I got dismissed today, what do you think?

Also, you will have to "talk" with a solicitor to get the payout. They do this to cover their arses.

You may also need to speak to a qualified financial advisor if you're looking to use the tax relief on the lump sum payout

Those days have gone. A relative in a senior role took a case against a previous employer, which got a lot of press coverage.

The employer settled the case when he started dishing the internal dirt. He went on to CEO level in future roles.

This is typical of how large companies, especially american ones do this. They just cut number off the balance sheet. You could be there 2 yrs or 20 yrs no difference. You can be bottom of the ladder or the top of it. Makes no difference either. I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.

Take some time off, a holiday, a project, something you wouldn't normally have the time for, etc then start looking for another job.

I would take it on condition that a written reference is provided

Look be realistic, they let you go, horrible as it is, legal or otherwise, they don’t want your services any longer. Why would you fight to stay somewhere that treats you badly? Take their money, find a new job and move on to a better company. Value your skills and take them somewhere they will be equally valued.

There might be some cases where it has not happened, but surely a prospective employer would google an applicant before hiring them? I know if I was interviewing someone and I found they had taken a case against a previous employer, it would be a hard pass from me.

It's a professional choice, but in a tight labour market, you'd want to be careful about finding reasons to exclude people. If you want people who are going to be a bit of a walkover for their colleagues and your customers, by all means, do your hard pass.

When I was interviewing people I was as much looking for someone I could work with as competence in the job role

If someone said they got let go from a previous company then that's not a red flag by itself, but if they seem very contentious over it then that's a potential red flag

It might mean passing over some otherwise good people, but I've worked with people who were very competent but utter pains to work with and would fight on every issue

Nobody wants a walkover for an employee, but you need to know when to pick your battles

The irony is I was probably one of those folks who got passed over because of their attitude. When I was being made redundant and interviewing for new jobs, I wouldn't stop going on about the whole redundancy and how badly we were being treated in the first couple of interviews

Reckon the interviewers assumed I was a moaner and wasn't worth the hassle

After that I decided to only give the most cursory details about the redundancy action in interviews and I was a lot more successful

Is the WRC not free?

it does not in any way, at all mean publicity. whilst the advice might be sound, this first line is ignorant

in the WRC its is most unlikely that you will know who has been there. most cases it says "an employee Versus xyz" in the interest of the company, they will look for an NDA to protect their own reputations., also, easy to verify, but I don't think WRC results come up on google, have to search it in the WRC website

WRC cases are all recorded on a website. That is what I mean by publicity. An occasional one is reported by the newspapers if it is sufficiently newsworthy. mThey are all public so any prospective employer can check the website. Even the annonymised ones can be easily identified by people i. The time spent working for any employer and the reason for leaving are required by any prospective employer. It is very easy to work out that a WRC case was taken by someone who left an employer at the time of the employment ended.

also, just to add, that the wrc hearing is likely 12 months after the horse has bolted, and candidates would most likely already be in their new role.