term contract until December 2006. However, in January 2006, he was approached to increase his hours. He worked out a compromise (he was working part time at a local college)and throughout January worked four days a week before going full time in February. There was a six month probationary period, with a week’s notice on either side.

In early March, my friend had a “supervisory” session with his manager, which identified the need for further IT training (booked for this summer) and also, a level of friction between the manager and my friend. It appears no specific action was taken to address this, but that the discussion was open and frank. Both parties agreed to continue an open debate if there were concerns from either side.

After Easter – with no further concerns raised – he was called in to a probationery meeting with what sounded like little preparation time. He was charged with being disorganised and not methodical, despite a recent project launching well and with no hitches. He was asked to clear his desk.

An extract from the company handbook states that in the event of an unsatisfactory probationary review, further training will be offered and if after training, performance is still unsatisfactory, the situation will be reviewed by the CEO. The handbook also states that only in extreme circumstances will the appointment not be confirmed.

I wondered if my friend had any case, as it appears that procedures were not followed. Any thoughts welcome!
Karen Drury