[FairWorld]

I was just fired from a job of ten months for which I had an year-long employment agreement. I was told that the reason for my firing was that I had not made suitable improvement after a negative performance review (in May). At the time of the review, I got a 2.7 where average was a 3 and was told that they expected some improvement. There were also extenuating circumstances to the negative review as I was in school when they hired me and was not able to put in the extra work that would normally be expected. They had agreed to this arrangement upon my hiring and that they would show understanding for my time constraints until I graduated (also in May). I have always made an effort to inform everyone that I work with of any time that I would not be able to work because of school.

I was told by management repeatedly that I would know if things were ever going badly because there would be multiple meetings with managers and partners about my situation before I would be terminated. I've heard nothing since May about this - no meetings, no advice, no nothing - and today I was terminated without warning. My employment agreement says that I can be terminated for a negative performance review, but I was told that I was terminated because of lack of improvement, not because of the performance review. (Also, at the time of the review, they showed understanding for my time/school situation - it wasn't anything that gave me any worries about my job whatsoever.) Can I be terminated for lack of improvement if management never told me of any problems? I believe that I have a verbal agreement with them (if I do not perform as they want, they will tell me about it rather than simply terminate me). They were also required by the contract to give me written notice of termination, which they never did. I'm wondering if this is worth showing to a lawyer. I live in Texas, if that matters. I need a straight answer - don't be afraid to hurt my feelings or tell me I'm wrong.

[JudyKayTee]

They did tell you - in May - that you needed to improve your performance. Was any of the "I'm in school and so... discussion put in writing? Your employment contract is contained legally within the four edges of the paper it's written on. There are no oral "asides."

If performance is the question it might come down to notification. However, you appear to have lost two months' wages. An Attorney will probably cost you more than that.

Can you prove you DID improve? Then the question will be whether you improved to meet their standards.

They used slippery words (in a nutshell) and I don't think it's worth your time, effort, money.

[ScottGem]

Your contract says that it can be terminated for a negative review. Despite the exact wording that it was for failure to improve, the root cause is the negative review. Therefore there is no wrongful termination.

[Fr_Chuck]

I agree, I see no wrongful termination, you were warned, and this is basically a follow up that your performance is still bad, They expected to see an improvement. So why was there not an improvement, after you were warned

[FairWorld]

Thanks guys. I was just wondering. Looks like it's not really worth it to pursue. Doesn't change my feelings about being lied to. The "negative review" wasn't really because of my performance, but because other staff members resented the time I was spending elsewhere while in school during peak business times, and they decided on my review ratings. There was basically a disconnect between what my immediate supervisors wanted and what I was promised by their bosses who hired me. Pretty sure I just got railroaded. I think that by the time I was out of school, the staff were already mad at me, decided I was a slacker, and told that to the higher-ups. It's hard to change perceptions.

My performance has, however, been on par since graduation to the best of my knowledge. I don't shirk responsibility and have done my absolute best to make up for the work I missed due to my heavy course load. Can't really prove it though. Never been fired before and have always had a reputation as an excellent, hard working employee, so this stings a lot. Oh well - moot point. At least I've gotten a bit of a lesson in office politics out of this. Thanks again for the advice.