Dear All,
I have a very serious query in my mind.... Is employee bond valid as per the labour laws in India? If yes could you please share few information regarding the same and its applicability. Thank you.
Regards
Unni
From India, Pune
I have a very serious query in my mind.... Is employee bond valid as per the labour laws in India? If yes could you please share few information regarding the same and its applicability. Thank you.
Regards
Unni
From India, Pune
Dear Unni,
According to the Law, if an employer is investing in employee then bond is eligible with the condition that before the training/investment the employee is having less than one 1 year experience.
regards,
Ruchi
From India, Chandigarh
According to the Law, if an employer is investing in employee then bond is eligible with the condition that before the training/investment the employee is having less than one 1 year experience.
regards,
Ruchi
From India, Chandigarh
Hi,
Kindly note that no employer can bond any employee by any bond,the legal system of India clearly abolished bonded labor system long back,and under no circumstance no person can bound other by any contract to waive of his legal rights guaranteed under the constitution of India,Article 19 guarantees the right to work and this right neither can be waived of by the employee on his own will nor the employer can force any contract in contradiction to above mentioned article
yes the employer can bond his employee for payment of any expenses incurred by the employer as part of training provided to employee,but this training should be provided to an employee by the employer for any other purpose than increasing his productivity in the organisation as an employee
yes the employer can stop his employees from working in its competitors organization for a certain period of time
From India, Mumbai
Kindly note that no employer can bond any employee by any bond,the legal system of India clearly abolished bonded labor system long back,and under no circumstance no person can bound other by any contract to waive of his legal rights guaranteed under the constitution of India,Article 19 guarantees the right to work and this right neither can be waived of by the employee on his own will nor the employer can force any contract in contradiction to above mentioned article
yes the employer can bond his employee for payment of any expenses incurred by the employer as part of training provided to employee,but this training should be provided to an employee by the employer for any other purpose than increasing his productivity in the organisation as an employee
yes the employer can stop his employees from working in its competitors organization for a certain period of time
From India, Mumbai
dear unni,
As far as entering into service contract there has to be a legal framework wherein both the parties agree to conditions mentioned in the service contract. The employer can enter into contract with the employee on certain conditions:
1) That the service is for specific period and the employer has not bounded the employee for specific period of his own. The service of the employee will conme to an end after completion of the period.
2) both the parties have the right to terminiate the contract after giving notice of specific period.
3) Any service contract cannot be a part of regular employement.
4) The employer has not put any kind of restriction on the movement of the employee taking into consideration that after specific period or notice the employee has the right to work in any organisation.
5) As per the bonded labour act no employer can restrict the freedom of work in any condition but service contract for a specific period is not a bonded labour condition as the employee enters into contract with the employer at free will.
suresh
From India, Jaipur
As far as entering into service contract there has to be a legal framework wherein both the parties agree to conditions mentioned in the service contract. The employer can enter into contract with the employee on certain conditions:
1) That the service is for specific period and the employer has not bounded the employee for specific period of his own. The service of the employee will conme to an end after completion of the period.
2) both the parties have the right to terminiate the contract after giving notice of specific period.
3) Any service contract cannot be a part of regular employement.
4) The employer has not put any kind of restriction on the movement of the employee taking into consideration that after specific period or notice the employee has the right to work in any organisation.
5) As per the bonded labour act no employer can restrict the freedom of work in any condition but service contract for a specific period is not a bonded labour condition as the employee enters into contract with the employer at free will.
suresh
From India, Jaipur
Actually, I am a fresher and have recently joined a bank. Before joining, they made me sign a bond for 4 years, and if I break the bond, I would have to pay Rs 100,000. They have kept all my original certificates.
In this regard, I want to know if such a bond is valid and if there is any duration for its validity. Also, they have provided me training. Basically, I want to know if I serve the bank for, say, 2 years, can they recover the cost of training, so can a bond of 4 years be valid? Please tell.
From India, Lucknow
In this regard, I want to know if such a bond is valid and if there is any duration for its validity. Also, they have provided me training. Basically, I want to know if I serve the bank for, say, 2 years, can they recover the cost of training, so can a bond of 4 years be valid? Please tell.
From India, Lucknow
Your bond is not valid. They have provided you with training related to the bank's work processes, which they would typically do when hiring a fresher. If you are content in your current company, why are you worried about breaking the bond? Spend two more years learning as much as you can from the bank. If you encounter any problems, consider consulting a legal practitioner with your appointment and ask for the right course of action. All the best.
Regards,
Asha
Regards,
Asha
If they really provided training and spent money on your training, yes you are liable to pay or they may take legal action
From India, Pune
From India, Pune
Hi,
I have signed the bond for 2 years. The clause states that if I resign before 2 years, I am supposed to pay 50,000 to the company. I joined this company as a fresher, and now it's been 1.9 years since I started working here. I am currently looking for a good opportunity.
Can anybody suggest if I break the bond, do I have to pay the amount or not?
Thanks in advance.
From India, Mumbai
I have signed the bond for 2 years. The clause states that if I resign before 2 years, I am supposed to pay 50,000 to the company. I joined this company as a fresher, and now it's been 1.9 years since I started working here. I am currently looking for a good opportunity.
Can anybody suggest if I break the bond, do I have to pay the amount or not?
Thanks in advance.
From India, Mumbai
Hi,
I do agree with the experts here that negative covenants like restrictions after leaving a job and non-compete clauses in employment bonds are illegal and have no legal standing. But the question is, how to resolve the dispute?
In my case, I left the job by mutual agreement (with written proof) and received full and final settlement. After 8 months of leaving, I started a similar job, and a Legal Notice was served to me, stating that I was absconding without notice and had breached the non-compete clause. The ex-employer invoked the SOLE ARBITRATOR Clause, which will likely be biased.
Please note that the ex-employer didn't spend a penny on my training. In fact, I trained their team for analysis. I was hired as an expert to enhance their product offering and, in fact, helped them generate profits. Later, we both agreed to close down the unit due to insufficient profits as estimated.
Now, they consider me a future threat and have initiated arbitration proceedings against me, demanding 5 years of salary (even though the bond's validity was 5 years, we agreed to end the relationship after 9 months).
Since arbitration is one-sided and likely biased, what options do I have? I believe I stand clean in a court of law.
Please help/suggest!
Thanks,
RshOne
From India, Delhi
I do agree with the experts here that negative covenants like restrictions after leaving a job and non-compete clauses in employment bonds are illegal and have no legal standing. But the question is, how to resolve the dispute?
In my case, I left the job by mutual agreement (with written proof) and received full and final settlement. After 8 months of leaving, I started a similar job, and a Legal Notice was served to me, stating that I was absconding without notice and had breached the non-compete clause. The ex-employer invoked the SOLE ARBITRATOR Clause, which will likely be biased.
Please note that the ex-employer didn't spend a penny on my training. In fact, I trained their team for analysis. I was hired as an expert to enhance their product offering and, in fact, helped them generate profits. Later, we both agreed to close down the unit due to insufficient profits as estimated.
Now, they consider me a future threat and have initiated arbitration proceedings against me, demanding 5 years of salary (even though the bond's validity was 5 years, we agreed to end the relationship after 9 months).
Since arbitration is one-sided and likely biased, what options do I have? I believe I stand clean in a court of law.
Please help/suggest!
Thanks,
RshOne
From India, Delhi
Hi,
I need your help to clarify the clauses in a training agreement (in the Sri Lankan context). I have been asked to sign a six-month training agreement for the post of trainee manager that says, "The trainee should pay this amount (equivalent to the payment for the trainee for six months) if the trainee terminates the agreement. The trainer has the sole authority to assign the trainee to any workplace, prescribe work hours and leave, and will instruct the trainee within the period. The trainee is entitled to annual, casual leave, and superannuation benefits according to the Shop & Office Act 1977 of Sri Lanka.
The trainee should work for 6 years within the company if he/she has been absorbed into the permanent cadre, and this agreement doesn't assure an opportunity after the successful completion of the program. It doesn't include a training schedule or evaluation criteria. Confusing? Please help.
From Sri Lanka, Colombo
I need your help to clarify the clauses in a training agreement (in the Sri Lankan context). I have been asked to sign a six-month training agreement for the post of trainee manager that says, "The trainee should pay this amount (equivalent to the payment for the trainee for six months) if the trainee terminates the agreement. The trainer has the sole authority to assign the trainee to any workplace, prescribe work hours and leave, and will instruct the trainee within the period. The trainee is entitled to annual, casual leave, and superannuation benefits according to the Shop & Office Act 1977 of Sri Lanka.
The trainee should work for 6 years within the company if he/she has been absorbed into the permanent cadre, and this agreement doesn't assure an opportunity after the successful completion of the program. It doesn't include a training schedule or evaluation criteria. Confusing? Please help.
From Sri Lanka, Colombo
Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.