This seems kinda nuts to me. I don't think I would leave a stable position for a probationary position, or accept one if I had more stable offers. "It's ok, we probably won't use it" - uhh, what? No, that's what legal protection is for.
Is it really that common? I'm sure many companies try to hoist this on propsective employees but I'm surprised people accept it.
Can someone else from the UK verify this? Still seems crazy to me.
Edit: reading around it seems like they're standard, but have no legal weight regarding termination? I.e. you're entitled to 30 days pay regardless. This seems very weird on all sides.
Also from UK and can confirm that 30-day probation is pretty standard.
In 20 years, I think I've only seen employees terminated during their probation 2 times. They were non-dev roles, and both times it had transpired that they were totally incapable of the job (one had also lied on their CV).
Damn. That sucks. At least it isn't common, but I'd like some legal protection against it. Guess it's just a matter of minimising uncertainty for your employer & having the leverage to negotiate your contract.
Is it really that common? I'm sure many companies try to hoist this on propsective employees but I'm surprised people accept it.