She scored below every threshold and still won her dismissal claim
An employer must pay $30,000 after Tribunal Magistrate Joel Tan ruled on 28 July 2026 that a probationer's dismissal lacked just cause.
The decision turned on a familiar scenario: a probationer scored below the employer's own thresholds, yet the employer could not defend the dismissal. The claimant, hired in April 2025 as a regional internal control audit manager on a six-month probation, was told in October that her performance fell short and given two weeks' notice. Her last day was 31 October 2025.
The employer's suitability standards required an overall goal score of at least 80% and an average competency rating of at least 3 out of 5. The claimant reached 71% and 2.4. On paper, she failed. The tribunal found the numbers behind those figures unreliable.
Her reporting supervisor rated her 2, below average, on six of ten competencies. Had any one been a 3, her average would have passed. But the supervisor never explained what each competency required, ran none of the periodic reviews the employer's own probation process mandated, and left the justification column in the evaluation form blank. The reasons offered came only at the hearing. The tribunal described the ratings as, in substance, the supervisor's impressions dressed up as a suitability review.
The performance goals fared no better. On the highest-weighted goal, worth 50%, the supervisor deducted 25 points for missed deadlines and formatting. The...
A SCOTTISH council has hit out at "entirely false" media claims that asylum seekers were being prioritised for housing. Edinburgh Council on Tuesday issued a statement rejecting the "misinformatio...