Probationary period extension

[JustBiscoff]

I would appreciate some advice please. My husband was informed yesterday that his probationary period has been extended by another three months. The reasons given include the amount of leave taken (most of which was two weeks of annual leave he took for the birth of our child), and also that he started the role at the same time as several people leaving (including his predecessor), so his manager admitted to feeling overwhelmed at the amount they still need to hand over to him. Even though his annual leave for the birth of DC was not directly mentioned, it was inferred that this is a major reason why his probationary period has been extended. I’m wondering if this is potentially discriminatory? Also is the manager being ‘overwhelmed with the amount to handover’ also a valid reason for extending a probationary period?

Equally bewildering, is that they repeatedly affirmed how well he’s doing, and promised good career progression etc during the same meeting. My husband is feeling very despondent, especially because he’s been going far above and beyond for they expect of him (another compliment he has also received from them!)

Probation has no real meaning in law, so if they want to extend it there really isn't anything he can do about it. Things that are "inferred" are not evidenced - it's a guess. Besides which, does he really want to rock the boat by claiming discrimination?

@PhilippaGeorgiou Thanks for the clarification. He feels that the inconsistency in receiving consistent praise for his work, with this sudden announcement id a matter about which he could raise a grievance. Other issues arose when he took annual leave for the birth of our child (though too outing to mention on here) that he has also been advised were potentially discriminatory.

Just go with it, I'm afraid theres nothing he can do. Raising a grievance is a sure way of truggering them ebding his employment. I would be looking for alternative work though.

Sounds like poor management to be honest.

I think that’s fair. They’re basically saying “you’re not at the standard we expect after three months, but you’ve taken two weeks off and there’s been a lot of staff changes in that time so we shouldn’t expect you to be. So let’s give you some more time to get up to standard”

Exactly this. They are being generous. Would you rather they just told him that he had failed his probation?

It sounds reasonable to me. Discriminatory I see no evidence of in the post.
That said I would if I were him start to look for something else as they are either not managing properly or he is not managing their possibly ridiculous expectations.

@Sprig1The reason for my post is because they have said repeatedly that he is meeting (and surpassing) all their expectations. I’m in agreement with other posters though, and have advised he looks for another job.

They sound like dicks, keeping all their options open. Constantly dangling the carrot but not living up to their end of the bargain. I ld develop an exit strategy.

Agree with this.

@CreationNat1onThank you, I agree.

Inconsistency isn't illegal though. So yes, he could raise a grievance. He could claim that his employer was discriminating against him - for which he would definitely need to raise a grievance....

"Dear Mr JustBiscoff, we regret to inform you that you have failed your probation and we are serving you with notice. Whilst you have performed well in some areas, which have been highlighted to you, we do not feel overall that you have met the required standard".

If he was going to raise a grievance about discrimination, he should have raised it at the time. Not that I would have recommended it. But raising it now as a response to an extension of his probation is going to look just a bit like he is doing it in a tit-for-tat. Probation really is of little relevance when you still require two years employment for unfair dismissal. And they didn't have to let him have the two weeks off. So as others have said, they have provided a reasonable rationale, and him not agreeing with it doesn't make it incorrect.

It’s incredibly common for probationary periods to be extended if an employer hasn’t had a full opportunity to assess an employee’s capability due to an extended absence. Your DH had an extended absence, so it’s perfectly acceptable for them to need more time.

Presumably that would be the case for any type of absence. I can’t see any discrimination here, and I would guess it wasn’t a qualified lawyer who suggested it was… unless they only apply it to employees who’ve taken paternity leave, but that feels unlikely!

@JustBiscoff emplyers are completely in their rights to do this

1. they want longer to monitor and evaluate his work as he's been in say 9 weeks rather than 12 weeks 2)'overwhelmed at the amount they still need to hand over to him' might mean he's taking longer to get up to speed than they'd hoped
2. Would be really interesting to hear 'what other issues arose at the birth of your child' to know whether the employers or your DH did anything unreasonable

I wouldn't throw the towel in if he's otherwise getting good feedback and your DH has to show more resilience than that at work (disappointing though it may be not to have sailed through probation.) I certainly wouldn't raise a grievance as what they've done is completely normal working practice in order to monitor his work over a set period.

Standard practice in my organisation. It just means with everything going on they haven’t had a chance to fully assess him. Realistically they can dismiss him for any reason within 2 years whether or not he has passed his probation. All this talk of looking for another job is premature I would think.

The PP's pointing out that his absence means they haven't had long enough to assess. Standard.

The fact that you think this is the sort of thing that you raise a grievance over is silly.

I’d start looking elsewhere. He’s not going to feel safe or supported there.

Does his contract state that his probation can be extended?

He needs to start applying for new jobs. Now. This weekend.

not even because they might fire him simply because it’s sounds chaotic and long term an employer who doesn’t grant you discretionary pat leave but instead insists you take 2 weeks annual leave AND THEN! throw that paltry amount of time back in your face is not someone you want to work for.
they also don’t sound like they know what they want and are in crisis.

What would anyone hope to achieve by raising a grievance at this stage? Being taken off probation? As has already been pointed out, probation has no teeth - it's a paper tiger. It's your two-year mark you want to be concerned about. Frankly I'd think raising grievance at this stage would cause people to sit up and take note - and not in a positive way.

Where does it say that the employer insisted that he take two years leave? Clue, it doesn't. It also does not say he took only two weeks leave. It says "The reasons given include the amount of leave taken (most of which was two weeks of annual leave he took for the birth of our child)". So he actually took more than two weeks leave in his probationary period, which is a lot of leave during his initial time at the company. He clearly had good reason, since he wouldn't have got paternity leave to support the OP, but (a) the employer doesn't have to aaprove annual leave and (b) that "more than two weeks" is a lot of time out of an assessment period, and combined with other good reasons, entirely justifiable as cause to extend probation.

I think it's unfair. He took 2 weeks out of what ... 3
months? And the manager threw so much at him they feel they haven't been able to access him properly. I wouldn't want to work there. It depends on how suited the job/sarary is whether i'd perserve or look for something else

This is a good point OP. What was the other leave ? Sickness??

Mine got extended by two months because at the 5 month mark of my probationary period (it was meant to be 6 months) my manager moved to another department and a new one came in. Old manager was happy to sign me up but new one wanted to work with me for a couple of months before signing me off. I knew there were no issues with my performance so it wasn’t an issue just slightly annoying.

Thing is before 2 years they can get rid of you for almost any reason so the probationary period doesn’t really mean much.

Annual leave doesn’t have the same rights as paternity leave. Doesn’t matter whether he was off because of your new baby or a worldwide cruise. He could argue that anyone would be expected to take 2 weeks leave during a 6 month period (you don’t say how long the probation was) and so the objectives should have been adjusted to allow for that, but he would be on a stickier wicket if the probation period was 3 months because you might not expect someone to take 2 weeks of leave in that time period.

Sorry - I just noticed that I said two years leave instead of two weeks! Head must have been somewhere else...