It is common for managers to ask themselves, ‘how do you tell someone they have not passed probation’? The answer is that you do so clearly, directly, and respectfully, ensuring there is no ambiguity: you explain, for example, that their employment is ending because they have not met the required standards during the probationary period. This is not a warning or a discussion about extension (although that may be an appropriate course of action in certain circumstances) it is a dismissal. The conversation must be structured, supported by documented evidence, and delivered in a way that demonstrates the decision is objective, transparent and free from discrimination. What is said should be consistent with the documented evidence—such as performance targets and review records—and the decision should also be confirmed in writing following the meeting. It is common for organisations to use short service letters in such circumstances. For more information on the topic, read our blog short service dismissal letter – an overview
Communicating that an employee has not passed probation and will be dismissed can be a particularly challenging task for managers or HR professionals. It requires not only sensitivity but also a strong understanding of the applicable policies and organisational requirements. In addition to handling the human impact of the decision, organisations must ensure that their decision-making process can withstand scrutiny—particularly as a former employee may pursue, for example, an Employment Tribunal claim alleging that the dismissal was influenced by discrimination. It is possible for the former employee to lodge such claims regardless of their length of service.
A probationary period is a formal assessment window, during which an employer evaluates whether an individual meets the required standards. Where an employee does not meet those standards, the outcome is that they do not pass probation. In such circumstances, the probationary period is either extended or dismissal occurs. It is important to be explicit so that the individual is fully aware of when not passing probation results in dismissal. Framing it in less direct terms can create ambiguity and may cause the former employee to doubt the reason for dismissal.
Preparation is key. Managers should ensure that all concerns regarding performance or behaviour have been documented throughout the probationary period. This may include records of objectives set, measurable performance targets, feedback provided, any training or support offered, and notes from review meetings. Such material may be important evidence showing that the decision to dismiss was not discriminatory.
A transparent, objective, and fair approach to measuring performance is central to this process. Organisations should have clearly defined criteria for success during probation, communicated to the employee from the outset. The required standards, expectations, and timeframes for achieving them should be clear at the beginning of employment. Employees should understand not only what is expected of them, but also how and when their performance will be assessed. Without this clarity, it becomes significantly more difficult to show that the dismissal was for the reason provided.
Alongside clear expectations, it is equally important that appropriate support is made available to help the individual meet those standards. This may include training, mentoring, regular feedback sessions, or access to resources necessary to perform the role effectively. Where performance concerns arise, managers should take proactive steps to support improvement, documenting the support provided and the employee’s response. This is particularly important when the employee has a disability and may need reasonable adjustments to perform their role effectively. Providing such support indicates that the organisation has acted reasonably by giving the individual every opportunity to succeed. Furthermore, in properly considering reasonable adjustments the organisation can show that any decision making relating to those adjustments was reasonable.
Consistency is equally important. Employees in similar roles should be assessed against the same standards, and managers should apply those standards uniformly. Inconsistent application of criteria can create the perception of unfairness or unfavourable treatment. In the context of potential discrimination claims, inconsistency can undermine an organisation’s position that dismissal was due to underperformance, whereas a structured probation review framework provides clarity.
Before the meeting in which the decision is communicated, it is important to ensure that the rationale for dismissal is clear, well-documented, and aligned with the organisation’s policies. Managers should be able to articulate the reasons for the decision succinctly, referencing specific examples and prior discussions. Importantly, what is communicated verbally must align with the documented evidence, including material such as performance targets, review outcomes, and any previous feedback. Any inconsistency between what is said and what is recorded may undermine the credibility of the decision and prompt the former employee to pursue the matter further.
As referred to earlier, when communicating the conclusion that the person has not passed their probation and will be dismissed, it may well be helpful to provide a concise explanation of the reasons for the decision. These reasons should directly reference the documented performance criteria, the expectations set at the outset, and prior feedback discussions. For example, it might be explained that specific performance targets were not achieved within the agreed timeframe despite support and review, or that required competencies were not demonstrated consistently.
After the meeting, the decision should be formally confirmed in writing. This written confirmation should clearly state that the employee has not passed their probationary period and that their employment is being terminated. It should summarise the reasons for the decision, ensuring they are consistent with what was discussed in the meeting and with the documented evidence, and set out the practical details of termination, including notice, final pay, and any other relevant arrangements. This written record is essential both for transparency and for evidencing the organisation’s decision-making process.
A robust probation management process should be implemented. This process includes clear onboarding, defined expectations, regular feedback, documented support, and structured reviews. Where these elements are in place, the outcome of a failed probation is more likely to be perceived, by all concerned, as fair and justified. Conversely, a lack of structure can lead to confusion, dissatisfaction, and increased risk of dispute.
Managers themselves should be supported and trained in handling probationary reviews and dismissals. Delivering such messages requires not only interpersonal skills but also an understanding of legal and organisational considerations. Ensuring that managers are equipped with this knowledge increases consistency and compliance.
It is also valuable to reflect on whether there are systemic improvements that can be made. For example, if multiple employees fail probation within a particular team or role, this may indicate issues with recruitment processes, role clarity, or training provision. Addressing these factors can improve outcomes and reduce the likelihood of future dismissals.
The tone of the conversation should balance firmness with respect. The individual should leave with a clear understanding of the outcome and the reasons behind it, without feeling that the process was arbitrary or unfair.
Plotkin & Chandler works exclusively in the areas of HR and employment law and supports both employers and employees.
If you are an employer, and you are contemplating a dismissal and would like guidance on how best to proceed, you would like training on a particular topic such as how to effectively manage performance, or how to have difficult conversations, or you would like assistance to defend an Employment Tribunal claim, we can help.
If you are a former employee who has been dismissed, and you believe the decision was unfair, and wish to discuss bringing an Employment Tribunal claim because, for example, you believe the dismissal was discriminatory, we can help.
We would be delighted to hear from you on 020 3923 8616 or via email on info@plotkinandchandler.com
