I was employed as a Senior Engineer , in anticipation of upcoming projects. I was honest in my interview process that I had not worked on units of such size and manner, and I was promised that I would have the necessary training. However, during my tenure, (4 months) there was a lack of available work, both on site and in the workshop. I was only sent on-site twice for a total of 9 days. On both occasions, my role was to conduct fault-finding witch I was successful in completing, and the other was routine maintenance which I was clear I had never done before but was taught by the lead.
Due to the limited workload and the slow access of my security clearance, my probation of three months was extended by another three months, on the basis that I had only been assigned one off-site job. During my one-to-one review, concerns were raised regarding my performance, including an allegation of being "not proactive in looking for work" This was despite my active approach in regularly requesting work from management, offering support to apprentices, and assisting other engineers where possible—despite there not being sufficient work even for them. I challenged this assessment during the meeting. I was told “you can always push a broom around”.
Subsequently, the HR manager reviewed the one-to-one report, identified inconsistencies, and took the initiative to amend it to reflect a more accurate and fair representation of my contributions. This intervention highlighted the value of an effective HR team in ensuring fair treatment within the workplace.
Following this, I was assigned only one additional client visit, where I successfully diagnosed the machine’s fault. However, despite this, I was abruptly dismissed, with the stated reason being that I was "not up to speed." Given that I was only provided with two site visits in five months—both of which I was heavily supported but completely successful—this reasoning appears questionable.
There is strong indication that my dismissal was not based on performance but rather internal preferential treatment. As an ex-Army professional in a company predominantly comprised of ex-Navy personnel, I have been informed that an ex-colleague of the management team required a role, leading to my termination.
Furthermore, it has been brought to my attention that such abrupt dismissals are a recurring practice within the company, where employees who do not align with internal preferences are regularly let go without due notice.
I believe these circumstances warrant further scrutiny, as they raise concerns about fair employment practices within the organisation.
