URGENT** I might be sacked from my first proper job on Monday

I'm somewhat resigned to the fact that they may let me go. Oh well. At least I would have time to do a PhD :P

It's so disappointing for me. I genuinely did what I thought they wanted. I'm quite annoyed at myself. But I'm glad I have the experience nonetheless.

I'm somewhat resigned to the fact that they may let me go. Oh well. At least I would have time to do a PhD :P

It's so disappointing for me. I genuinely did what I thought they wanted. I'm quite annoyed at myself. But I'm glad I have the experience nonetheless.

I'm somewhat resigned to the fact that they may let me go. Oh well. At least I would have time to do a PhD :P

It's so disappointing for me. I genuinely did what I thought they wanted. I'm quite annoyed at myself. But I'm glad I have the experience nonetheless.

I'm panicking and I can't stop shaking. Meeting is in one hour.

I've got my email evidence ready. I'll probably seize up in the meeting though

I'm panicking and I can't stop shaking. Meeting is in one hour.

I've got my email evidence ready. I'll probably seize up in the meeting though

I'm panicking and I can't stop shaking. Meeting is in one hour.

I've got my email evidence ready. I'll probably seize up in the meeting though

What was the result? Informal warning or a performance review?


Posted from TSR Mobile

Don't know yet, but termination seems likely.

If you could quote me on how all this turns out, and how your presentation of the email evidence went I'd be really interested. Just because it'll clearly notify me when you post.

X

Okie dokie, here is how it went.

The allegations were simple. My letter-writing skills were apparently not the best. Even though everyone had amendments before theirs were sent out, mine apparently weren't kosher. I say apparently, because this doesn't corroborate my emails.

I explained I was experimenting with responses, in order to see what my trainers would consider acceptable, or not. I also asked my trainers a lot of question. Apparently these practices are not acceptable. (which makes me wonder about the point of having a trainer but oh well)

I explained I was thinking of employing a different strategy to ensure accuracy in the future.

I was told that I was warned about my performance multiple times... I wasn't. I explained my disability means I cannot filter out instructions when verbally given. This wasn't sufficient.

I presented the email evidence. The relevant parts were highlighted. They accepted them and said they would look over them carefully.

She then said she was considering termination. At this point I sobbed a bit, and reiterated the point about employing a different strategy.

She asked if I had any closing comments. I said again that I was willing to improve or something like that.

I left the room while they considered the emails. This took about 20 minutes.

I was asked back in. I was asked to sit down (always a bad sign).

Yup, you guessed it: termination.

I asked about the references. These will apparently be neutral, so it would be unaffected.

I packed up. I asked my folder full of work be passed on to whoever wants it. I left. I'm now sitting here chilling and hoping my PhD interview on Thursday goes well.

So there you go. In conclusion, if you're autistic, don't go into law. And if you want to go into law, don't be autistic.

So sorry to hear that. Given that we only heard your side of the story there may have been warnings given but not considering the way you would interpret them better. Seeing as you studied law, is there anything in the law that is on your side? Perhaps to sue and get the most money from them?

Maybe not if you don't want to do that. From your side of the story there wasn't enough of a warning and too much appraisal when there clearly wasn't any constructive criticism.

Keep positive. It'll be difficult now as you got the bad news, but time heals a lot of things in my opinion.

Back to my suing point though, I'm pretty sure you have some rights here, especially for them not catering for whichever disability you do have. Worth some looking into, seeing as you're a law student with spare time, you should be unstoppable!

I dunno, man, I'm just tired now. Taking on a legal firm does seem a bit of a challenge

Shame I didn't do employment law...

Okie dokie, here is how it went.

The allegations were simple. My letter-writing skills were apparently not the best. Even though everyone had amendments before theirs were sent out, mine apparently weren't kosher. I say apparently, because this doesn't corroborate my emails.

I explained I was experimenting with responses, in order to see what my trainers would consider acceptable, or not. I also asked my trainers a lot of question. Apparently these practices are not acceptable. (which makes me wonder about the point of having a trainer but oh well)

I explained I was thinking of employing a different strategy to ensure accuracy in the future.

I was told that I was warned about my performance multiple times... I wasn't. I explained my disability means I cannot filter out instructions when verbally given. This wasn't sufficient.

I presented the email evidence. The relevant parts were highlighted. They accepted them and said they would look over them carefully.

She then said she was considering termination. At this point I sobbed a bit, and reiterated the point about employing a different strategy.

She asked if I had any closing comments. I said again that I was willing to improve or something like that. I passed over a huge folder of work I had done, explaining that I had focused mainly on my knowledge, not my technique, as I was led to believe all was well.

I left the room while they considered the emails. This took about 20 minutes.

I was asked back in. I was asked to sit down (always a bad sign).

Yup, you guessed it: termination.

I asked about the references. These will apparently be neutral, so it would be unaffected.

I packed up. I asked my folder full of work be passed on to whoever wants it. I left. I'm now sitting here chilling and hoping my PhD interview on Thursday goes well.

So there you go. In conclusion, if you're autistic, don't go into law. And if you want to go into law, don't be autistic.