1. Onboarding and the contract
Gaps at the start are the hardest to repair. They affect validity, the evidence base and the risk of double wages.
- Was the contract signed within one month of the start date, by the employee in person? Was a counterpart delivered, with a receipt kept?
- Does the onboarding form include a written confirmation that there is no unended employment and no outstanding non-compete?
- Were education, licences and CV claims checked, and does the contract say that a false statement is fraud and grounds for dismissal?
- Does the probation period match the term (six months only on a fixed term of three years or more, or an open-ended term)? Has this person had only one probation?
- Are the conditions for passing probation in writing and acknowledged? A dismissal for failing them requires proof that the conditions were stated in advance.
2. Rules and working time
A handbook is usable only if the content is lawful, the process was democratic, and it was published to the workforce. Missing any one of the three usually knocks it out.
- Were rules that affect employees' interests discussed with the workers' congress or the whole workforce, and is that recorded?
- Is there written proof of publication (acknowledgement, training sign-in, system read-record)? A poster or a group email rarely stands alone.
- Are the cases of "serious breach" listed, not left as a general phrase?
- If comprehensive or unfixed hours are used, is there an administrative approval? Without it, overtime pay still accrues on the excess.
- Are attendance records complete? Is overtime approval actually used — unpaid self-arranged overtime needs a rule to stand on.
3. Pay, redeployment and performance
Transfers and pay changes are where disputes cluster. Review usually turns on three points: a genuine operating need, no discriminatory or punitive purpose, and whether pay and conditions have become materially worse.
- Are pay records kept for at least two years, and do bank flows match the payslip?
- Is the job and place of work in the contract too vague, or too tight? The first may be treated as unclear; the second leaves no room to move.
- Is a transfer explained in writing as necessary and reasonable? Was a change in pay structure confirmed separately?
- Were performance standards published in advance? A dismissal for incompetence needs the prior step of training or transfer, and a record of it.
- Are bonus and commission conditions, including "nothing on leaving", in a written document? Amounts already earned in service are usually still due if they are not.
4. A few working points
First, a file is a chain. A transfer with a notice but no reasons, or reasons but no acknowledgement, is a break.
Second, a negotiated exit usually costs less than a unilateral one. Unlawful dismissal attracts twice the statutory severance, and the employee may claim reinstatement. Where the evidence is thin, a settlement with a full-and-final clause is often the steadier path.
Third, rules need a rhythm. A handbook that is never revised drifts from how the place is actually run, and becomes evidence against the employer. A full review every two years is a reasonable pace.
This is a general working list, not a judgment on particular facts. Local practice differs. Handle a live matter against the local standard and the file you actually have.