AIBU to think dismissal during probation was unfair given autism adjustments?

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.

You don't seem to understand that the analytical work is only one part of what's required of you.

All other things you mention are important competencies that are a part of your role, just like the analysis is. They're not an optional add-on. They were part of your job and you were apparently unable to do them.

Some of the things you've listed here are serious, and frankly, if you communicate at work in the same way you're communicating here, that is likely to pose a problem in most workplaces.

I wonder if OP was using AI excessively in her work.
Data analysis is easily done by AI, although it can be inaccurate. I wonder if OP was using it not just for emails, but also transcribing the recorded meeting as someone said, and even doing parts of her job. Which is obviously gross misconduct.

This is another issue affecting the younger generations. AI is used to write essays and help students navigate their degree, leaving them without the skills they should have developed while getting their degree. And that time is lost then, you can't then add on the 3 years of learning you have missed, but you also won't be able to function in a job so you can develop the skills. It's awful

In my work, the only AI thats allowed is copilot, and you’re not allowed to record a meeting without the consent of all parties attending. Thinking about it, I’m wondering if the op’s thought process was “it’s already being recorded so it doesn’t matter if I record it too”?

if that is/was her thought process, that is something that she can work on and learn from. Don’t record anyone ever unless you’re sure you have permission. It’s also a bit shit not to apologise for that.

I see the reasonable adjustments as separate to or in addition to the gross misconduct. So the op had reasonable adjustments which she was using to help her to pass probation. But then she ballsed up by recording without permission and it was a cumulative thing.

I know im not expressing it well, but what I’m trying to get to is that she would’ve been let go for the recording of the meeting, regardless of her autism or other ND and regardless of reasonable adjustments. Im just not sure the op is seeing the recording of a meeting without permission and outwith the standard processes as that big of a deal.

I’m guessing to use AI to transcribe it?

This, how can it even have been a true recording if op was only one who knew it was being recorded so make have acted nefariously, or it was one work were also recording… why was she needing to also record it? For what purpose?

One that works for everyone. That is really what reasonable adjustments are supposed to be. They are to make the work environment work for the person who needs them. This comes at a reasonable "cost" to the rest of the workforce, but neither the employer, nor the workforce is obliged to be nice and the adjustments are a balance between the individual's rights and everybody else's (yes even their nasty employer's right to make money).

It is an unpalatable truth but not every autistic person is going to be able to do the job they want, or even any job. 75% does seem high, but to determine whether it is too high, such that it indicates that reasonable adjustments are not being made, we'd need to know a lot more. Also, you need to remember that - just like all of us - autistic people may not be able to do a job for reasons outside of their autism. All people on this thread are doing is asking the OP to do some reflection on whether or not she could have (notwithstanding her autism) done things differently, i.e. don't assume straightaway that it is discrimination, failure to make adjustments and consider what else could have gone wrong (with the fairly obvious "I recorded a meeting against policy", notwithstanding the matters stated as mitigating circumstances, would be serious everywhere).

I think that's all it is. Not malicious prejudice.

With the right job it doesn’t have to be that way either. Sometimes it really is as simple as it just isn’t the right job. There’s always been autistic people who struggle with work. And there’s always been autistic people who don’t. The ones who didn’t back before adjustments were even a thing found jobs they were good at and thrived at. Surely that should be the aim rather than everyone trying to simply shoehorn themselves into a job they just can’t do?

Thank you for getting it. There’s times when that being done to me would have had me suicidal - and I would have been at serious risk of harm if my location had inadvertently been disclosed.

im not sure how concerns raised quality assurance under pressure squares with output being so good they thought it was AI?

You’re joking aren’t you?

Recording a meeting without the knowledge or consent of the participants represents a serious breach of trust.

When a company records meetings, those recordings are subject to strict safeguarding measures and controlled access.

Employees rely on these protections, particularly when discussions may involve highly confidential or sensitive projects.

By contrast, an employee secretly recording a meeting circumvents these safeguards entirely.

This behaviour undermines professional standards, compromises confidentiality, and exposes the organisation to unnecessary risk.

For these reasons, covert recording is typically treated as gross misconduct and may lead to disciplinary action and in this case the employees dismissal.

And were you using AI? Do you know the company policy on use of AI?

Im autistic. I tried consulting and im shit at it So no shade from me on that front. No shade on spelling either coz mine is shit outside of work.

The thing I, even as an ND person, you can’t expect to have all the adjustments you want. They might not be reasonable in the circumstances.

And there are some behaviours that are just a hard no and a gross misconduct. A GDPR breach could land the company in hot water legally, for example.

I feel for you because I am autistic as well as having other disabilities I know that work can be absolutely brutal for autistic people.

I think you need to find something where you are a better fit. In a graduate scheme it is a steep learning curve. If you are autistic you need a slower learning curve. You need to think about the aspects of the role you did well in and those you struggled with and find something with more of your strengths.

A previous poster suggested doing a reflection. I think that is a good idea. There is employment coaching available for autistic people and that could be a good option.

It sounds like your work did try to help you. It is perfectly reasonable to have adjustments for autism. The recording a meeting thing was a mistake anyone new to the work place could have made. Not apologising when you were asked to is a big problem though. It looks like you don’t care about other people’s feelings. Everyone makes mistakes but you need to learn from them and they can let you go because of that.

Just because you did not succeed in this job does not mean you can’t succeed and you can learn how to do things that are scary even as an autistic person. However you need to take it slowly and not overload yourself .

Which has been a pattern on the OP's previous threads, too -- similar pattern of shortlived graduate jobs/pathways in which she didn't succeed or was terminated after not passing necessary exams, starting several near-simultaneous threads on here about the same topic, complaining about injustice and unfair dismissal, and frequently either ignoring or responding to long, helpful posts of career advice by well-meaning posters with a barked 'what do yu mean' or 'wht do i do now', or accusing people of not being in 'good faith'.

Move on. This sort of work and environment is clearly not for you, and you aren’t for them.

I have tried to gather information from the op and she’s been really rude to me. She also called me a troll.

She didn’t apologise.

and thats à gdpr breach and possibly a confidentiality breach depending on the information discussed in the meeting. And she hasn’t said what she used for transcription and whether or not the transcription was done by AI.

Genuinely, recording someone without their consent (which she did) is a misconduct in a lot of organisations.

The thread didn't start with people arguing, there were a lot of detailed replies trying to understand the OP's situation and trying to help.
Then came the "u wot m8" replies & OP calling people trolls, followed by the hyperbole about the world wanting autistic people to starve & die

You seem to be confusing “not in good faith” with “not blindly agreeing”.

I really feel people just want to argue in bad faith

That wasn't the same as the OP described at all.
It was a company meeting that she recorded for work purposes that never went further than internal systems. Not a personal recording.

I've read them and I've reread them and I feel sorry that it's so fckn difficult to retain a job because so many workplaces are not only a toxic environment for neurodiverse people, but that when they ask for adjustments and support, they actually just get insulted.

What are people supposed to do?

Autistic people can and do make excellent employees, but it does take adjustments and understanding. It's complex, but 75%of autistic people not being in work, and the huge amount that want to work but even in the jobs they are qualified for, and want to do, it so often fails for other reasons, and then they get managed out or end up with burn out.

What sort of society is it you want?

As bluntly as possible, if the OP's condition is so severe that she cannot comprehend the concept of apologising to someone for infringing their rights, perhaps she has a learning disability.

Someone screwed up GDPR at work once in a way that impacted other colleagues' capacity to carry out our roles (vital information not passed on) and had the potential to jeopardise health and safety of colleagues. Including mine. You bet I wanted an apology!

@Branleuse she didn't apologise
"and didn't apologise to someone for recording a call without their permission"

"i didnt argue. i jsut told her i wouldnt do it again and it was an honest mistake"

From the op's posts, no apology

I'm not ignoring it. It was a meeting she recorded for transcription purposes and the meeting would be recorded anyway and was only recorded into internal systems.

It sounds like it was a genuine error by someone trying to do their job. She apologised and now knows.
No need to make it seem weird by missing the context