Probation Period Extended due to non job role reasons?

shadowfortress

So, at about the five and a half month mark, my employer randomly pulled me into their office for my six month review. My line manager said I was doing a good job and then my employer also said "I was doing well at my job" but felt that "I was not being a good team player" and then said something about my partner which floored me. They then said because of this my probational period was being extended

I was shocked. My employer is rarely around and my line manager has repeatedly told me I am doing a good job. It's evident that my employer didn't bother to discuss this with my line manager. The whole meeting was random and what my employer said seemed a little random as well. No metrics or quantifiable data was used in coming to their conclusion.

The whole thing was unprofessional and made me angry as there was no rationale whatsoever for bringing my partner into the discussion. Any advice?

General_Grant

What is the consequence of completing your probationary period?  Increase in pay?  Access to other benefits?

What was it about your partner that didn't meet with your employer's approval?  For example do they work for a competitor? 

Ask you manager what they would view as being a team player and whether you had done or not done something to give the impression that you were not a team player?

elsien

Unless you are willing to share what they said about your partner, not sure how much help people can be.
As above, it also depends on the significance of passing probation. It doesn’t give you any extra employment protection to pass so unless it comes with a pay rise or other benefits it may not make a huge difference in practical terms. 

I agree, you need more information about what they feel would make you be a good team player. 

Undervalued

shadowfortress said:

So, at about the five and a half month mark, my employer randomly pulled me into their office for my six month review. My line manager said I was doing a good job and then my employer also said "I was doing well at my job" but felt that "I was not being a good team player" and then said something about my partner which floored me. They then said because of this my probational period was being extended

I was shocked. My employer is rarely around and my line manager has repeatedly told me I am doing a good job. It's evident that my employer didn't bother to discuss this with my line manager. The whole meeting was random and what my employer said seemed a little random as well. No metrics or quantifiable data was used in coming to their conclusion.

The whole thing was unprofessional and made me angry as there was no rationale whatsoever for bringing my partner into the discussion. Any advice?

With less that 2 years service you have little employment protection so in practice there is not much you can do about this. You can be dismissed for any reason that does not amount to unlawful discrimination, or indeed no reason at all.

Probation has little legal meaning other than any contractual benefits that may come if / when you are judged to have passed it.

What "something about your parter" was mentioned? Although unless there is a clear racial, religious, gender ect aspect it is unlikely to be helpful.

Jemma01

I'm sorry you're going through this, it must be stressful to feel your job is on the line.

I'd focus more on the team playing issue. It seems someone complained about your attitude with your colleagues. Mind elaborating more? The fact you haven't said anything else to deny or acknowledge says you either know it is true, or you think it isn't but it is of insignificant value, and whichever one it is, you need to take it seriously and work on it. Most of us would absolutely dismiss an employee that's not working well with people. 

Also, if you're working with your partner on the same things, or spending too much time talking to each other, or not being professional around each other (e.g. bringing your arguments to the office), or whatever it might be, many managers and colleagues may have an issue with it. I've never witnessed it be a problem, because most people are professional, but you've also decided to omit that part from your post. 

Your employer doesn't need to be around to ask about you and to hear about you. I've had someone very senior that I didn't even know who it was emailed me out of the blue to tell me he's heard about me. So don't assume they don't know who you are or what you do.

elsien

Jemma01 said:

I'm sorry you're going through this, it must be stressful to feel your job is on the line.

I'd focus more on the team playing issue. It seems someone complained about your attitude with your colleagues. Mind elaborating more? The fact you haven't said anything else to deny or acknowledge says you either know it is true, or you think it isn't but it is of insignificant value, and whichever one it is, you need to take it seriously and work on it. Most of us would absolutely dismiss an employee that's not working well with people. 

Also, if you're working with your partner on the same things, or spending too much time talking to each other, or not being professional around each other (e.g. bringing your arguments to the office), or whatever it might be, many managers and colleagues may have an issue with it. I've never witnessed it be a problem, because most people are professional, but you've also decided to omit that part from your post. 

Your employer doesn't need to be around to ask about you and to hear about you. I've had someone very senior that I didn't even know who it was emailed me out of the blue to tell me he's heard about me. So don't assume they don't know who you are or what you do.

Not sure where in the OP that came from? 

My interpretation is that the OP was referring to their partner outside of work hence the lack of clarity around why this is relevant in the workplace. 

Jemma01

elsien said:

Jemma01 said:

I'm sorry you're going through this, it must be stressful to feel your job is on the line.

I'd focus more on the team playing issue. It seems someone complained about your attitude with your colleagues. Mind elaborating more? The fact you haven't said anything else to deny or acknowledge says you either know it is true, or you think it isn't but it is of insignificant value, and whichever one it is, you need to take it seriously and work on it. Most of us would absolutely dismiss an employee that's not working well with people. 

Also, if you're working with your partner on the same things, or spending too much time talking to each other, or not being professional around each other (e.g. bringing your arguments to the office), or whatever it might be, many managers and colleagues may have an issue with it. I've never witnessed it be a problem, because most people are professional, but you've also decided to omit that part from your post. 

Your employer doesn't need to be around to ask about you and to hear about you. I've had someone very senior that I didn't even know who it was emailed me out of the blue to tell me he's heard about me. So don't assume they don't know who you are or what you do.

Not sure where in the OP that came from? 

My interpretation is that the OP was referring to their partner outside of work hence the lack of clarity around why this is relevant in the workplace. 

OP said in their original post regarding the highlighted bit

shadowfortress said:

 my employer also said "I was doing well at my job" but felt that "I was not being a good team player" 

As for their partner, your interpretation and mine are of no value, because OP wasn't clear what was said about the partner

elsien

It’s a bit of a stretch to go from there to assuming that someone’s complained about their attitude to their colleagues. 

LinLui

Jemma01 said:

..... Most of us would absolutely dismiss an employee that's not working well with people. 

Actually, "most of us" managers:

• Would not wait five and ahalf months to mention something that impacted on job performance
• Would identify issues, explain and quantify, and set out expectations 
• Would want to see improvements to enable an employee to be successful
• Wouldn't leap to conlcusions based on no evidence - the fact that the OP didn't deny it does not mean that they know it is true nor that they think it insignificant; especially since the OP has made it clear that the comment was made out of the blue, unsupported by any evidence, and "random", which actually suggests that they don't understand where this comment has come from.
• And absolutely wouldn't dismiss someone unless there was no other choice.

Just because someone doesn't have employment protections shouldn't mean that managers should dismiss with impunity - that is bad management.

You have just made up a random bunch of "facts" that are nowhere mentioned in the OP and laid into them for being "unprofessional". "Most of us" managers would try to elicit some facts before coming to conclusions. 

Undervalued

LinLui said:

Jemma01 said:

..... Most of us would absolutely dismiss an employee that's not working well with people. 

Actually, "most of us" managers:

• Would not wait five and ahalf months to mention something that impacted on job performance
• Would identify issues, explain and quantify, and set out expectations 
• Would want to see improvements to enable an employee to be successful
• Wouldn't leap to conlcusions based on no evidence - the fact that the OP didn't deny it does not mean that they know it is true nor that they think it insignificant; especially since the OP has made it clear that the comment was made out of the blue, unsupported by any evidence, and "random", which actually suggests that they don't understand where this comment has come from.
• And absolutely wouldn't dismiss someone unless there was no other choice.

Just because someone doesn't have employment protections shouldn't mean that managers should dismiss with impunity - that is bad management.

You have just made up a random bunch of "facts" that are nowhere mentioned in the OP and laid into them for being "unprofessional". "Most of us" managers would try to elicit some facts before coming to conclusions. 

Maybe so.

However all that actually matters his how the OP's manager decides to handle this.

LinLui

Undervalued said:

LinLui said:

Jemma01 said:

..... Most of us would absolutely dismiss an employee that's not working well with people. 

Actually, "most of us" managers:

• Would not wait five and ahalf months to mention something that impacted on job performance
• Would identify issues, explain and quantify, and set out expectations 
• Would want to see improvements to enable an employee to be successful
• Wouldn't leap to conlcusions based on no evidence - the fact that the OP didn't deny it does not mean that they know it is true nor that they think it insignificant; especially since the OP has made it clear that the comment was made out of the blue, unsupported by any evidence, and "random", which actually suggests that they don't understand where this comment has come from.
• And absolutely wouldn't dismiss someone unless there was no other choice.

Just because someone doesn't have employment protections shouldn't mean that managers should dismiss with impunity - that is bad management.

You have just made up a random bunch of "facts" that are nowhere mentioned in the OP and laid into them for being "unprofessional". "Most of us" managers would try to elicit some facts before coming to conclusions. 

Maybe so.

However all that actually matters his how the OP's manager decides to handle this.

True. But the poster to whom I responded assumed things not in evidence and assumed that "most people" would dismiss. I was pointing out the absurdity of their claim.