Dear All,
Greetings!
My heartiest wishes for DIWALI.
May God give you a lot of wonderful coming years.
I have a concern about the human resource practices in big brands.
Today, I came across a situation where I am not comfortable with my company's human resource practices.
We encountered a situation that I want to share with all of you.
In my company, an employee who has been working with us for the last 25 years made a mistake. He works in the credit department and, due to some reasons, was unable to follow up on bills worth 40 lakhs with the ministry, showing negligence in his duties.
He had a clean record in his 25 years of service.
The company had not issued a single warning letter in his name. In this incident, the company did not issue any memo but directly suspended him for 7 days (standing order of the company is for 6 days).
Furthermore, the company issued him a charge sheet, asking for an explanation within 48 hours.
My question is, was it right to suspend an employee directly for one negligence without conducting an inquiry or following other procedures?
If a person is suspended for misconduct, can we issue a charge sheet stating that the suspension will be extended, etc.?
The main issue lies with our management (General Manager), as they seem ready to dismiss an employee at a moment's notice. Our General Manager does not speak properly to employees.
If we claim that big brands have good human resource practices or state that employees are assets by providing benefits like LTA, Medicals, etc., is it accurate?
What procedure should be adopted in this case?
As a junior member, it is challenging to accept the management's decision.
In my previous post, I mentioned that my HR Manager only knows how to manage by any means necessary. She is only familiar with what happens in this company as she is a product of it.
I would appreciate it if you could suggest the correct procedure and the actions this employee can take against the management.
It is disheartening to witness situations like this where employees are suspended almost every other day, and there is no one to advocate for them as unions are management-friendly, focusing solely on their benefits. (This employee is in an Executive cadre).
I would appreciate prompt responses.
Regards,
Ranjeet
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
12Greetings!
My heartiest wishes for DIWALI.
May God give you a lot of wonderful coming years.
I have a concern about the human resource practices in big brands.
Today, I came across a situation where I am not comfortable with my company's human resource practices.
We encountered a situation that I want to share with all of you.
In my company, an employee who has been working with us for the last 25 years made a mistake. He works in the credit department and, due to some reasons, was unable to follow up on bills worth 40 lakhs with the ministry, showing negligence in his duties.
He had a clean record in his 25 years of service.
The company had not issued a single warning letter in his name. In this incident, the company did not issue any memo but directly suspended him for 7 days (standing order of the company is for 6 days).
Furthermore, the company issued him a charge sheet, asking for an explanation within 48 hours.
My question is, was it right to suspend an employee directly for one negligence without conducting an inquiry or following other procedures?
If a person is suspended for misconduct, can we issue a charge sheet stating that the suspension will be extended, etc.?
The main issue lies with our management (General Manager), as they seem ready to dismiss an employee at a moment's notice. Our General Manager does not speak properly to employees.
If we claim that big brands have good human resource practices or state that employees are assets by providing benefits like LTA, Medicals, etc., is it accurate?
What procedure should be adopted in this case?
As a junior member, it is challenging to accept the management's decision.
In my previous post, I mentioned that my HR Manager only knows how to manage by any means necessary. She is only familiar with what happens in this company as she is a product of it.
I would appreciate it if you could suggest the correct procedure and the actions this employee can take against the management.
It is disheartening to witness situations like this where employees are suspended almost every other day, and there is no one to advocate for them as unions are management-friendly, focusing solely on their benefits. (This employee is in an Executive cadre).
I would appreciate prompt responses.
Regards,
Ranjeet
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Ranjeet,
Let us analyze the issue step by step.
a) "In my company, an employee who has been working with us for the last 25 years committed a mistake. He works in the credit department and, due to some reasons, he is unable to follow up on bills worth 40 lakhs with the ministry, showing negligence in his duties."
Comments: 40 lakhs is a significant amount. Why did he not follow up with the client? The reasons need to be investigated. The law does not consider the length of service of an individual.
b) "He had a clean record in his 25 years with the company. The company had not issued a single warning letter to him. In this incident, the company did not issue any memo but directly suspended him for 7 days (the Standing order of the company is for 6 days)."
Comments: The law does not consider a past clean record, especially given the severity of the mistake. It is possible that he may have been engaging in misappropriation of funds prior to this incident but was only caught now. Suspension pending inquiry is appropriate. If the accused is not suspended, there is a risk of tampering with records and evidence. To prevent this, the management has suspended him. During this period, he is eligible for a subsistence allowance.
c) "In continuation, the company issued him a charge sheet asking for an explanation within 48 hrs. My question is, was it right to suspend an employee directly for one negligence? Shouldn't we conduct an inquiry or follow other procedures first?"
Comments: Before issuing the charge sheet, the company should have conducted an inquiry. A charge sheet can be issued directly only for smaller offenses, not for an offense of this magnitude. A charge sheet comes after an inquiry, not before it.
d) "If we say that big brands have good human resource practices or claim that employees are their assets only by providing welfare like LTA, Medicals, etc., is it right?"
Comments: It is not a matter of big or small brands. Discipline is the foundation of any organization. To instill a culture of discipline, incidents like this need to be handled firmly. It sends a message to all employees about the consequences of corruption or negligence. The essence of the law lies in deterrence. Mr. Ranjeet, please note that India faces more problems due to a lack of discipline rather than a lack of intelligence or intelligent people.
Secondly, justice is also fundamental to any organization. Your management must ensure that justice is served to the accused employee and the organization.
e) "It's so painful to see things like this, where employees are suspended every second day, and there's no one to stand for them as unions are management-friendly and focus only on their benefits. (This employee is in the Executive cadre)."
Comments: Managers must think with their heads, not their hearts. The Head vs. Heart debate poses an age-old challenge for managers. Progress occurs when issues are handled dispassionately, without emotional involvement. An American employee was reportedly fired for being 43 minutes late after lunch.
The accused employee can defend himself by presenting evidence of the steps he took to recover the money, such as keeping superiors informed of his challenges. However, his culpability remains established as he withheld crucial information from his superiors. In times of recession, there is a significant capital crunch, requiring employees to make aggressive efforts to release blocked working capital.
Your management should focus on the incident rather than the individual. Investigating the incident may raise questions such as:
a) Did the employee's Manager know about this credit? What guidance did they provide?
b) Why was this issue not discussed in weekly or fortnightly credit review meetings? If it was discussed, what was the outcome?
c) How long after discovery was this credit issue brought to light? Why was it not addressed in the monthly reconciliation by the Accounts or audit department?
Answers to these questions may reveal culpability of higher officials as well. Simply punishing the employee could amount to scapegoating while allowing seniors to evade accountability.
I am not a legal expert. I have shared my opinions based on experience. However, Mr. RN Khola and Mr. JS Malik are the appropriate individuals to seek legal clarifications from.
Thanks,
Dinesh V Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Let us analyze the issue step by step.
a) "In my company, an employee who has been working with us for the last 25 years committed a mistake. He works in the credit department and, due to some reasons, he is unable to follow up on bills worth 40 lakhs with the ministry, showing negligence in his duties."
Comments: 40 lakhs is a significant amount. Why did he not follow up with the client? The reasons need to be investigated. The law does not consider the length of service of an individual.
b) "He had a clean record in his 25 years with the company. The company had not issued a single warning letter to him. In this incident, the company did not issue any memo but directly suspended him for 7 days (the Standing order of the company is for 6 days)."
Comments: The law does not consider a past clean record, especially given the severity of the mistake. It is possible that he may have been engaging in misappropriation of funds prior to this incident but was only caught now. Suspension pending inquiry is appropriate. If the accused is not suspended, there is a risk of tampering with records and evidence. To prevent this, the management has suspended him. During this period, he is eligible for a subsistence allowance.
c) "In continuation, the company issued him a charge sheet asking for an explanation within 48 hrs. My question is, was it right to suspend an employee directly for one negligence? Shouldn't we conduct an inquiry or follow other procedures first?"
Comments: Before issuing the charge sheet, the company should have conducted an inquiry. A charge sheet can be issued directly only for smaller offenses, not for an offense of this magnitude. A charge sheet comes after an inquiry, not before it.
d) "If we say that big brands have good human resource practices or claim that employees are their assets only by providing welfare like LTA, Medicals, etc., is it right?"
Comments: It is not a matter of big or small brands. Discipline is the foundation of any organization. To instill a culture of discipline, incidents like this need to be handled firmly. It sends a message to all employees about the consequences of corruption or negligence. The essence of the law lies in deterrence. Mr. Ranjeet, please note that India faces more problems due to a lack of discipline rather than a lack of intelligence or intelligent people.
Secondly, justice is also fundamental to any organization. Your management must ensure that justice is served to the accused employee and the organization.
e) "It's so painful to see things like this, where employees are suspended every second day, and there's no one to stand for them as unions are management-friendly and focus only on their benefits. (This employee is in the Executive cadre)."
Comments: Managers must think with their heads, not their hearts. The Head vs. Heart debate poses an age-old challenge for managers. Progress occurs when issues are handled dispassionately, without emotional involvement. An American employee was reportedly fired for being 43 minutes late after lunch.
The accused employee can defend himself by presenting evidence of the steps he took to recover the money, such as keeping superiors informed of his challenges. However, his culpability remains established as he withheld crucial information from his superiors. In times of recession, there is a significant capital crunch, requiring employees to make aggressive efforts to release blocked working capital.
Your management should focus on the incident rather than the individual. Investigating the incident may raise questions such as:
a) Did the employee's Manager know about this credit? What guidance did they provide?
b) Why was this issue not discussed in weekly or fortnightly credit review meetings? If it was discussed, what was the outcome?
c) How long after discovery was this credit issue brought to light? Why was it not addressed in the monthly reconciliation by the Accounts or audit department?
Answers to these questions may reveal culpability of higher officials as well. Simply punishing the employee could amount to scapegoating while allowing seniors to evade accountability.
I am not a legal expert. I have shared my opinions based on experience. However, Mr. RN Khola and Mr. JS Malik are the appropriate individuals to seek legal clarifications from.
Thanks,
Dinesh V Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Mr. Divekar,
Your reply is perfectly right. The employee in question is suspended pending inquiry. He is served with a charge sheet. He has an opportunity to reply to the charge sheet and defend himself in the inquiry to be conducted subsequently. He is also entitled to subsistence allowance. In case of grave misconduct, the employer has the right to suspend an employee immediately even without giving the charge sheet. A charge sheet can be framed only after conducting a preliminary investigation to assess the extent of the omission or commission.
If the suspended employee proves his innocence in the domestic inquiry, his suspension would be revoked, and he can rejoin duty with full salary (arrears) from the date of his suspension. Discipline is a must. Financial discipline is utmost essential.
I fully agree with your view that the problems in India are due to indiscipline and not a lack of intelligence. (I may be a bit outdated for the youngsters!)
Dear Ranjeet,
Let us analyze the issue step by step.
a) "In my company, an employee who has been working with us for the last 25 years had committed a mistake. He is working in the credit department, and due to some reasons, he is not able to follow up on the bills worth 40 lakhs with the ministry, which shows his negligence in duties."
Comments: 40 lakhs is a too big amount. Why did he not follow up with the client? The reasons need to be investigated. The law does not take into account the length of service of anybody.
b) "He had a clean record in his name in 25 years. The company had not even issued a single warning letter in his name. In this incident also, the company had not issued any memo but directly suspended him for 7 days (Standing order of the company is for 6 days)."
Comments: Law does not take into account a past clean record, especially considering the severity of the mistake. It may be that so far he could have been misappropriating funds, but he was caught now. Suspension pending inquiry is perfectly all right. If the accused is not suspended, there is every possibility of him tampering with the records and evidence. To avoid this, management has suspended him. During this period, he is eligible for a subsistence allowance.
c) "In continuation, the company had issued him a charge sheet asking for an explanation within 48 hours."
Comments: Before issuing the charge sheet, the company should have ordered an inquiry. A charge sheet can be issued directly only for smaller offenses, not for an offense of this magnitude. The charge sheet comes after the inquiry, not before it.
d) "If we say that big brands have good human resource practices or they say the employees are their assets only by giving welfare like LTA, Medicals, etc. Whether is it right."
Comments: It is not a question of big or small brands. Discipline is the foundation of any organization. To create a culture of discipline, instances of this kind need to be handled with an iron hand. It sends a message to one and all about the fate corrupt or negligent employees can invite. More than its application, the essence of the law lies in its deterrence. Mr. Ranjeet, you may note that India has more problems because of a lack of discipline and not because of a lack of intelligence or intelligent people. Secondly, justice is also the foundation of any organization. Your management must ensure that justice is done to the accused employee and to the organization as well.
e) "It's so painful to see things like this, that every second day you are suspending employees and there is nobody who can stand for them as unions are management-friendly as they know only to do their benefits only. (This employee is in the Executive cadre)."
Comments: Managers must think from the head and not from the heart. The Head Vs. Heart is an old debate and an old challenge for managers. You are pained because you are thinking from your head. Progress happens when issues are handled dispassionately or without involving emotions. I have read in the newspaper that an American employee was fired because she came 43 minutes late after the lunch break.
The accused employee can defend himself by citing evidence of the steps he took to recover the money. Did he keep his superiors informed of his inability to recover the outstanding amount, etc.? Notwithstanding this, his culpability is still established since he suppressed the material facts from his superiors.
I am not a legal expert. I have given my opinions based on my experience. However, Mr. RN Khola and Mr. JS Malik are the right persons to have clarifications from the legal point of view.
Thanks,
Dinesh V Divekar
Management & Behavioral Training Consultant
Bangalore - 560 094
+91 9900155394
"Limit of your words is the limit of your world."
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Your reply is perfectly right. The employee in question is suspended pending inquiry. He is served with a charge sheet. He has an opportunity to reply to the charge sheet and defend himself in the inquiry to be conducted subsequently. He is also entitled to subsistence allowance. In case of grave misconduct, the employer has the right to suspend an employee immediately even without giving the charge sheet. A charge sheet can be framed only after conducting a preliminary investigation to assess the extent of the omission or commission.
If the suspended employee proves his innocence in the domestic inquiry, his suspension would be revoked, and he can rejoin duty with full salary (arrears) from the date of his suspension. Discipline is a must. Financial discipline is utmost essential.
I fully agree with your view that the problems in India are due to indiscipline and not a lack of intelligence. (I may be a bit outdated for the youngsters!)
Dear Ranjeet,
Let us analyze the issue step by step.
a) "In my company, an employee who has been working with us for the last 25 years had committed a mistake. He is working in the credit department, and due to some reasons, he is not able to follow up on the bills worth 40 lakhs with the ministry, which shows his negligence in duties."
Comments: 40 lakhs is a too big amount. Why did he not follow up with the client? The reasons need to be investigated. The law does not take into account the length of service of anybody.
b) "He had a clean record in his name in 25 years. The company had not even issued a single warning letter in his name. In this incident also, the company had not issued any memo but directly suspended him for 7 days (Standing order of the company is for 6 days)."
Comments: Law does not take into account a past clean record, especially considering the severity of the mistake. It may be that so far he could have been misappropriating funds, but he was caught now. Suspension pending inquiry is perfectly all right. If the accused is not suspended, there is every possibility of him tampering with the records and evidence. To avoid this, management has suspended him. During this period, he is eligible for a subsistence allowance.
c) "In continuation, the company had issued him a charge sheet asking for an explanation within 48 hours."
Comments: Before issuing the charge sheet, the company should have ordered an inquiry. A charge sheet can be issued directly only for smaller offenses, not for an offense of this magnitude. The charge sheet comes after the inquiry, not before it.
d) "If we say that big brands have good human resource practices or they say the employees are their assets only by giving welfare like LTA, Medicals, etc. Whether is it right."
Comments: It is not a question of big or small brands. Discipline is the foundation of any organization. To create a culture of discipline, instances of this kind need to be handled with an iron hand. It sends a message to one and all about the fate corrupt or negligent employees can invite. More than its application, the essence of the law lies in its deterrence. Mr. Ranjeet, you may note that India has more problems because of a lack of discipline and not because of a lack of intelligence or intelligent people. Secondly, justice is also the foundation of any organization. Your management must ensure that justice is done to the accused employee and to the organization as well.
e) "It's so painful to see things like this, that every second day you are suspending employees and there is nobody who can stand for them as unions are management-friendly as they know only to do their benefits only. (This employee is in the Executive cadre)."
Comments: Managers must think from the head and not from the heart. The Head Vs. Heart is an old debate and an old challenge for managers. You are pained because you are thinking from your head. Progress happens when issues are handled dispassionately or without involving emotions. I have read in the newspaper that an American employee was fired because she came 43 minutes late after the lunch break.
The accused employee can defend himself by citing evidence of the steps he took to recover the money. Did he keep his superiors informed of his inability to recover the outstanding amount, etc.? Notwithstanding this, his culpability is still established since he suppressed the material facts from his superiors.
I am not a legal expert. I have given my opinions based on my experience. However, Mr. RN Khola and Mr. JS Malik are the right persons to have clarifications from the legal point of view.
Thanks,
Dinesh V Divekar
Management & Behavioral Training Consultant
Bangalore - 560 094
+91 9900155394
"Limit of your words is the limit of your world."
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Yes, suspension is not a punishment. The charged employee is kept under suspension pending investigation, gathering of all documents, etc., to frame charges against the charged employee by management. The charged employee should not tamper with, influence, or destroy the documents in the office. The charged employee needs to keep himself ready for the inquiry. Personal inquiry with the charged employee needs to be completed. Once the investigation is over and the charged employee's suspension can be revoked, the charge sheet, full inquiry, and findings are reviewed for awarding suitable punishment as per organizational rules.
Murali
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Murali
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
Mr. Divekar's views are perfectly right. I only gathered the impression from the original post that the suspension was not pending an enquiry, but as a punishment without affording him an opportunity to explain his position. I hope it was not.
I.N. Jha
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Mr. Divekar's views are perfectly right. I only gathered the impression from the original post that the suspension was not pending an enquiry, but as a punishment without affording him an opportunity to explain his position. I hope it was not.
I.N. Jha
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear All,
Thanks for the responses.
Following are the points that I would like to share with you:
1. Is suspension without subsistence allowance justifiable by law or not?
2. Is suspending an employee for a single misconduct justifiable under the law and principles of natural justice?
3. Is suspending an employee without any formal inquiry justifiable?
4. Is it justifiable to chargesheet an employee directly, asking for an explanation even when there is no intention to conduct a domestic inquiry?
5. It is not a case of misappropriation of funds; rather, it is that bills worth 40 lakhs were not forwarded to the concerned ministry on time. Discipline encompasses various aspects.
Do you believe it is good human resource practice when employees feel their jobs are insecure?
Should we adopt a strict approach where people work only until their superiors are present?
Should we promote a culture where employees work under a constant feeling of insecurity and tension?
When we refer to Human Resources, our goal is to care for our employees and foster a positive culture within the organization.
I recently read a book by Mr. Khera, "You Can Win," where he mentions that fear-based motivation is only temporary and works as long as the fear factor or authority figure is present.
I personally advocate for an organizational culture where employees eagerly anticipate coming to work.
Please address my queries: Is having two suspensions in a week a step in the right direction?
Is terminating an employee's service or accepting their resignation the correct approach? Perhaps reducing headcount during this recession is a prudent policy.
How should one handle a situation where the GM reprimands everyone for minor issues, such as a phone disconnection due to technical reasons?
I feel he lacks an understanding of HR. Our company's foremost value is integrity and respect. Where is the respect for others, and where is the joy in the workplace?
Additionally, is it not advisable to issue warning letters for minor misconducts, such as absences, before proceeding to chargesheets or direct suspensions?
In cases of major misconduct, what procedures should one follow? Is it appropriate to issue a chargesheet without conducting an inquiry?
Is terminating an employee based on an audit report justifiable?
Your responses will be highly appreciated.
Regards,
Ranjeet
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thanks for the responses.
Following are the points that I would like to share with you:
1. Is suspension without subsistence allowance justifiable by law or not?
2. Is suspending an employee for a single misconduct justifiable under the law and principles of natural justice?
3. Is suspending an employee without any formal inquiry justifiable?
4. Is it justifiable to chargesheet an employee directly, asking for an explanation even when there is no intention to conduct a domestic inquiry?
5. It is not a case of misappropriation of funds; rather, it is that bills worth 40 lakhs were not forwarded to the concerned ministry on time. Discipline encompasses various aspects.
Do you believe it is good human resource practice when employees feel their jobs are insecure?
Should we adopt a strict approach where people work only until their superiors are present?
Should we promote a culture where employees work under a constant feeling of insecurity and tension?
When we refer to Human Resources, our goal is to care for our employees and foster a positive culture within the organization.
I recently read a book by Mr. Khera, "You Can Win," where he mentions that fear-based motivation is only temporary and works as long as the fear factor or authority figure is present.
I personally advocate for an organizational culture where employees eagerly anticipate coming to work.
Please address my queries: Is having two suspensions in a week a step in the right direction?
Is terminating an employee's service or accepting their resignation the correct approach? Perhaps reducing headcount during this recession is a prudent policy.
How should one handle a situation where the GM reprimands everyone for minor issues, such as a phone disconnection due to technical reasons?
I feel he lacks an understanding of HR. Our company's foremost value is integrity and respect. Where is the respect for others, and where is the joy in the workplace?
Additionally, is it not advisable to issue warning letters for minor misconducts, such as absences, before proceeding to chargesheets or direct suspensions?
In cases of major misconduct, what procedures should one follow? Is it appropriate to issue a chargesheet without conducting an inquiry?
Is terminating an employee based on an audit report justifiable?
Your responses will be highly appreciated.
Regards,
Ranjeet
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I agree with Mr. Dinesh - anything else I would add would only be a repetitive statement of his views already mentioned.
Please understand that "HR" is a link between the Management and the Employee. Nowhere is it a theory that the HR must only consider the employee's side of view.
To add to this - as an employee, you will not get to hear the "complete story". Only a part of the same would be revealed by the HR & Management to the others. The reason is to safeguard the employee's image to a maximum extent. This is something that employees, excluding HR people in the senior level, fail to understand.
Moreover - at the end of the day, every relationship at work boils down to business. It's "how much has been converted to money" that counts. The relationship may exist - but "a professional workplace" should be able to differentiate these two objects - "Relationship/loyalty" and WORK/delivery/consistency.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Please understand that "HR" is a link between the Management and the Employee. Nowhere is it a theory that the HR must only consider the employee's side of view.
To add to this - as an employee, you will not get to hear the "complete story". Only a part of the same would be revealed by the HR & Management to the others. The reason is to safeguard the employee's image to a maximum extent. This is something that employees, excluding HR people in the senior level, fail to understand.
Moreover - at the end of the day, every relationship at work boils down to business. It's "how much has been converted to money" that counts. The relationship may exist - but "a professional workplace" should be able to differentiate these two objects - "Relationship/loyalty" and WORK/delivery/consistency.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
Mr. Divekar has rightly replied to the query. One thing to add is that suspension is of two types. Firstly, as a punishment, and secondly, as a tool to prevent tampering of evidence, etc. Sometimes it is difficult to impose the responsibility upon management to explain its actions and then to act. As a first aid and emergent prevention, suspension could have been ordered. A viewing of the standing orders of the company would shed light on this.
Regards
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Mr. Divekar has rightly replied to the query. One thing to add is that suspension is of two types. Firstly, as a punishment, and secondly, as a tool to prevent tampering of evidence, etc. Sometimes it is difficult to impose the responsibility upon management to explain its actions and then to act. As a first aid and emergent prevention, suspension could have been ordered. A viewing of the standing orders of the company would shed light on this.
Regards
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Ranjeet,
Your concern is correct. But I guess you need to read what Mr. Dinesh wrote. He has answered all your queries. In fact, I guess he has answered them so perfectly without any room for us to say...he he he... 😊 Please go through them and ponder on his suggestion carefully, and you will find a solution. Let not emotion take over the mind so you may be able to take the correct perception of the matter.
Regards,
ukmitra
From Saudi Arabia, Riyadh
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Your concern is correct. But I guess you need to read what Mr. Dinesh wrote. He has answered all your queries. In fact, I guess he has answered them so perfectly without any room for us to say...he he he... 😊 Please go through them and ponder on his suggestion carefully, and you will find a solution. Let not emotion take over the mind so you may be able to take the correct perception of the matter.
Regards,
ukmitra
From Saudi Arabia, Riyadh
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
"He is working in a credit department and due to some reasons, he is not able to follow up for the bills worth of 40 lakhs with the ministry which shows his negligence in duties."
If you read the line, it is clear that "he is not able to follow up" and hence negligence. I think his immediate boss should be given a charge sheet first as he/she failed to let it happen. Is it a good HR practice? The answer is “NO.”
Sarfaraz
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If you read the line, it is clear that "he is not able to follow up" and hence negligence. I think his immediate boss should be given a charge sheet first as he/she failed to let it happen. Is it a good HR practice? The answer is “NO.”
Sarfaraz
From India, Bangalore
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.
Innovative HR Practices-.doc