Probationary lecturer dismissed for poor performance: all claims fail

This case shows how employment tribunals approach claims from employees who are dismissed during a probationary period. The claimant, a lecturer in physiotherapy, was subject to a three-year probation. After performance concerns emerged, she was placed on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP). When she failed the PIP, she was dismissed.

What the tribunal decided

The tribunal rejected all her claims. It found that the university's decision to dismiss was within the range of reasonable responses for an employer. The performance concerns were genuine, and the process – including a probation hearing and a grievance appeal – was fair. The tribunal also found that the claimant was not disabled under the Equality Act, so her disability discrimination claims could not succeed.

The protected disclosure angle

The claimant argued that she had made protected disclosures about clinical placement structures and that these led to detriment and dismissal. The tribunal concluded that the university's actions were motivated by performance, not by the disclosures. This is a common pattern: employees who raise concerns may later feel they are being penalised, but if the employer can show a legitimate reason for its actions, the claim will fail.

What the losing side could have done differently

From the claimant's perspective, the case illustrates the importance of engaging with performance management processes and seeking early advice. The tribunal noted that the claimant had been unrepresented at the final hearing and had struggled with disclosure. For employers, the case confirms that a well-documented PIP and probation process can withstand scrutiny, even when the employee has raised grievances and disclosure claims.

Why this matters

This decision reinforces that probationary periods are a time when employers can legitimately assess and dismiss underperforming staff, provided they act fairly. It also shows that multiple discrimination and whistleblowing claims will fail if the evidence points to genuine performance issues. For employees on probation, the message is clear: performance concerns must be addressed, and raising grievances does not create immunity from dismissal.