Jack and Max are walking from a religious service. Jack wonders whether it would be all right to smoke while praying.
Max replies, "Why don't you ask the Priest?"
So Jack goes up to the Priest and asks, "Father, may I smoke while I pray?"
The Priest replies, "No, my son, you may not. That's utter disrespect to our religion."
Jack goes back to his friend and tells him what the good Priest told him.
Max says,
From Saudi Arabia
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
13Max replies, "Why don't you ask the Priest?"
So Jack goes up to the Priest and asks, "Father, may I smoke while I pray?"
The Priest replies, "No, my son, you may not. That's utter disrespect to our religion."
Jack goes back to his friend and tells him what the good Priest told him.
Max says,
From Saudi Arabia
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hey Sawant,
We can speak tons on emotions and stuff towards our employees, but when it comes to the organization, only a set of rules and policies are considered. No organization would permit an employee who is still in probation to take 45 days of leave, and that too with no guarantee of joining back. Management only knows about the profit you make from an employee, and at the end of the day, we are all accountable for every penny we shell out. We can amend rules but not to the extent of someone pointing out favors for a particular employee... Think Practical.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
We can speak tons on emotions and stuff towards our employees, but when it comes to the organization, only a set of rules and policies are considered. No organization would permit an employee who is still in probation to take 45 days of leave, and that too with no guarantee of joining back. Management only knows about the profit you make from an employee, and at the end of the day, we are all accountable for every penny we shell out. We can amend rules but not to the extent of someone pointing out favors for a particular employee... Think Practical.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Pratime,
Let me clear one misunderstanding that you are saving employers money or doing big favour to your job is not true. Because no monetary loss to employer is intended in applying leave for marriage because employer never pay more than due leave.
The issue is intention of employee whethre to cotinue or leave organization after marriage.
Lest have another angle to your view:
Everyone quotes stereo type legal and human relation angles although its known fact to every one of us but that doesn’t makes sense. All HR or P&A do same things repeatedly taking shelter of rules and regulations.
But this is not out of box thinking we need to analyses what harm employee can cause to employer?
In this case there is no harm, because HR is not going to pay more than due leave accumulated and employee will be on unpaid leave for remaining period.
If we believe in retention is best strategy we may allow employees to take 45 days leave without pay nothing harms both the parties. And even if employee left the organization heaven will not fall.
Because, even if you reject leave he/she if don’t want to continue will never comeback then what option you have except search another replacement after 45 days instead of this better take preventive measure.
If Employee requesting for 45 days for marriage.
Marriage can be confirmed from the invitation cards to establish guaniness of leave.
Once it is establish employee marrying then he/she will obviously apply for leave. I do agree that 45 days leave is too long but no employee is indispensable and no rocket science is being applied on any jobs which no one else other than him or her cannot do.
This will provide an opportunity to new comer for on the job training and if incase employee does not turn back after marriage for possible replacement without affecting work.
Prevention is better than cure……………….
Regards
Sawant
From Saudi Arabia
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Let me clear one misunderstanding that you are saving employers money or doing big favour to your job is not true. Because no monetary loss to employer is intended in applying leave for marriage because employer never pay more than due leave.
The issue is intention of employee whethre to cotinue or leave organization after marriage.
Lest have another angle to your view:
Everyone quotes stereo type legal and human relation angles although its known fact to every one of us but that doesn’t makes sense. All HR or P&A do same things repeatedly taking shelter of rules and regulations.
But this is not out of box thinking we need to analyses what harm employee can cause to employer?
In this case there is no harm, because HR is not going to pay more than due leave accumulated and employee will be on unpaid leave for remaining period.
If we believe in retention is best strategy we may allow employees to take 45 days leave without pay nothing harms both the parties. And even if employee left the organization heaven will not fall.
Because, even if you reject leave he/she if don’t want to continue will never comeback then what option you have except search another replacement after 45 days instead of this better take preventive measure.
If Employee requesting for 45 days for marriage.
Marriage can be confirmed from the invitation cards to establish guaniness of leave.
Once it is establish employee marrying then he/she will obviously apply for leave. I do agree that 45 days leave is too long but no employee is indispensable and no rocket science is being applied on any jobs which no one else other than him or her cannot do.
This will provide an opportunity to new comer for on the job training and if incase employee does not turn back after marriage for possible replacement without affecting work.
Prevention is better than cure……………….
Regards
Sawant
From Saudi Arabia
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Pratima,
Let me clear one misunderstanding that you are saving employers money or doing big favour to your job is not true. Because no monetary loss to employer is intended in applying leave for marriage because employer never pay more than due leave.
The issue is intention of employee whethre to cotinue or leave organization after marriage.
Lest have another angle to your view:
Everyone quotes stereo type legal and human relation angles although its known fact to every one of us but that doesn’t makes sense. All HR or P&A do same things repeatedly taking shelter of rules and regulations.
But this is not out of box thinking we need to analyses what harm employee can cause to employer?
In this case there is no harm, because HR is not going to pay more than due leave accumulated and employee will be on unpaid leave for remaining period.
If we believe in retention is best strategy we may allow employees to take 45 days leave without pay nothing harms both the parties. And even if employee left the organization heaven will not fall.
Because, even if you reject leave he/she if don’t want to continue will never comeback then what option you have except search another replacement after 45 days instead of this better take preventive measure.
If Employee requesting for 45 days for marriage.
Marriage can be confirmed from the invitation cards to establish guaniness of leave.
Once it is establish employee marrying then he/she will obviously apply for leave. I do agree that 45 days leave is too long but no employee is indispensable and no rocket science is being applied on any jobs which no one else other than him or her cannot do.
This will provide an opportunity to new comer for on the job training and if incase employee does not turn back after marriage for possible replacement without affecting work.
Prevention is better than cure……………….
Regards
Sawant
From Saudi Arabia
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Let me clear one misunderstanding that you are saving employers money or doing big favour to your job is not true. Because no monetary loss to employer is intended in applying leave for marriage because employer never pay more than due leave.
The issue is intention of employee whethre to cotinue or leave organization after marriage.
Lest have another angle to your view:
Everyone quotes stereo type legal and human relation angles although its known fact to every one of us but that doesn’t makes sense. All HR or P&A do same things repeatedly taking shelter of rules and regulations.
But this is not out of box thinking we need to analyses what harm employee can cause to employer?
In this case there is no harm, because HR is not going to pay more than due leave accumulated and employee will be on unpaid leave for remaining period.
If we believe in retention is best strategy we may allow employees to take 45 days leave without pay nothing harms both the parties. And even if employee left the organization heaven will not fall.
Because, even if you reject leave he/she if don’t want to continue will never comeback then what option you have except search another replacement after 45 days instead of this better take preventive measure.
If Employee requesting for 45 days for marriage.
Marriage can be confirmed from the invitation cards to establish guaniness of leave.
Once it is establish employee marrying then he/she will obviously apply for leave. I do agree that 45 days leave is too long but no employee is indispensable and no rocket science is being applied on any jobs which no one else other than him or her cannot do.
This will provide an opportunity to new comer for on the job training and if incase employee does not turn back after marriage for possible replacement without affecting work.
Prevention is better than cure……………….
Regards
Sawant
From Saudi Arabia
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Sawant,
If we sanction 45 days of leave for an employee, who will do her work in her absence? I can sanction her 45 days of leave as an HR, but when I put myself in as a Reporting Manager, then obviously my answer would be NO. We recruit people and allot them their KRAs not for them to go on leave for 45 days. If a department can manage the workload for 45 days in her absence, then I strongly feel she is not required to come back at all.
Hey, don't think that I am being rude. It's just that rules are rules. When we start bending the rules for one, then that would become a practice. Tomorrow another employee would follow her footsteps. If I say no to them, then we are unnecessarily giving way to politics and agitation.
In case of emergencies, of course, they can go on LOP, but not on pleasure trips. I strongly disagree. Of course, the same applies to me too.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If we sanction 45 days of leave for an employee, who will do her work in her absence? I can sanction her 45 days of leave as an HR, but when I put myself in as a Reporting Manager, then obviously my answer would be NO. We recruit people and allot them their KRAs not for them to go on leave for 45 days. If a department can manage the workload for 45 days in her absence, then I strongly feel she is not required to come back at all.
Hey, don't think that I am being rude. It's just that rules are rules. When we start bending the rules for one, then that would become a practice. Tomorrow another employee would follow her footsteps. If I say no to them, then we are unnecessarily giving way to politics and agitation.
In case of emergencies, of course, they can go on LOP, but not on pleasure trips. I strongly disagree. Of course, the same applies to me too.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
So DON'T THINK INHUMAN, I DOUBT YOU'RE AN HR PERSON. Suppose an employee meets with an accident and needs to take rest for two months, what will you do? Go to the hospital and give them a termination letter? Will you manage without them for two months? The same goes for marriage. If you think of marriage as a pleasure trip, that's your thinking, but not everyone sees it that way. People like you don't know what to say, just unfit as humans.
Though I may sound harsh, I pity the employees of your organization. They must be really being tortured by you.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Though I may sound harsh, I pity the employees of your organization. They must be really being tortured by you.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Ravi,
So in your organization, do you approve 45 days as marriage leave for every employee? It's nice to discuss approval in forums, but in reality, I am sure you will not follow through with what you have mentioned. That is practically not possible. If you did follow through, you would always be answerable to the higher officials and it would have a negative impact on other employees.
If you believe you are too emotional towards your employees, then you are not suited to be in HR when you can't balance both your policies and employees. I specifically mentioned in my previous message that emergencies are always exceptional. I also know how to speak rudely about you, but I know my limits in how to communicate with others. You should also be mindful of your words. I see no reason to argue with you, insult you, or find faults in my profession. I truly feel sorry for you because you can't control your words. I wonder...?
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
So in your organization, do you approve 45 days as marriage leave for every employee? It's nice to discuss approval in forums, but in reality, I am sure you will not follow through with what you have mentioned. That is practically not possible. If you did follow through, you would always be answerable to the higher officials and it would have a negative impact on other employees.
If you believe you are too emotional towards your employees, then you are not suited to be in HR when you can't balance both your policies and employees. I specifically mentioned in my previous message that emergencies are always exceptional. I also know how to speak rudely about you, but I know my limits in how to communicate with others. You should also be mindful of your words. I see no reason to argue with you, insult you, or find faults in my profession. I truly feel sorry for you because you can't control your words. I wonder...?
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I have heard people going on 1-month leave for marriage, which is justifiable, but 45 days is too much. Try to convince her that her presence also matters in the office for work, and she should try to reduce it to 1 month maximum. Remember that you are encroaching and delving into the personal areas of the employees, which employees might find offensive. Therefore, you should be gentle and cautious while addressing this issue.
In human life, two things matter a lot: firstly, the career, and secondly, marriage. You are focusing on the latter, so approach her in a way that doesn't make her feel bad. Employees nowadays are very sensitive to certain issues, therefore, they need to be handled with care, and this is one of those situations where they might consider leaving if pressured.
From United Kingdom
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In human life, two things matter a lot: firstly, the career, and secondly, marriage. You are focusing on the latter, so approach her in a way that doesn't make her feel bad. Employees nowadays are very sensitive to certain issues, therefore, they need to be handled with care, and this is one of those situations where they might consider leaving if pressured.
From United Kingdom
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Pratima,
There are good HR and well as bad HR practices.
If you take money factor this also can be explained how organization is looser on loosing employee with short tenure.
Any Employee who joins employment whether experienced or inexperienced takes time to get acquainted and customized with the organization. Although they do work every day but do not perform for initial settling period which may be varied from 3 months to 6 months until he starts contributing to the growth of organization. You never experience that from the first day of employee joining your profit margins increased or share value of your company shooting up and miracle starts happening right from the first day except something unusual happen in the market drivers.
So, Employee starts performing at the level where he is capable of influencing your company’s prospects and results only after establishing himself. There are very rare breed of employees who come from straight jacket fit into job profile from first day in certain professions which are not common.
You are dealing with average employee who takes minimum 3 to 6 months to reach that level of perfection, accuracy and efficiency. Once the employee has worked for more than six months don’t think he is liability but is an asset to the organization and your company has spend money on his/her initial settling period to customization and acquaintance. You are going lose that investment spend on building employees confidence to yield results. The day he is matured and prepared to perform, you are preparing for shunt him out for pity reason which is neighther an offence or misbehavior or indiscipline.
You are losing 6 months’ salary investment by your company and I would rather ask my HR Manager to resign first if he fails to understand the modern good HR practices. He should not promote bad HR practices if management is not vise of what is difference between good and bad HR practices.
As true HR professional, I cannot afford to lose my employee and insist management to retain as much as I can. All successful organizations inlast two decades from RELIANCE TO INFOTECH & WIPRO prosper on maximising employee retaintion rate and not attrition. More attirtion leads unstable organization.
With Regards
Sawant
From Saudi Arabia
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
There are good HR and well as bad HR practices.
If you take money factor this also can be explained how organization is looser on loosing employee with short tenure.
Any Employee who joins employment whether experienced or inexperienced takes time to get acquainted and customized with the organization. Although they do work every day but do not perform for initial settling period which may be varied from 3 months to 6 months until he starts contributing to the growth of organization. You never experience that from the first day of employee joining your profit margins increased or share value of your company shooting up and miracle starts happening right from the first day except something unusual happen in the market drivers.
So, Employee starts performing at the level where he is capable of influencing your company’s prospects and results only after establishing himself. There are very rare breed of employees who come from straight jacket fit into job profile from first day in certain professions which are not common.
You are dealing with average employee who takes minimum 3 to 6 months to reach that level of perfection, accuracy and efficiency. Once the employee has worked for more than six months don’t think he is liability but is an asset to the organization and your company has spend money on his/her initial settling period to customization and acquaintance. You are going lose that investment spend on building employees confidence to yield results. The day he is matured and prepared to perform, you are preparing for shunt him out for pity reason which is neighther an offence or misbehavior or indiscipline.
You are losing 6 months’ salary investment by your company and I would rather ask my HR Manager to resign first if he fails to understand the modern good HR practices. He should not promote bad HR practices if management is not vise of what is difference between good and bad HR practices.
As true HR professional, I cannot afford to lose my employee and insist management to retain as much as I can. All successful organizations inlast two decades from RELIANCE TO INFOTECH & WIPRO prosper on maximising employee retaintion rate and not attrition. More attirtion leads unstable organization.
With Regards
Sawant
From Saudi Arabia
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Sawant,
I hope you won't take it as an argument. That was what I am also trying to say. The organization has invested so much in hiring an employee. It almost takes 6 months to have an employee trained and put them on a project full-fledged. As an HR person, I do agree with you that measures should always be taken for retaining employees, but a lady who is going to relocate after marriage abroad with her husband, then I don't really find any reason to take retention measures. After enjoying 45 days of marriage leave, she is going to come back and submit her resignation. Do you really think it is worth it? Let's say, as you said, I can even go ahead and sanction 45 days for her as marriage leave. After a couple of days, another person from the same team, who has been working for the organization for almost 2 years, applies for 2 months of marriage leave. What do you think is the right thing to do? He will just question me on one thing, "When I can sanction 45 days for a person who has worked for just 5 months, why can't I give 2 months of marriage leave to a person who has worked for more than two years?" Then I will be forced to sanction 2 months of marriage leave for him. Being an HR is not just about sanctioning leave. "Again and again, Sawant, I am telling you guys only one thing: I am not here to argue with you or to prove my point of view." Correct me if I am wrong. Good HR practices are to spread balance and satisfaction among employees but not to create politics.
No offense meant.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I hope you won't take it as an argument. That was what I am also trying to say. The organization has invested so much in hiring an employee. It almost takes 6 months to have an employee trained and put them on a project full-fledged. As an HR person, I do agree with you that measures should always be taken for retaining employees, but a lady who is going to relocate after marriage abroad with her husband, then I don't really find any reason to take retention measures. After enjoying 45 days of marriage leave, she is going to come back and submit her resignation. Do you really think it is worth it? Let's say, as you said, I can even go ahead and sanction 45 days for her as marriage leave. After a couple of days, another person from the same team, who has been working for the organization for almost 2 years, applies for 2 months of marriage leave. What do you think is the right thing to do? He will just question me on one thing, "When I can sanction 45 days for a person who has worked for just 5 months, why can't I give 2 months of marriage leave to a person who has worked for more than two years?" Then I will be forced to sanction 2 months of marriage leave for him. Being an HR is not just about sanctioning leave. "Again and again, Sawant, I am telling you guys only one thing: I am not here to argue with you or to prove my point of view." Correct me if I am wrong. Good HR practices are to spread balance and satisfaction among employees but not to create politics.
No offense meant.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)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.