I’m looking for honest views because I’m not sure whether I’m being unreasonable or whether this was genuinely unfair.
I was recently dismissed from a graduate/analyst role after my probation was extended. I am autistic, and my employer knew this. I had raised the need for clear written instructions, defined objectives, examples of similar work, timelines, and timely/direct feedback. Some support was put in place, including coaching, but I don’t feel the actual adjustments were properly embedded or reviewed before the decision was made.
The difficult part is that the concerns raised about me seemed mainly to focus on communication style, professional behaviour, asking for clarification, Teams messages, and quality assurance under pressure — rather than on whether I could actually do the analytical work. Some recent written feedback said my analytical skills were good, that my work did not contain relevant errors, that I was taking ownership, and that I sought support appropriately. Another person said I had picked up on a complex project well.
The project I was criticised on was not straightforward. I was a first-year graduate with no prior experience in that sector, and I was assigned open-ended/data-heavy modelling work with a lot of ambiguity and short deadlines. Some outputs were expected within hours or by the next day, so there was not much time for structured review. I also didn’t always get timely feedback while I could still act on it. Some feedback came months after the work had ended.
My probation extension was meant to allow support and coaching to take effect, but I was dismissed before the extension period had fully ended. I had submitted evidence of improvement the day before the decision, but I don’t feel it was properly discussed or considered.
The coaching report apparently said the benefit of coaching should be assessed after a longer period, because performance can dip while new strategies embed.
I’m appealing because I think they didn’t properly separate disability-related communication issues from actual capability, didn’t give recent improvement enough weight, and didn’t consider alternatives such as letting the extension run, providing clearer QA/communication frameworks, assigning more standard analyst work, or redeploying me to a more suitable team.
I’m not saying I was perfect. I know there were areas to improve. But I feel like I was assessed against unclear expectations, on complex work, without the timely feedback and structure that had already been identified as necessary for me.
AIBU to think this was unfair and potentially linked to disability discrimination/failure to make reasonable adjustments? Or is this just how probation works, and I should accept it and move on?