Yes, Ravi,
That's because I have working experience in HR 😄😄😄
(You asked for this)
I would have appreciated if you read anything below those lines... will not blame you. As I mentioned - experience in HR alone will teach you.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
57That's because I have working experience in HR 😄😄😄
(You asked for this)
I would have appreciated if you read anything below those lines... will not blame you. As I mentioned - experience in HR alone will teach you.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
This is the right approach for addressing any serious misconduct. Keeping an employee under suspension is appropriate for various reasons, ensuring that the delinquent employee will not tamper with or influence evidence. It is important to follow the company's standard operating procedures correctly.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear The power of Suspension is reserved to the Management pending enquiry on grave charges. Rgds VS Rajan Associates Chennai Mob:98401-42164
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Dear Friends,
I have read some of the detailed responses of fellow HR practitioners. I have the following advice to offer.
- Charge Sheet or Suspension is NOT an HR practice. There is nothing right or wrong about this.
- Managing Discipline or rather Indiscipline is a very important and sensitive function of the HR person in an organization. Ignoring indiscipline generally piles up into a messy affair which takes a lot of effort and time to sort out, at a later stage.
- Indiscipline must be addressed with clinical promptness and precision. There is no tailor-made solution how to handle indiscipline. Solutions are situation based and need to be so addressed.
- In this case an employee with a very long association and clean service record, is found to have not followed the proper system of following up with some clients resulting in an outstanding of Rs.40 lacs approx.
- The management has suspended him. Now as Ranjeet has stated, he has been suspended for 7 days whereas the Standing Orders of the Co. provide for suspension of only 6 days.
- I will safely suppose that the 6 day suspension stipulated in the Standing Orders is “Punishment” and not suspension pending enquiry.
- There is a suggestion that the Charge Sheet should have been issued after Enquiry. If it is Domestic Enquiry that is being referred to, the suggestion is incorrect.
- I will outline the process which needs to be followed if Disciplinary action is contemplated against an employee.
- At the very outset let me explain that the management is at liberty to suspend, Charge Sheet or take any action it deems proper in a given situation. What matters is whether the action so taken is correct under provisions of law or not. Can you commit a murder. Yes you can, but then you got to face the consequences.
- The correct process would be as under:
- An employee commits an act of misconduct.
- The management finds the act committed by him serious enough to immediately suspend him. This should be suspension pending enquiry into the matter.
- At a later stage, after having examined the facts of the matter, the management may issue a detailed Charge Sheet.
- It is important to impress here that the wording of the letter of suspension and later the Charge Sheet is critical and one should be careful about wording the two instruments of communication, since the entire proceedings will happen within the confines of these two letters. Legal advice may be sought before issuing this letter to an employee.
- Suspension automatically implies payment of subsistence allowance…50% of the wages for this first 90 days and 75% after that till the completion of the Enquiry.
- After the employee submits his written explanation to the Charge Sheet received by him, the management in the interest of fairplay and to grant the suspended employee fair and full opportunity to defend himself, may institute a Domestic Enquiry into the Charges leveled against the concerned employee.
- For this the management will have to appoint an Enquiry Officer to conduct the DO(Domestic Enquiry) This process also follows a certain procedure which should be correct.
- During the Enquiry the employee will be allowed to seek assistance of a co-employee or even an outsider (generally it a Union representative) to act as his counsel to represent him in the Enquiry proceedings.
- After the enquiry is over the management will decide the kind of punishment it plans to inflict upon the employee for which proper written communication to the employee is necessary.
Correctness of the action taken, carefully considering the nature of misconduct and the punishment given, will determine the future course of action should the employee decide to challenge the decision of the management in a court of law.
Someone has said that in while addressing cases of indiscipline one should use
one’s head and not the heart. I fully agree with this line of thought.
Managing indiscipline is very vast subject and there a lot of fine points that are involved depending upon situations. It will be difficult to list all of these in one go.
I hope the above narration and explanation of handling indiscipline gives you a good insight into certain important realities.
In case you have any specific clarification, please feel free to contact me anytime.
Best Wishes,
Vasant Nair
09717726667
Email:
s
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Friends,
I have read some of the detailed responses of fellow HR practitioners. I have the following advice to offer.
1. Charge Sheet or Suspension is NOT an HR practice. There is nothing right or wrong about this.
2. Managing Discipline or rather Indiscipline is a very important and sensitive function of the HR person in an organization. Ignoring indiscipline generally piles up into a messy affair which takes a lot of effort and time to sort out, at a later stage.
3. Indiscipline must be addressed with clinical promptness and precision. There is no tailor-made solution how to handle indiscipline. Solutions are situation based and need to be so addressed.
4. In this case an employee with a very long association and clean service record, is found to have not followed the proper system of following up with some clients resulting in an outstanding of Rs.40 lacs approx.
5. The management has suspended him. Now as Ranjeet has stated, he has been suspended for 7 days whereas the Standing Orders of the Co. provide for suspension of only 6 days.
6. I will safely suppose that the 6 day suspension stipulated in the Standing Orders is “Punishment” and not suspension pending enquiry.
7. There is a suggestion that the Charge Sheet should have been issued after Enquiry. If it is Domestic Enquiry that is being referred to, the suggestion is incorrect.
8. I will outline the process which needs to be followed if Disciplinary action is contemplated against an employee.
9. At the very outset let me explain that the management is at liberty to suspend, Charge Sheet or take any action it deems proper in a given situation. What matters is whether the action so taken is correct under provisions of law or not. Can you commit a murder. Yes you can, but then you got to face the consequences.
10. The correct process would be as under:
a. An employee commits an act of misconduct.
b. The management finds the act committed by him serious enough to immediately suspend him. This should be suspension pending enquiry into the matter.
c. At a later stage, after having examined the facts of the matter, the management may issue a detailed Charge Sheet.
d. It is important to impress here that the wording of the letter of suspension and later the Charge Sheet is critical and one should be careful about wording the two instruments of communication, since the entire proceedings will happen within the confines of these two letters. Legal advice may be sought before issuing this letter to an employee.
e. Suspension automatically implies payment of subsistence allowance…50% of the wages for this first 90 days and 75% after that till the completion of the Enquiry.
f. After the employee submits his written explanation to the Charge Sheet received by him, the management in the interest of fairplay and to grant the suspended employee fair and full opportunity to defend himself, may institute a Domestic Enquiry into the Charges leveled against the concerned employee.
g. For this the management will have to appoint an Enquiry Officer to conduct the DO(Domestic Enquiry) This process also follows a certain procedure which should be correct.
h. During the Enquiry the employee will be allowed to seek assistance of a co-employee or even an outsider (generally it a Union representative) to act as his counsel to represent him in the Enquiry proceedings.
i. After the enquiry is over the management will decide the kind of punishment it plans to inflict upon the employee for which proper written communication to the employee is necessary.
Correctness of the action taken, carefully considering the nature of misconduct and the punishment given, will determine the future course of action should the employee decide to challenge the decision of the management in a court of law.
Someone has said that in while addressing cases of indiscipline one should use
one’s head and not the heart. I fully agree with this line of thought.
Managing indiscipline is very vast subject and there a lot of fine points that are involved depending upon situations. It will be difficult to list all of these in one go.
I hope the above narration and explanation of handling indiscipline gives you a good insight into certain important realities.
In case you have any specific clarification, please feel free to contact me anytime.
Best Wishes,
Vasant Nair
09717726667
Email:
s
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I have read some of the detailed responses of fellow HR practitioners. I have the following advice to offer.
1. Charge Sheet or Suspension is NOT an HR practice. There is nothing right or wrong about this.
2. Managing Discipline or rather Indiscipline is a very important and sensitive function of the HR person in an organization. Ignoring indiscipline generally piles up into a messy affair which takes a lot of effort and time to sort out, at a later stage.
3. Indiscipline must be addressed with clinical promptness and precision. There is no tailor-made solution how to handle indiscipline. Solutions are situation based and need to be so addressed.
4. In this case an employee with a very long association and clean service record, is found to have not followed the proper system of following up with some clients resulting in an outstanding of Rs.40 lacs approx.
5. The management has suspended him. Now as Ranjeet has stated, he has been suspended for 7 days whereas the Standing Orders of the Co. provide for suspension of only 6 days.
6. I will safely suppose that the 6 day suspension stipulated in the Standing Orders is “Punishment” and not suspension pending enquiry.
7. There is a suggestion that the Charge Sheet should have been issued after Enquiry. If it is Domestic Enquiry that is being referred to, the suggestion is incorrect.
8. I will outline the process which needs to be followed if Disciplinary action is contemplated against an employee.
9. At the very outset let me explain that the management is at liberty to suspend, Charge Sheet or take any action it deems proper in a given situation. What matters is whether the action so taken is correct under provisions of law or not. Can you commit a murder. Yes you can, but then you got to face the consequences.
10. The correct process would be as under:
a. An employee commits an act of misconduct.
b. The management finds the act committed by him serious enough to immediately suspend him. This should be suspension pending enquiry into the matter.
c. At a later stage, after having examined the facts of the matter, the management may issue a detailed Charge Sheet.
d. It is important to impress here that the wording of the letter of suspension and later the Charge Sheet is critical and one should be careful about wording the two instruments of communication, since the entire proceedings will happen within the confines of these two letters. Legal advice may be sought before issuing this letter to an employee.
e. Suspension automatically implies payment of subsistence allowance…50% of the wages for this first 90 days and 75% after that till the completion of the Enquiry.
f. After the employee submits his written explanation to the Charge Sheet received by him, the management in the interest of fairplay and to grant the suspended employee fair and full opportunity to defend himself, may institute a Domestic Enquiry into the Charges leveled against the concerned employee.
g. For this the management will have to appoint an Enquiry Officer to conduct the DO(Domestic Enquiry) This process also follows a certain procedure which should be correct.
h. During the Enquiry the employee will be allowed to seek assistance of a co-employee or even an outsider (generally it a Union representative) to act as his counsel to represent him in the Enquiry proceedings.
i. After the enquiry is over the management will decide the kind of punishment it plans to inflict upon the employee for which proper written communication to the employee is necessary.
Correctness of the action taken, carefully considering the nature of misconduct and the punishment given, will determine the future course of action should the employee decide to challenge the decision of the management in a court of law.
Someone has said that in while addressing cases of indiscipline one should use
one’s head and not the heart. I fully agree with this line of thought.
Managing indiscipline is very vast subject and there a lot of fine points that are involved depending upon situations. It will be difficult to list all of these in one go.
I hope the above narration and explanation of handling indiscipline gives you a good insight into certain important realities.
In case you have any specific clarification, please feel free to contact me anytime.
Best Wishes,
Vasant Nair
09717726667
Email:
s
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Jeeni,
I see varied views on the issues, and I thought I would add to it:
1. At the outset, an employee can be suspended pending an inquiry on serious charges. At times, due to the gravity of the situation, an employee may be suspended pending an inquiry, and a charge sheet can be issued in due course. As per the law, in general, if the standing orders apply (if the person is considered a workman), then subsistence allowance is payable.
2. The concept of penal discipline is generally used in the case of workmen, and in the case of executives, today such actions are not resorted to. Instead, counseling is used, and where it fails repeatedly, then one needs to look at other options for separation. Unless there is a deliberate malafide intent or an issue of integrity, it is best to have a mutually peaceful separation.
3. The decision on separation must be carefully taken. Unless there are serious issues, penal action against an employee with 25 years of blemishless service will demoralize others.
4. In the case cited by you, if management has done what you have said, then there will be no "fair play and equity." Every person must be heard before being condemned. If management does not do so and takes unilateral action, it will kill enthusiasm and instill "fear psychosis" among employees. In today's context of focusing on enhancing employee engagement, such management actions will produce an adverse effect.
5. Many times these days, managements use the termination clause in the appointment letter to terminate. Such actions can be questioned in court if the person seeks protection under the ID Act. It will be the onus on the management then to prove that the person is not a workman.
6. One more important point I would like you to note is that HR Managers many times have to dance to the dictates of the higher-ups. Many times they are helpless and forced to carry out the instructions. In the instant case, if the GM is a dictator, there is nothing that the HR Manager can do, or else he or she should be ready to quit.
7. A suggestion on what an executive can do: The executive can make a representation to the GM outlining what had happened. Such letters can be marked to the superior of the GM as well. Of course, a better option would be to approach the supervisor and through him or her seek to clarify and resolve the issue. In a case like this, a supervisor will also be accountable, and it will be unfair to blame the person below as a cause for failure.
8. One more aspect that needs to be seen is whether the work assigned is part of the normal job of the executive. Is the person briefed about the task clearly? Did the executive make efforts? If so, what was done? Was the employee provided adequate resources to do the task? Were there any extraneous factors that affected the transaction? We need answers to all these questions before coming to a conclusion as to who was responsible for the situation.
My answers to your points are as follows:
1. Suspension without subsistence allowance is justifiable by law or not. If the person is covered under the ID Act or standing orders, it will be bad in law. It is not the "designation" but the job done that will be the basis of judgment. A subsistence allowance is payable (please refer to the ID Act or standing orders). Even for an executive, the employer will stand high if a subsistence allowance is paid.
2. Suspension only if one misconduct is justifiable with law and the principle of natural justice. "Suspension pending inquiry" is not a punishment as per law. "Suspension" as a punishment can be imposed based on the gravity of charges proved in a domestic inquiry. If the principles of natural justice are not followed, the punishment is bad in law and will be struck down by a court.
3. Suspending an employee without any formal inquiry is not justifiable. Not justifiable. Even if an employee accepts, it has been opined to have an inquiry and then effect the punishment to avoid any charges that the admission letter was extracted.
4. To charge sheet an employee directly asking for an explanation even if you are not going to conduct a domestic inquiry is justifiable. It is fair to ask for an explanation from an employee by giving a notice of charges leveled with the details of acts of commission and omission, giving 48 or 72 hours.
5. It is not a part of misappropriate use of funds, it is just that bills worth 40 lakhs were not forwarded to the concerned ministry on time. Discipline includes a lot of things. We need to investigate the matter as outlined above by me.
Do you think that it is a good human resource practice where your employee thinks that their jobs are insecure? Whether we should take steps with an iron hand where people will work until the bosses are there? No, that will not yield results. Please give feedback to the management through your boss. Maybe you may not be aware of some facts that were not told. A healthy communication is required if there has been some reason. Whether we should encourage a culture where people are working with a feeling of insecurity and in a tense situation? Of course not. Such a culture will drive away talent and lead to slavery. When we say Human Resources, we are here to take care of our employees and to drive a good culture in the organization. HR is a tool many times used to shoot. A good HR Manager will try to avoid such situations by educating the management. If the HR Manager is under directions and has to execute without an option, what can he do? He can't jump and keep jumping. It is difficult to infer about HR or a manager unless we know the full situation. The truth many times is elsewhere.
I had gone through a book by Mr. Khera "You Can Win," where he has mentioned that fear motivation is only temporary. It works until the time the fear factor or boss is there. I personally believe in a culture in an organization where employees look forward to coming to the job. Yes, we need to create such a situation, an enabling climate. Look for specifics to be done.
Please answer my queries: Two suspensions in a week, are we going in the right direction? Need to look into the facts. Please ask your manager. If this is a culture, find another place to work. Throwing out an employee or taking their resignation, is it right or wrong? Maybe it is a good policy to reduce your heads in this period of recession. Need to understand the full facts and the situation before we can come to a conclusion. If the ship is sinking, then we need to see how we can turnaround.
What will you say to the GM who scolds everybody for small things like the phone being disconnected due to technical reasons in between? If the top man behaves like that, there is not much you can do. It is up to the management to see what they want to perpetuate. I am sure the noise will reach the management sometime, and they will take corrective action. Maybe I think he does not know what is the meaning of HR. Our first value of the company is integrity, respect... Where is the respect for the other, where is that joy at the workplace? Many times what you stated is given as lip service. That is why employee engagement varies, and it depends on what is actually present. The HR Department coming with statements without the commitment of the top will be of no use. The Management Team as a whole needs to articulate and take actions, or else such statements will hang on the walls like pictures.
Again, my question is: Is it not necessary to issue warning letters in minor misconducts like absence before issuing a charge sheet or suspending them directly is right? Ideally yes. But at times based on gravity, if the need for higher punishment can be given.
Kind regards,
[Your Name]
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I see varied views on the issues, and I thought I would add to it:
1. At the outset, an employee can be suspended pending an inquiry on serious charges. At times, due to the gravity of the situation, an employee may be suspended pending an inquiry, and a charge sheet can be issued in due course. As per the law, in general, if the standing orders apply (if the person is considered a workman), then subsistence allowance is payable.
2. The concept of penal discipline is generally used in the case of workmen, and in the case of executives, today such actions are not resorted to. Instead, counseling is used, and where it fails repeatedly, then one needs to look at other options for separation. Unless there is a deliberate malafide intent or an issue of integrity, it is best to have a mutually peaceful separation.
3. The decision on separation must be carefully taken. Unless there are serious issues, penal action against an employee with 25 years of blemishless service will demoralize others.
4. In the case cited by you, if management has done what you have said, then there will be no "fair play and equity." Every person must be heard before being condemned. If management does not do so and takes unilateral action, it will kill enthusiasm and instill "fear psychosis" among employees. In today's context of focusing on enhancing employee engagement, such management actions will produce an adverse effect.
5. Many times these days, managements use the termination clause in the appointment letter to terminate. Such actions can be questioned in court if the person seeks protection under the ID Act. It will be the onus on the management then to prove that the person is not a workman.
6. One more important point I would like you to note is that HR Managers many times have to dance to the dictates of the higher-ups. Many times they are helpless and forced to carry out the instructions. In the instant case, if the GM is a dictator, there is nothing that the HR Manager can do, or else he or she should be ready to quit.
7. A suggestion on what an executive can do: The executive can make a representation to the GM outlining what had happened. Such letters can be marked to the superior of the GM as well. Of course, a better option would be to approach the supervisor and through him or her seek to clarify and resolve the issue. In a case like this, a supervisor will also be accountable, and it will be unfair to blame the person below as a cause for failure.
8. One more aspect that needs to be seen is whether the work assigned is part of the normal job of the executive. Is the person briefed about the task clearly? Did the executive make efforts? If so, what was done? Was the employee provided adequate resources to do the task? Were there any extraneous factors that affected the transaction? We need answers to all these questions before coming to a conclusion as to who was responsible for the situation.
My answers to your points are as follows:
1. Suspension without subsistence allowance is justifiable by law or not. If the person is covered under the ID Act or standing orders, it will be bad in law. It is not the "designation" but the job done that will be the basis of judgment. A subsistence allowance is payable (please refer to the ID Act or standing orders). Even for an executive, the employer will stand high if a subsistence allowance is paid.
2. Suspension only if one misconduct is justifiable with law and the principle of natural justice. "Suspension pending inquiry" is not a punishment as per law. "Suspension" as a punishment can be imposed based on the gravity of charges proved in a domestic inquiry. If the principles of natural justice are not followed, the punishment is bad in law and will be struck down by a court.
3. Suspending an employee without any formal inquiry is not justifiable. Not justifiable. Even if an employee accepts, it has been opined to have an inquiry and then effect the punishment to avoid any charges that the admission letter was extracted.
4. To charge sheet an employee directly asking for an explanation even if you are not going to conduct a domestic inquiry is justifiable. It is fair to ask for an explanation from an employee by giving a notice of charges leveled with the details of acts of commission and omission, giving 48 or 72 hours.
5. It is not a part of misappropriate use of funds, it is just that bills worth 40 lakhs were not forwarded to the concerned ministry on time. Discipline includes a lot of things. We need to investigate the matter as outlined above by me.
Do you think that it is a good human resource practice where your employee thinks that their jobs are insecure? Whether we should take steps with an iron hand where people will work until the bosses are there? No, that will not yield results. Please give feedback to the management through your boss. Maybe you may not be aware of some facts that were not told. A healthy communication is required if there has been some reason. Whether we should encourage a culture where people are working with a feeling of insecurity and in a tense situation? Of course not. Such a culture will drive away talent and lead to slavery. When we say Human Resources, we are here to take care of our employees and to drive a good culture in the organization. HR is a tool many times used to shoot. A good HR Manager will try to avoid such situations by educating the management. If the HR Manager is under directions and has to execute without an option, what can he do? He can't jump and keep jumping. It is difficult to infer about HR or a manager unless we know the full situation. The truth many times is elsewhere.
I had gone through a book by Mr. Khera "You Can Win," where he has mentioned that fear motivation is only temporary. It works until the time the fear factor or boss is there. I personally believe in a culture in an organization where employees look forward to coming to the job. Yes, we need to create such a situation, an enabling climate. Look for specifics to be done.
Please answer my queries: Two suspensions in a week, are we going in the right direction? Need to look into the facts. Please ask your manager. If this is a culture, find another place to work. Throwing out an employee or taking their resignation, is it right or wrong? Maybe it is a good policy to reduce your heads in this period of recession. Need to understand the full facts and the situation before we can come to a conclusion. If the ship is sinking, then we need to see how we can turnaround.
What will you say to the GM who scolds everybody for small things like the phone being disconnected due to technical reasons in between? If the top man behaves like that, there is not much you can do. It is up to the management to see what they want to perpetuate. I am sure the noise will reach the management sometime, and they will take corrective action. Maybe I think he does not know what is the meaning of HR. Our first value of the company is integrity, respect... Where is the respect for the other, where is that joy at the workplace? Many times what you stated is given as lip service. That is why employee engagement varies, and it depends on what is actually present. The HR Department coming with statements without the commitment of the top will be of no use. The Management Team as a whole needs to articulate and take actions, or else such statements will hang on the walls like pictures.
Again, my question is: Is it not necessary to issue warning letters in minor misconducts like absence before issuing a charge sheet or suspending them directly is right? Ideally yes. But at times based on gravity, if the need for higher punishment can be given.
Kind regards,
[Your Name]
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
Disciplinary action under the tenets of model standing order is perfectly all right. In the model standing orders, there is provision for suspension pending inquiry. Good human resource practice includes initiating disciplinary action against erring staff. The role of the HR dept cannot always remain good and should be in the direction of healthy practices.
Shibu Krishnan
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Disciplinary action under the tenets of model standing order is perfectly all right. In the model standing orders, there is provision for suspension pending inquiry. Good human resource practice includes initiating disciplinary action against erring staff. The role of the HR dept cannot always remain good and should be in the direction of healthy practices.
Shibu Krishnan
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The advice given by Mr Vasant Nair is absolutely correct. Thanks for sharing the rights steps to be taken in the conduct of domestic enquiry.
I am sure no one will have doubts now about the procedure.
KCS Kutty
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am sure no one will have doubts now about the procedure.
KCS Kutty
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Friends,
I think Mr. Sarfaraz had hit the nail on the head.
A junior employee being HELD RESPONSIBLE for non-recovery of Rs. 40 lakhs (that too from a Ministry)
The question that arises are :
1. Is the "Ministry" running away with Rs. 40 lakhs ?? Anything due with the Govt. of India, can always be recovered.
2. Were the seniors sleeping for so many years, and then they suddenly woke up ?
3. Why should not the seniors be charge-sheeted ?? If they say, they were NOT aware, then this is also a big error on their part.
4. The truth, in my humble opinion, is that this poor chap had been reminding his bosses time and again regarding the Rs. 40 lakhs.
But since, the company wanted some favours from the Ministry, they were not pressing hard for the amount.
In turn they must be telling the person verbally (as it happens normally), to keep things in abeyance for some time.
Such verbal orders must have continued time and again.
Also, it is not possible for a junior employee to recover Rs. 40 lakhs from the Ministry on his own. He must be going to his bosses, who must be ordering him to keep quiet for some time.
I wonder how our dear HR professionals are baying for the blood of the poor employee in the name of "DISCIPLINE".
Give a dog a bad name, and then shoot him.
HR professional should develop the ability to -
Unfortunately, they only believe in :
Link for what ?
A postman's job of passing repugnant orders from top-to-bottom ??
Correct. One should take only the employer's side; after all its a question of one's bread-and-butter which is provided by the employer (and not by the employees).
Looked at this way, there is no difference between the HR's involvement and Auditors involvement in the Satyam scam - both acted on behalf and in collusion with the erstwhile management.
I agree that we are all responsible to our own families; but then we should also draw up a limit to the extent to which one can bend.
Else, why call oneself an HR professional (without perhaps having the requisite degrees/diplomas); better to go back to the business of sugar cane juice vending (as our member AnonymousA has implied in a thread).
Dear Ranjeet
I compliment you on putting up this thread, and I appreciate your personal values and professional ethics in thinking that suspension is unfair, and that something is not correct with this whole episode.
We need more upright, sensitive and brave HR professionals like you.
I agree with your satement "When we say Human Resouces, we are here to take care of our employees and to driven a good culture in the organisation."
and, I understand you when you say, "In my previous post also i had writeen that my HR Manager knows only to manage by hook or by crook. She just know what happens in one company itself as she is baby of this comapny."
I think HR these days have found a "new niche" in the scheme of things.
Unfortunately, I see that the day is not far off; when HR professionals will be handing summary Dismissal order; in case there is a loss in the company; to several office-boys ; the reason being - their indiscipline; in not providing good quality tea at the right time to senior officials, causing a drop in their efficiency and thereby causing a loss to the company !!!
Please do not laugh, when one can hold a petty employee responsible for Rs. 40 lakhs; why not office-boys for loss worth crores ??
After all, isn't whatever the BOSS says is correct ??
Regards.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I think Mr. Sarfaraz had hit the nail on the head.
A junior employee being HELD RESPONSIBLE for non-recovery of Rs. 40 lakhs (that too from a Ministry)
The question that arises are :
1. Is the "Ministry" running away with Rs. 40 lakhs ?? Anything due with the Govt. of India, can always be recovered.
2. Were the seniors sleeping for so many years, and then they suddenly woke up ?
3. Why should not the seniors be charge-sheeted ?? If they say, they were NOT aware, then this is also a big error on their part.
4. The truth, in my humble opinion, is that this poor chap had been reminding his bosses time and again regarding the Rs. 40 lakhs.
But since, the company wanted some favours from the Ministry, they were not pressing hard for the amount.
In turn they must be telling the person verbally (as it happens normally), to keep things in abeyance for some time.
Such verbal orders must have continued time and again.
Also, it is not possible for a junior employee to recover Rs. 40 lakhs from the Ministry on his own. He must be going to his bosses, who must be ordering him to keep quiet for some time.
I wonder how our dear HR professionals are baying for the blood of the poor employee in the name of "DISCIPLINE".
Give a dog a bad name, and then shoot him.
HR professional should develop the ability to -
- read between the lines
- be analytical in their approach and not to accept 'facts' as they are presented
- play a non-partisan strategic role for the betterment of the organization
Unfortunately, they only believe in :
- "HR" is a link between the Management and the Employee."
Link for what ?
A postman's job of passing repugnant orders from top-to-bottom ??
- "Nowhere its a theory that the HR must only consider the employee side of view."
Correct. One should take only the employer's side; after all its a question of one's bread-and-butter which is provided by the employer (and not by the employees).
Looked at this way, there is no difference between the HR's involvement and Auditors involvement in the Satyam scam - both acted on behalf and in collusion with the erstwhile management.
I agree that we are all responsible to our own families; but then we should also draw up a limit to the extent to which one can bend.
Else, why call oneself an HR professional (without perhaps having the requisite degrees/diplomas); better to go back to the business of sugar cane juice vending (as our member AnonymousA has implied in a thread).
Dear Ranjeet
I compliment you on putting up this thread, and I appreciate your personal values and professional ethics in thinking that suspension is unfair, and that something is not correct with this whole episode.
We need more upright, sensitive and brave HR professionals like you.
I agree with your satement "When we say Human Resouces, we are here to take care of our employees and to driven a good culture in the organisation."
and, I understand you when you say, "In my previous post also i had writeen that my HR Manager knows only to manage by hook or by crook. She just know what happens in one company itself as she is baby of this comapny."
I think HR these days have found a "new niche" in the scheme of things.
Unfortunately, I see that the day is not far off; when HR professionals will be handing summary Dismissal order; in case there is a loss in the company; to several office-boys ; the reason being - their indiscipline; in not providing good quality tea at the right time to senior officials, causing a drop in their efficiency and thereby causing a loss to the company !!!
Please do not laugh, when one can hold a petty employee responsible for Rs. 40 lakhs; why not office-boys for loss worth crores ??
After all, isn't whatever the BOSS says is correct ??
Regards.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Friends,
I endorse Mr. KCS Kutty's view about the inputs from Mr. Vasant Nair.
Mr. Nair has given a very precise and legally correct brief on disciplinary proceedings.
Another point I wish to reiterate is: Issuing a charge sheet is not the end but the beginning of disciplinary proceedings. Subsequently, a Departmental Enquiry needs to be constituted, an Enquiry Officer nominated; who 'appoints' a Prosecution Nominee and similarly allows the Charge-Sheeted Employee (CSE) to choose a co-worker to assist him in his defense. The proceedings are quasi-judicial in nature, thereby meaning that all the principles of natural justice are followed.
However, in these days of profiteering, no company has the time or sensitivity to follow legally laid out rules. They have the power and money to bribe one and all. So principles are flouted with impunity.
It is for HR professionals to create a strategic role for HR in an organization; as well as champion the cause of fair play, corporate ethics, and principles of natural justice in an organization.
Also, they must be made aware of the role and rights of a whistleblower in an organization, and that it is alright to speak against the management in case principles of ethics are being compromised (and not just being an "agent" or a "yes-man" of the employer).
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I endorse Mr. KCS Kutty's view about the inputs from Mr. Vasant Nair.
Mr. Nair has given a very precise and legally correct brief on disciplinary proceedings.
Another point I wish to reiterate is: Issuing a charge sheet is not the end but the beginning of disciplinary proceedings. Subsequently, a Departmental Enquiry needs to be constituted, an Enquiry Officer nominated; who 'appoints' a Prosecution Nominee and similarly allows the Charge-Sheeted Employee (CSE) to choose a co-worker to assist him in his defense. The proceedings are quasi-judicial in nature, thereby meaning that all the principles of natural justice are followed.
However, in these days of profiteering, no company has the time or sensitivity to follow legally laid out rules. They have the power and money to bribe one and all. So principles are flouted with impunity.
It is for HR professionals to create a strategic role for HR in an organization; as well as champion the cause of fair play, corporate ethics, and principles of natural justice in an organization.
Also, they must be made aware of the role and rights of a whistleblower in an organization, and that it is alright to speak against the management in case principles of ethics are being compromised (and not just being an "agent" or a "yes-man" of the employer).
Warm regards.
From India, 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.
Innovative HR Practices-.doc