@Varghesemathew, I have gone through the revised act ammendments 2008 and i find the no substantial changes except for the medical bonus. Please correct me with relevant changes with sections as applicable. For the moment, i presume, i have read and understood the act well.
@ Deepthi_regalla- Even her joining date is Sep, I presume she has completed more than 160 days. This will not change the picture. Any women working on permanent, probationary or contractual basis will end it benefiting from the Maternity act.
To sum it all , the employee will be getting all the benefit under the Maternity act.
From India, Mumbai
21@ Deepthi_regalla- Even her joining date is Sep, I presume she has completed more than 160 days. This will not change the picture. Any women working on permanent, probationary or contractual basis will end it benefiting from the Maternity act.
To sum it all , the employee will be getting all the benefit under the Maternity act.
From India, Mumbai
My company`s point is she is a non performer why should she be benefited becoz of her company incurred 50,000 loss which was proved on papers
From India, Hyderabad
From India, Hyderabad
First, please clarify : was it fraud or non performance ?
Further, was non performance amounting to negative impact / loss of customer or just less efficient. The answers to some extent would be influenced by that.
In general, she has worked more than 80 days before delivery date and is entitled to maternity benefit. As per the act you can not terminate her till the end of her pregnancy. So you are stuck with her. You can terminate her only in April.
She is smart, and probably planned this. You guys are taken for suckers, so now you don't have an option but to pay her salary and maternity benefit under the act.
You can put her on compulsory paid leave till delivery If you feel her presence is detrimental to the working of the company.
From India, Mumbai
Further, was non performance amounting to negative impact / loss of customer or just less efficient. The answers to some extent would be influenced by that.
In general, she has worked more than 80 days before delivery date and is entitled to maternity benefit. As per the act you can not terminate her till the end of her pregnancy. So you are stuck with her. You can terminate her only in April.
She is smart, and probably planned this. You guys are taken for suckers, so now you don't have an option but to pay her salary and maternity benefit under the act.
You can put her on compulsory paid leave till delivery If you feel her presence is detrimental to the working of the company.
From India, Mumbai
Dear members As per sec 5(2) amended by sec 4(b)(1) of Act 61 of 1988 effective from 10.01.1989 , the minimum period of work under an employer , to be eligible for MB is 80 days. Varghese Mathew
From India, Thiruvananthapuram
From India, Thiruvananthapuram
Dear friends,
The real issue here is the non-performance of the employee. Incidentally employee happens to be a pregnant woman. Deepthi's befuddlement is more because of the payment of pregnancy benefits to a non-performance rather than the root cause of the problem.
Root cause of the problem is improper recruitment. Will this job candidate give the required performance? This is the million dollar question. Why interviewer(s) failed to unravel poor performer within her?
So far the the whole discussion has revolved around payment of maternity benefits under the provisions of the relevant law. Legal provisions apart, now the time has come to think from management science point of view also. Now Deepthi needs to reveal the woman employee's designation, qualification, how the selection was done, what kind of tests were taken to assess the suitability of the candidate etc.
Recently Amazon selected a woman employee at a very senior level. She is daughter-in-law of our family friend. She told me that recruitment process contained 10 rounds. Of these 10 rounds, two rounds were hardcore technical rounds wherein her brain was battered hard.
Though she has more than 10 years experience of which eight years in very top-notch IT company, Amazon did not believe on it. Amazon did not believe on her qualification of IIM, Bangalore also. They went ahead with their stringent recruitment process.
Deepthi's post throws light on importance of training of managers on "Interview Handling Skills". Many companies prefer losing money on poor recruitment but saving on managerial training. Is Deepthi's company one amongst these? That she would know best!
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
The real issue here is the non-performance of the employee. Incidentally employee happens to be a pregnant woman. Deepthi's befuddlement is more because of the payment of pregnancy benefits to a non-performance rather than the root cause of the problem.
Root cause of the problem is improper recruitment. Will this job candidate give the required performance? This is the million dollar question. Why interviewer(s) failed to unravel poor performer within her?
So far the the whole discussion has revolved around payment of maternity benefits under the provisions of the relevant law. Legal provisions apart, now the time has come to think from management science point of view also. Now Deepthi needs to reveal the woman employee's designation, qualification, how the selection was done, what kind of tests were taken to assess the suitability of the candidate etc.
Recently Amazon selected a woman employee at a very senior level. She is daughter-in-law of our family friend. She told me that recruitment process contained 10 rounds. Of these 10 rounds, two rounds were hardcore technical rounds wherein her brain was battered hard.
Though she has more than 10 years experience of which eight years in very top-notch IT company, Amazon did not believe on it. Amazon did not believe on her qualification of IIM, Bangalore also. They went ahead with their stringent recruitment process.
Deepthi's post throws light on importance of training of managers on "Interview Handling Skills". Many companies prefer losing money on poor recruitment but saving on managerial training. Is Deepthi's company one amongst these? That she would know best!
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Deepthi As per your thread she is a non performer and the company has incurred a loss of Rs. 50K, what steps were initiated from your end, please let the forum know.
From India, Ahmadabad
From India, Ahmadabad
Hi Deepthi
In this case when u are aware that the lady is pregnant you cannot remove her from her service. On medical ground she will get relaxation on duty. While she is on maternity leave even at that point of time you will have to sanction her leave till the time she is not fit to join the off be it on paid or without paid.
From India, Gangtok
In this case when u are aware that the lady is pregnant you cannot remove her from her service. On medical ground she will get relaxation on duty. While she is on maternity leave even at that point of time you will have to sanction her leave till the time she is not fit to join the off be it on paid or without paid.
From India, Gangtok
you can terminate her on basis of non performance but you must need all the proof to prove that, like warning letters, Mail copy, performance records etc.. but clearly not on the basis of pregnancy
From India, Bangalore
From India, Bangalore
Hello Deepthi,
Saswata Banerjee is right on dot.
Even w.r.t. your contention about her 'fraud' [not informing that she's pregnant], I think you are on very thin ice, BOTH legally & logically--if she joined in Sept, 2014 & her Delivery is due in April, 2015, then she can always get away saying that even she didn't know about it when she joined [she would have conceived 1-2 months earlier & she can take the stand that she got the Pregnancy Tests done AFTER joining].
Suggest consult an advocate & check-out IF the documentation you have w.r.t. her non-performance is valid AND sufficient legally [you mentioned a loss of 50 K, etc].
If Yes, then suggest go the whole hog & handle her legally--but keep in mind that she seems to have geared-up legally too [and to the extent I know about how Courts deal with such matters, SHE will tend to have more sympathy & benefits-of-doubt].
Rgds,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Saswata Banerjee is right on dot.
Even w.r.t. your contention about her 'fraud' [not informing that she's pregnant], I think you are on very thin ice, BOTH legally & logically--if she joined in Sept, 2014 & her Delivery is due in April, 2015, then she can always get away saying that even she didn't know about it when she joined [she would have conceived 1-2 months earlier & she can take the stand that she got the Pregnancy Tests done AFTER joining].
Suggest consult an advocate & check-out IF the documentation you have w.r.t. her non-performance is valid AND sufficient legally [you mentioned a loss of 50 K, etc].
If Yes, then suggest go the whole hog & handle her legally--but keep in mind that she seems to have geared-up legally too [and to the extent I know about how Courts deal with such matters, SHE will tend to have more sympathy & benefits-of-doubt].
Rgds,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Dear Deepthi,
My point is little practical. If management don't want an employee or visa versa , then it is not healthy to continue with the employee. As it doesn't work in favor of both the parties.
February month ended now. Her maternity is due on April. So only one month she will be coming. Also she will take maternity leave, one or two weeks before her due date.
Let her go on maternity leave. After that you may get a lot of points for separation.
I always prefer to keep the issues away from courts and law. Neither party is going to get benefited.
From India, Delhi
My point is little practical. If management don't want an employee or visa versa , then it is not healthy to continue with the employee. As it doesn't work in favor of both the parties.
February month ended now. Her maternity is due on April. So only one month she will be coming. Also she will take maternity leave, one or two weeks before her due date.
Let her go on maternity leave. After that you may get a lot of points for separation.
I always prefer to keep the issues away from courts and law. Neither party is going to get benefited.
From India, Delhi
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
EMPLOYEE JOB SATISFACTION QUESTIONER.pdf
Employee Appraisal Form new.doc