Our client was a UK-based technology startup employing a junior, short-serving team member during a period of early-stage growth.
The client identified performance concerns with a junior employee during their probationary period, a situation that would typically allow for a relatively swift termination. However, before formal action was taken, the employee disclosed both a pregnancy and an existing mental health condition. Shortly after a performance improvement plan was introduced, the employee was signed off with work-related stress and alleged that the performance concerns were linked to their protected characteristics. The situation became more complex when a trade union representative became involved. The client needed to manage a contentious and sensitive process, balancing legal risk, procedural fairness, and a genuine commitment to avoiding any disadvantage to the employee.
We advised a cautious and structured approach from the outset, recommending that the client follow a full and fair performance improvement process despite the employee’s short service. We worked closely with the client at every stage, providing clear guidance on process, documentation, and communication, and ensuring that reasonable adjustments and appropriate support were considered in light of the employee’s pregnancy and mental health condition. We discussed alternative options, including an early settlement or swift dismissal, but advised against these due to the risk that they could appear to validate discrimination allegations or create disproportionate cost exposure. Our advice was practical, commercially grounded, and partner-led, enabling the client to proceed confidently while maintaining a clear audit trail and protecting the integrity of the process.
With careful guidance, the client was able to complete the performance management process fairly and consistently. The employee’s performance remained unsatisfactory, and the employment was ultimately terminated without the need to pay additional compensation. The approach adopted ensured that reasonable adjustments had been made and that the employee was not disadvantaged due to pregnancy or mental health. The dismissal was managed in a way that prevented any discrimination claim from having merit and protected the client from further legal exposure.
Jamie Webster, who was supported by Anthony Purvis on this transaction, commented: “The presence of protected characteristics such as pregnancy or disability can make managing employee performance far more fraught for employers, particularly where the employee is short-serving. I was pleased to steer our client through this difficult situation in a way that protected the business while ensuring the employee was treated fairly.”
Employment & HR Law