...citing performance or budgetary concerns... In the UK, where I ran a business and employed people, you need a small mountain of paperwork, collected over a

...citing performance or budgetary concerns... In the UK, where I ran a business and employed people, you need a small mountain of paperwork, collected over a fair period of time, to show that you tried in good faith to remedy the situation with the employee (in case of performance). Budgetary concerns also carry a heavy burden of proof. It really is a difficult and time-consuming path. Most medium and large companies choose to bypass the whole thing and offer a "compromise agreement", essentially "we give you x months pay right now if you sign this agreement where we mutually agree not to sue, or talk bad against eachother, and you GTFO right now". There is a significant risk of something called "constructive dismissal" meaning you made it unreasonably hard for someone to be effective in their workplace, that is decided by an employment tribunal. As an employer, the system is undoubtedly a burden, but as a human, I always found I could live with it. I had one instance where it was open-and-shut grounds for instant dismissal, and I still had to spend 4 months going through the process to ensure I was fully covered and not liable to some tribunal action. That sucked, but in the end there are many large firms that will fuck over employees without a second thought (USA style), and employees need protection from that.