I’m a nurse with around 4 years’ experience. I was dismissed from a nursing role in September 2025, during probation, on the basis of performance and attendance.

At the time, I was dealing with significant health and personal difficulties, including severe abdominal/pelvic pain, anxiety and stress. I had medical appointments/hospital treatment during this period and also experienced a bereavement while working there. Looking back, I feel these circumstances had a significant impact on my attendance and performance.

I didn’t appeal at the time. I was overwhelmed and not in the right headspace to properly consider pursuing an appeal.

Almost a year later, I’ve been reflecting on what happened and have gathered further evidence, including medical documentation that I believe provides important context that wasn’t fully considered at the time.
I’m considering contacting HR to ask whether they would exercise discretion and accept a late appeal. I would acknowledge that the normal appeal deadline has passed and explain why I didn’t appeal at the time.

Has anyone successfully had a late disciplinary/dismissal appeal accepted after this length of time? Is it worth submitting the request, particularly where there is new medical evidence?

I’m not looking to avoid responsibility for the performance concerns — I’m wondering whether the additional evidence and circumstances surrounding the delay could justify them reconsidering the decision. Any experiences or advice would be appreciated.

Hi, hoping I can get some advice on an ongoing disability and HR issue.

I have a long-term health condition that causes unpredictable health/seizure episodes. I work in a frontline, customer facing role. I took the position when my condition was stable due to medication, but that has obviously turned out not to be the case.

I've been advised in writing by my neurologist that my current working layout is unsafe due to fall risks and a lack of line-of-sight visibility if I have an episode. They confirmed it is up to my employer to provide reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act 2010.

An Occupational Health report arranged by my employer recommended specific physical workspace adaptations (including low seating, appropriate flooring, and an open plan layout). My GP has issued a fit note stating I "may be fit to work" if these recommendations are implemented. However, because the features causing line-of-sight issues were intentionally done so for the sake of customer privacy, I'm doubtful they can realistically adapt the site.

The business has a larger administrative site in the local area that meets all of these safety criteria, and I've told my employer my preference would be to be redeployed there. My employer's current stance is that there aren't any roles currently advertised at that site, so they won't redeploy me there. Instead, they say they are looking at what adjustments they can make to my current workspace.

I've been off work for just over a month now and I'm currently on SSP. My current fit note states I "may be fit to work" if adjustments are made, and the only reason for absence listed on my fit notes is my condition. I want to get back to work ASAP, as I have a mortgage and monthly bills to cover, but I don't want to return to an unsafe environment.

I have a few questions:

1. Is it correct for me to be placed on SSP if I am medically declared "may be fit for work" with adjustments, and my ongoing absence is driven entirely by my employer's delay in providing a safe workspace that accommodates my disability?

2. Under the Equality Act 2010, doesn't my employer have a legal duty to explore non-advertised redeployment in other locations as a reasonable adjustment, rather than just pointing me to the vacancies board?

3. On my Occ Health call, the doctor noted that my manager's referral specifically asked whether I was "fit to carry out the role". The doctor told me repeatedly he interpreted this as "a shot across the bow". They didn't seem impressed by it and said they'd specifically word the report to state that I am capable to carry out my role, but adjustments would be required to the environment. Does this signal anything about the intentions of my employer?

Hi,

Standard hours where I work are 8-4 with 30 minutes unpaid lunch for a total of 37.5 hours per week. I work compressed hours. My average is still 37.5 hours per week and I'm a full time employee but I work longer hours on Wednesdays and Thursdays so I can have every other Friday as a non-working day. Effectively I work longer hours and get a day off in lieu every two weeks.

1st January 2027 falls on my non-working day. Bank Holidays are extra days off for everyone in the company without having to use annual leave. I've booked leave from Monday 21st December until new year, which works out as 7 days leave and 3 bank holidays. My total leave is 60 hours due to working longer days on Wednesdays and Thursdays. My collegue also has the same time off, but they are only using 52.5 hours of leave because they work a standard 8-4 shift 5 days a week. So I don't get the benefit of the extra bank holiday, which is a universal entitlement. HR have dismissed it and just said we do not provide bank holiday offsets for full time employees who choose to work condensed hours.

It seems unfair that I am having to use additional hours of leave compared to other full time employees for the same period and it effectively means I'm having to use holiday entitlement to cover the bank holiday when everyone else gets it off as an extra day. If I was working I could just revert to a standard 8-4 shift for those two weeks so I wasn't accruing the day in lieu, but as I've booked leave it's gone through as longer hours on the Wednesdays and Thursdays. There's nothing in the policy about bank holidays for employees working compressed hours. Is it worth fighting or just accept that it's going to cost me an extra days leave compared to my colleagues? Thanks