Dilemma- Notice Period

Let's start with a Case let-

Virat, appeared for an interview and after qualifying through all the rounds; during the negotiation stage he was asked:

Interviewer: When can you join the company?

Virat: I have to serve a two months’ notice period.

Interviewer: Mr. Virat, we cannot linger this position for two months.

Virat: After a hiatus, ok, Sir I will try to talk to the HR department for early relieving.

Interviewer: We would like you to join in 20 days.

Virat: That would be complicated but I will try to cope as I have some leave balance.

Interviewer: Alright then, here is your offer letter.

Virat: Thank you (he signs the letter).

This is what happens with many of us….isn’t it? Now let’s see another scenario where Virat resigned from this company:

Same Interviewer (HR Person): You have to serve the notice period of three months.

Virat: But Sir, I cannot do that, I have some leave balance which can be adjusted or else I will pay the amount for 2 months and serve one month notice period.

HR Person: That is not possible Virat; the position is crucial and requires a proper handover to the new person who will be taking over.

Virat: Sir, Handing over will not take much time, it will be done in one month; but I have to join the new company in a month’s time.

HR Person: No, Virat, this will not be possible or else we will have to go the legal way.

So, dear friends what do these two scenarios depict? The same person who asked Virat to join in 20 days is not ready to relieve him in one month’s time. Question here is, why do we have such double standards? As an HR professional isn’t it our responsibility to create and design policies in a manner beneficial to both the company and the employee? When you want a person in your company, you show them fear of loss of the opportunity and ask them to negotiate with the notice period, and once you are faced with  a similar situation the entire world goes upside down and you threaten them with legal proceedings.

There are many cases which keeps coming in in the portfolio companies, handled at PlugHR about not serving the notice period, legal proceedings by companies and relieving letter, and the crux of all such posts happen to be the same. Here is an example:

I worked with an Indian IT major, my employment was on contract for first 9 months and later they made me permanent 3 months ago in Jan. I was not very happy with my profile and package and in between got an offer from some other company who wanted me to join in 15 days.

I put the resignation in the tool (online) stating that I have got an offer from some other company who are paying me better and also told them (verbally) that I have some financial issues in family hence need this job anyhow and will not be able to serve 2 months’ notice. I also told them in writing that I am willing to give ‘notice pay’. My manager paid no heed to it and said that he could not relieve me until I served the 2 months notice (nor could he increase my salary or change my role in the team) and I would have to give KT to the replacement. I kept requesting them for 2 weeks (post resignation) but they did not consider my request , hence I left the company (told my reporting manager over the phone) and submitted the laptop (took receipt from the IT dept) and joined the other company.

My new employer knows the entire scenario.

After one week of joining I got a call from HR (of previous co.) stating that they will send me a legal notice as I have not given proper KT and will run an absconding action against me which means that I will not get the relieving letter and experience letter and the full and final settlement will not be done either.

I want to know what can be the implications or consequences of this legal notice , can they send it to me even after I have stated that I am ready to pay the notice pay amount and have also submitted the laptop?

Sometimes I wonder, when will our HR Managers learn to be austerely professional while handling such matters and accept resignation without taking it as rejection. How do we edify the significance of the notice period to both the parties? We all have started taking it for granted. Why such a scurry to hire a person when in need and then when the same person (has become habitual) desires you to relieve him/her early, why bully them with trepidation of going legal etc. Manipulation is not HR’s job but still we all live it out in our day-to-day life.

Practice of notice period, in companies, was introduced to grant a respite to both the employee and the employer, in order to reconcile them in their respective roles, for the employer it is vital as they can hire opposite replacement and proper handling over can be completed. Employee gets the benefit of bidding good bye on a positive note which creates constructive reference for them in future.

Is there any record available somewhere which depicts how many employees leave a company without serving the notice period even after being threatened by the HR department about going the legal way? Also how many employers really go to the extent of filing a legal suit against such employees (apart from sending a legal notice)? I seriously won’t think there will be many unless something of severe nature absolutely demands such an action from the employer.

So, the practice is very normal, then why are we adamant on having a notice period for such a long duration when we cannot make our employees adhere to it, in fact we only entice them to do such things in the first place. The policies are drafted keeping in mind the suitability of both the employer and the employee, with such practices of not serving notice period, who is getting the advantage?

Settle on, consider and then transform policies for the benefit of all!

more at http://www.citeman.com/15693-dilemma-notice-period.html#ixzz2Vnz2t1Ay

Sense and Sensibility: In case of termination

Non performance, disciplinary issues, company in loss, behavioral issues or just ‘want to get rid of someone’…terminating employees has become a trend in the companies, as the patience level goes down, the rate of termination goes high. And sometimes, no matter how afraid we get of  terminating an employee, even when it is an absolute requirement, we pass the buck by saying lets give them a chance…but understanding when and where to give a fair chance is a complicated method, although we all work on our instincts, still it is a matter of someone’s career or may be their bread and butter….Hence why not think before we take such a step, here is a write up to work on our sense and sensibilities to guide Our Gen next to empathize with their employees, where and how.

There was a case I came across few days back, that one of the senior level employees had been accused of sexual harassment by female employees, and still the company did not take any action and just let him go with a warning and counseling, no inquiries initiated, no written explanation…And what will be the position of those female employees now…no one considered that.

Generally with sexual harassment the standard is if you know or have known that the conduct was occurring, you need to take immediate and appropriate corrective action to make it stop. Even termination of the employee can be considered if the proper process is being followed, as mentioned in the law and company policy.

A lot of times we have seen Managers bury their actions as they are scared of legal complications, massive settlements, or claims of wrongful termination and yes, why not if you are not properly prepared and not thinking smartly, you have all the reasons to be scared.

What makes sense??

Company policy on Termination: A clear cut, well defined policy speaks louder than any claim that an employee makes, a Smart HR professional is always proactive in designing the policies and procedures in order to avoid getting in to such law suits or other complications. If there are any amendments, make sure to announce and update, a slight mistake can cause several millions to the company.

The procedure Implementation: No matter how small or big the mistake is, in case of any kind of misconduct, the entire procedure needs to be followed in a proper manner with documentation as and when required. I know of an instance, where one female member was asked to leave on disciplinary grounds as she was caught stealing something, the Manager let her go after a warning (verbal), and then after a few days she accused the same manager of harassing her. Ground realities stood different from what's hypothetically correct, hence procedures, SOPs should be created with utmost viability of implementation.

Maintain consistency: Same misconduct, similar issues and if earlier you bid good bye to one of the employees, then for the next one also you have to do the same. As a general rule, an employer’s response to a particular problem should be consistent with its policies and responses to prior, comparable situations. Bias, opinions and judgments always create an un-proportionate hatred in the organization and then the wrong message follows and it creates an unhealthy grapevine. Hence it becomes empirical to standardize the level of punishments and reprisals especially when the nature of problem is the same.

Do not postpone the decision: Once the enquiry is over, and the process is at the finishing stage, it is advisable to take the decision of termination at the earliest; prolonging it may unnecessary cause trouble and give birth to rumor mongers in the company. Such rumors can play havoc and the situation could go out of hand. The rumor mill then creates many such questions which can easily be avoided if handled at the right stage.

Alacrity in valediction: Do not rush; do not jump to conclusion, just flow with the stride and let the gust settle, once things are clearer and cleaner then decide what is appropriate. Sometimes no matter how much we avoid, and demand a resignation instead of termination, I feel teaching a lesson to some becomes pragmatic. Although there are no guarantees, that the lessons are learnt with such actions, still we can always create an example for the others to not follow the same path of destruction.

Pay Severance if promised: If the word severance is mentioned in any policy and document, pay it up; because taking chances with “the woebegone employees” often results in uncalled legal tensions, when they could be evaded with elegance. What should be done is paying those employees their one or two month salary rather than redundant trips to courts which waste time.

Sensibility makes sense when we create proper measures to handle our most important assets- human resource. They need to be sent off with dignity unless of course it is not at all important. The sensibilities once shown will always be remembered by people deep down and companies will be respected for that.

So, give them a chance if you can, or show them the golden gate from where they entered the mansion of their dreams – their workplace, if they can't respect it they cannot breathe inside it…

Ciao…….

more at http://www.citeman.com/16135-sense-and-sensibility-in-case-of-termination.html#ixzz2VnuSvh2o