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

[SereneRoseRobin]

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?

I dont need to answer you... u arent helping my situation.

To be fair, I am ND (ADHD). There are aspects of my job that I find difficult and I work in slightly different ways, but the bottom line is, I can still do the job and I can do it very well.

It sounds like the OP was able to do some aspects of the job, but a number of really key skills were lacking. Reasonable adjustments should be offered by all employers, but it simply isn't reasonable to expect employers to just accept that disabled or ND employees will be unable to carry out central requirements of their jobs effectively. And surely communication and professionalism are absolutely core skills for a consultant?

I was trying to explain how much trouble you’d be in for recording without permission and using AI (if you did).

you aren’t coming across well in this thread.

In all honesty i would have fired you long time ago.

The OP does not have a discrimination case. The company gave reasonable adjustments.

Have you considered accountancy instead?

It might be a better fit for your skills.

Put your energy into your future to see where you might be successful.

I agree. There’s not a hope in hell of a discrimination claim succeeding at tribunal, from the posts on this thread.

You aren’t either.

I don't agree that disabled staff should need to be better than non-disabled staff. That is the sort of attitude that I wo only expect to see from a crap employer that doesn't recognise the benefits that having a diverse team can bring.

However, disabled employees do need to be able to do the job according to the required standards, with reasonable adjustments in place.

Were you like this in the workplace? Rude? Abrupt? Expecting people to help you? Just thinking about what you need? Can you express yourself in a professional manner?

You need to be able to do the job with reasonable adjustments. Unfortunately, I think what you asked for wasn’t reasonable or achievable for the company. Reasonable adjustments would be things like allowing you to wear headphones or work in a quiet space so that you can concentrate. It isn’t about the company changing their ways of working.

It sounds like it’s hit you hard, which is understandable, and I am sorry that the job ended. My advice would be to ask someone else to help you interpret any feedback you get in future jobs, to make sure you are taking on board what is being said to you.

No it won't.

Thats for the tribunal to decide not you.

How am I not? Im autistic with adhd and I am blunt.

the op would be guilty if misconduct for recording without permission. If it was audio thats one thing, if it was video thats a whole other ballgame. I don’t allow any videos recorded of me. She had no right to do that.

if she used AI to transcribe, then there’s potentially sensitive company information being out in the ether.

adjustments have to reasonable and it seems to me that the op wasn’t a good fit for this company, and she wasn’t a good fit for the consultancy company before. She’s overselling her experience and she’s not learning from her roles - there’s more to doing a job than technical know how.

im crap at consulting because my autism means I can’t do the schmoozing side if it, so I don’t do that. But I also have 30+ years of experience under my belt.

There’s nothing to be gained by posting here.
Go and get advice from Accas and document everything whilst its fresh in your mind.

OP was dismissed from accountancy Big 4.
But I agree a lower-level finance job might suit.

Quite the contrast to the AI written OP! Presumably she can't get away with using AI to produce her work for her

I don’t want to seem harsh but there is a big difference between having reasonable adjustments and expecting to be spoon-fed. You are not helping yourself by trying to cling onto this job. Have some honest reflection about where your strengths lie and then look for a career which is a better fit with those.

That's very harsh, but I think this is actually true of most workplaces.

If u was a good fit you wud have gained permanent employment it's that simple they obviously didn't think U was a good fit or terrible at the job or a job where it's being made difficult with your adjustments that's what probation periods are for to see if u fit the job and the company and it's that simple let it go and look for a different job your over analysing it tbh x

Op my HR team have just given us all an eductation on the changing employment righta coming into play next year
Theyve basically said if your not sure someone is a "fit" after 3 months let them go, before they hit 6m and have more rights.
Wither its right or wrong is another argument but you are in your probation they have let you go. In this case- from what youve shared- thats that!

Nope. Not any job in finance.
Op cannot work in a team with all reasonable adjustments.

In what way was recording and transcribing a meeting a “reasonable adjustment” in your opinion? Your decision not to inform everyone and seek consent was not related to your autism. What was the company policy for recording meetings?

Exactly this.

I have a reasonable adjustment that means im never video recorded at work.

but the op totally over rode that (potentially).

I suppose I meant more like data entry, spreadsheets, number crunching etc.