Son's awful experience in first week of job

[ArmyofMunn]

Sorry this is long but I wanted to get it all down!

My 18DS started his first full time job last week. He has A Levels but is not degree educated and was taken on as one of four, the other three being in their mid-to late twenties and two of them with degrees. It was with a financial services company and paid £4K more per year plus commission than another job he’d also been offered, so he was very pleased.

He spent last week and the first two days of this week completing training for the job and he's been coming home each day saying how much he loves it - the training, the people, the office, the role etc. The training has been intense, involving two powerpoint presentations per day to prove he understood the training, but in which he said he kept coming second from top.

This week, following the training, he’s had to do three mock calls to a fake customer (his line manager) and he apparently made three ‘breaches’ in total, all involving not noticing that the customer had used some wrong letters during the security checks of emails and addresses etc. He thought he’d done well though as he was confident and affable and just thought next time he’d get the breaches right. He was shocked therefore to be taken into a room after his final call by two managers and told that because of the breaches he hasn’t passed his probation week and would have to leave and couldn’t appeal!

He’s completely shocked. The company didn’t tell him that his first week was probationary and he also remembers reading clearly that breaches by employees in their first month should not be regarded as breaches. He unfortunately read this on their own system so he can’t access it now, and his employer has his contract, so he can’t check that over either.

I just think this is an absolutely terrible way to treat an employee and my son is struggling to understand how the breaches he made were so serious as to warrant being asked to leave. He did ask to opt out of their employee life insurance and pension scheme, so I’m wondering if that just didn’t go down well with them!

Does anyone on here have experience of this type of thing? Are companies allowed to treat people like this these days?

No advice on the contractual or legal status I’m afraid but opting out of the life insurance and pension scheme would actually save the employer money on their payroll contribution cost. Though I can’t imagine any employer generally making personnel decisions based on this type of thing. It’s very common where I work for younger employees to do this two wards the beginning of their career and no one bats an eyelid.

What does his contract say about probation periods?

That's true, but he was hoping to work in financial services and opting out of a workplace pension might have indicated to them that he was naive about financial issues. Perhaps that and the apparent lack of concern about mistakes made them conclude that he wasn't mature enough to handle the responsibility.

I think he's had a lucky escape. They sound awful.

Name them so us mumsnetters avoid them like the plague.

So sounds like a call centre, I've worked in plenty. They are all shit. BUT you absolutely can't expect to work there if you can't complete the security checks correctly. He needs to take it on the chin, learn from it and move on.

Of course they should do this and provide more training etc - but in reality they won’t as it’s easier and cheaper to get rid of someone and no risk in the first two years unless it’s on the grounds of a protected characteristic.

He thought he’d done well though as he was confident and affable and just thought next time he’d get the breaches right.

It might have been this approach they didn't like - 'just thought next time he'd get it right' rather than asking for help/putting something specific in place to stop making the mistake again.

Hope he finds another job soon, OP, and can take something from where this one went wrong for him.

Thanks for all your replies so far - it's helping to give me perspective.

Yes he was given feedback on his mistakes after each call, so maybe it's a three strikes and you're out scenario.

What doesn't square up though is that he read that any mistake made by an employee in their first three months there can't be classed as a breach, as they're training, so why was he penalised in his first week for this?

After what they did, no, he doesn't want to go back - but we're just trying to get to the bottom of why their reaction was so draconian, and also if they are breaking employment rules.

Are they obliged to send us his contact if we request it?

Sorry I meant any mistake in the first MONTH, not first three months, can't be classed as a breach.

The law is on their side here

Sorry but he only made 3 calls and had 3 breaches - he got the security checks wrong on every single call? That's a major risk. MAJOR.

I work in administering a public service think police records, medical records, benefit records etc. If people fail the security questions I literally cannot proceed with the call/appointment. I have to stop and rebook. It's a massive data breach to discuss accounts regardless. It doesn't matter if it's a faff, you have to follow the guidance your employer provides

It seems like his manager kept giving him a chance to notice but he kept failing it.

That means it's not reportable to the FCA as a breach. It doesn't mean he won't be internally penalised for it.

He failed to ensure basic security checks and was told so. He failed again and was told so. He failed again! Who would continue to employ him? He was cocky and sloppy and he neither paid attention to detail, which is pretty fucking critical for success, nor showed that he could listen to and absorb basic feedback. I'd have let him go too. That's what probation is for.

What doesn't square up though is that he read that any mistake made by an employee in their first three months there can't be classed as a breach, as they're training, so why was he penalised in his first week for this?

In the regulatory sense, something either is a breach or it isn't. Technically what happened this week was not a regulatory breach as it didn't happen with genuine customer details - so it wouldn't require a breach to be recorded/reported. It's still a mistake (and would have been a breach in a live situation) and really it's up to them what grounds they have for failing a probation on lack of technical competence.

He's not up for the job. It's the basics.

Poor lad, tell him he's likely dodged a bullet.

They can get rid of him for any reason during probation.

A hard sharp lesson that most of us have suffered, hope it doesnt knock his confidence too much!

Are they obliged to send us his contact if we request it?

”We” can’t request anything, your son will have to do that himself.

You’re painting a picture of quite an immature young man. That’s understandable at 18, but he needs to learn from this.

Is there a particular reason he didn’t go to university? Could this be the impetus he needs to maybe rethink that decision?
(And I get that uni isn’t for everyone. I went working straight after A-levels and did the whole uni thing in my late twenties while working full time)

There is always a probationary period. Tell him to pick himself up. Just keep applying he will be very knocked by this so some confidence building.

Attention to detail in these organisations is vital. So it's a lesson he will learn.

Don't put it in his CV. Just ignore it. Future employers won't know about it

Financial services can be a really tough environment. Maybe they picked more people than they needed only to "weed them out" later - so he shouldn't be too down about it. Just use it as a learning experience. He could get back in touch with the other company - I would because there is nothing to lose. I'm sorry he's been through that though - it can be so tough out there and some managers don't care.

Data protection breaches are serious for a company. It’s good they are taking this seriously as in real life it can have a huge detrimental impact for the customer and business.

I’ve worked for companies that have not taken staff further if they are unable to follow basic DPA on training calls.

Presumably security and data protection was covered in training?
If your DS has then gone on to fail this three times then in all honesty I’m not surprised they are not taking him further. Pension etc won’t be relevant.

I wouldn't say the manager didn't care. They can't just employ someone because they are good at everything else if they can't do basic security checks. The fines are potentially massive

I might be reading between the lines incorrectly, but I've formed the impression he didn't take the 'breaches' very seriously until he was told he'd failed, and that's probably why they thought the role wasn't for him.

My advice in the future would be for him to give the impression, at least, that he takes this sort of thing very seriously indeed - it isn't enough to display optimism that he'll get it right next time, he needs to say (e.g.) 'I will put a reminder on my screen to make sure I don't make this mistake again.'

They mean it isn't 'breach' as in it doesn't have to be reported not that its fine and isn't an issue. Its a very big issue and really a very basic part of the job. What were his plans post A level? Would an apprenticeship be a better route for him? Sounds like he needs experience of a workplace and to appreciate the difference between that and school.

What doesn't square up though is that he read that any mistake made by an employee in their first three months there can't be classed as a breach, as they're training, so why was he penalised in his first week for this?

It sounds like your DS perhaps hasn’t understood properly.

If your bank, for example, breached your data, it would still be classed as a data breach. Your bank would still have to record this and be held accountable regardless of whether it was a new employee who made the error.

That’s why financial company have stringent training and do these type of practice calls. It’s often just not worth the risk to them to put someone on live calls who has repeatedly made breaches in practice. Sorry for your DS though, it’s a tough lesson to learn.

Is he sure he hasn't already received his contract on an email from them?
Sorry to ask but my DC of similar age doesn't read their emails every day, and often uses one-time email addresses as they don't want people trying to email them!

If they were real case, we would have totally left the company open to data breaches, sanctions and fines.

Basically gave information or funds to scammers.

He was advised after each call and still missed it.

He is probably not suited to working in a regulated company where these things are critical.