"Is it not easy to retire from the probationary period? If you think it's inappropriate, let him go. This is the simple cognition of many business managers. However, legal practice has repeatedly proved that the probationary period is not a "resignation if you want" exemption period, and once the operation is improper, it is easy for enterprises to change from actively screening parties to losing parties in arbitration tribunals.

The key to legally terminating the probationary labor contract lies in conclusive facts and clear legal basis, and the core is Article 39, Paragraph 1 of the Labor Contract Law - proving that the employee "does not meet the employment conditions during the probationary period". The labor dispute between a network technology company in Jiangsu Province and employee Song is a typical footnote to this clause, and it also reflects the common legal blind spots of enterprises.

1. Basic facts of the case and the result of the ruling

On May 25, 2021, Song joined the company, and the probationary period was agreed to end on June 24 of the same year. On June 17, the company sent him a "Notice of Dismissal during the Probationary Period" by email, unilaterally terminating the contract on the grounds that he was "incompetent for the job and did not meet the conditions for employment during the probationary period". Song then filed an arbitration demanding payment of compensation for illegal termination. The focus of the dispute is clear: is it legal for the company to terminate the labor contract during the probationary period?

The arbitration commission held that according to Article 39, paragraph 1 of the Labor Contract Law, the employer must bear the corresponding burden of proof when terminating the contract on this ground. In this case, the company neither proved that it had clearly informed Song of the specific employment conditions, nor provided any effective evidence to prove that he did not meet the conditions, and should bear the adverse consequences of failing to provide evidence. In the end, the arbitration commission ruled that the company should pay Song compensation for illegal termination of the labor contract.

2. Management omissions in case refraction

The judgment of this case clearly reflects the common problems of enterprises in the dismissal operation during the probationary period.

First of all, the company only uses vague expressions such as "incompetent for work" as the reason for dismissal, but cannot provide any written, specific and measurable employment conditions. In legal practice, the employment conditions are by no means general, but must be based on the job description, clearly define the qualifications, ability requirements and performance standards - this is the legal prerequisite for the establishment of the probationary period assessment. Without this benchmark, dismissal decisions are difficult to support.

Second, the whole proof process is too subjective. The company claimed that Song "did not meet the conditions", but failed to provide objective evidence chain support: there were no targeted appraisal records, no comparable performance data, confirmed work error documents, or written traces of formal communication and improvement requirements for work performance. In the absence of evidence, dismissal is easy to be recognized as a subjective judgment of management and difficult to be accepted by the judiciary.

In addition, the operation procedure is also hasty. The dismissal notice was issued near the end of the probationary period, reflecting the lack of continuous process tracking and evidence retention mechanisms. A legitimate dismissal decision should be based on a continuous, documented examination during the probationary period, rather than relying on a "surprise denial" before the end of the term. This "end-of-the-line adjudication" approach not only makes it difficult to demonstrate procedural fairness, but also greatly amplifies legal risks.

3. Three key nodes of compliance management

If enterprises want to avoid similar risks, they must incorporate probationary period management into the institutionalized track, and transform the excuse after the fact into prior norms and records in the event.

First, the employment conditions must be clearly informed. When employees are hired, the company should define the employment conditions in writing, such as attachments to the employment notice, special clauses in the labor contract, or independent confirmation documents. The conditions should not be vague descriptions such as "serious work" and "team spirit", but should be quantified into executable and verifiable standards: specific task completion indicators, project result quality requirements, necessary qualification certificates or clear attendance discipline, etc. It is crucial that the employee signs and confirms it to fulfill the legal obligation to inform.

Second, the assessment process must leave traces. The probationary period assessment should be a continuous and traceable process, not a "one-time trial" at the end of the term. Enterprises need to establish a normalized tracking and feedback mechanism, and objectively record employees' work progress, achievements and shortcomings through regular work reviews, written evaluations or management tools. When it is found that the performance may deviate from expectations, timely and formal communication and guidance should be provided - this will not only help employees improve, but the improvement plan generated by the email, minutes or signature will also be the key evidence to prove that the company has fulfilled its inspection responsibilities. Only daily records throughout the probationary period can build a complete chain of evidence to support the determination of "not meeting the employment conditions".

Third, the decision to lift the sentence must be prudent and rigorous. Before forming a final decision, the human resources department should take the lead in reviewing all the evidence accumulated in the previous stage. The termination notice issued to the employee should be directly related to the specific terms of the employment conditions notified in advance, and briefly explain the factual basis for non-conformity. At the same time, the time red line must be strictly followed to ensure that the entire process is completed before the expiration of the probationary period.

Epilogue

The legality of probationary dismissal fundamentally tests the standardization and refinement of enterprise human resource management. It requires enterprises to integrate legal thinking into management actions to ensure the effectiveness of decision-making with standardized procedures. Building a probationary period management system with clear rights and responsibilities, process traces, and legal procedures is not only a necessary move to avoid legal risks, but also an inherent requirement for enterprises to improve their governance level and create a fair workplace environment.