i have read a lot many points and i strongly agree that no business is done for charity. Its business. When we or for that matter any layman starts for a business each and every step is raised in order to get maximum profits.
Than what's the sense blaming Jet for downsizing to not initiate the loss cycle(keep away the profit earning). Why all off a sudden the media & the politicians pounced on a business decision that has been taken for the business itself.
Maybe the sudden step would be a block to gulp in but they are not running business for people. Its the business whose running the peple.
and besides that nw when this has been announced that 1900 employees would be called back on their jobs the politicians have shut bt the media nw has a problem that how could the decision of giving pink slips to the huge mass could be taken without the CM's consent?
God this indian Media?????
Antima
From India, Jaipur
4Than what's the sense blaming Jet for downsizing to not initiate the loss cycle(keep away the profit earning). Why all off a sudden the media & the politicians pounced on a business decision that has been taken for the business itself.
Maybe the sudden step would be a block to gulp in but they are not running business for people. Its the business whose running the peple.
and besides that nw when this has been announced that 1900 employees would be called back on their jobs the politicians have shut bt the media nw has a problem that how could the decision of giving pink slips to the huge mass could be taken without the CM's consent?
God this indian Media?????
Antima
From India, Jaipur
Dear All,
The management should have made a thorough ground work before venturing into the process of retrenching 1900 employees.
The issue came up to notice as the number of employees retrenched were very high. It should have done in a period of six months rather than going on a days' news and shock.
They would have made a halfyearly performance evaluation (as this is the mid of FY 0809). The low performers can be given the pink slip. They can abstain from recruiting new employees and can avoid replacement of the resigned employees. The percentage of salary hike can be lowered.
Cost cutting can be achieved through the withdrawal of the certain avoidable allowances and perks.
There wer lot many ways of doing this rather than a massive retrenchment.
Thanks
From India, Bangalore
The management should have made a thorough ground work before venturing into the process of retrenching 1900 employees.
The issue came up to notice as the number of employees retrenched were very high. It should have done in a period of six months rather than going on a days' news and shock.
They would have made a halfyearly performance evaluation (as this is the mid of FY 0809). The low performers can be given the pink slip. They can abstain from recruiting new employees and can avoid replacement of the resigned employees. The percentage of salary hike can be lowered.
Cost cutting can be achieved through the withdrawal of the certain avoidable allowances and perks.
There wer lot many ways of doing this rather than a massive retrenchment.
Thanks
From India, Bangalore
Hello everyone,
As a former Airline industry professional, currently associated actively with trainings related to aviation, I have been following the developments in the airline industry very keenly. The very day that Jet & Kingfisher announced their strategic alliance, it should have set alarm bells ringing for employees in both the airlines.
The very purpose of having an alliance of this nature is to cut down on overheads wherever possible. These are troubled times for aviation, and the annual salary bill has become a huge burden for most airlines. More so in the case of full service carriers like Jet and Kingfisher, since their business model requires them to have a significantly larger number of cabin crew on board their flights as compared to the Low Cost carriers. And the way things had been moving in aviation till last year, they were obviously in the expansion mode, recruiting staff and gearing up for it.
The slowdown has hit everyone – each airline is struggling hard to keep flying. Jet & KF are no different. Forming the alliance was a brilliant move – it created grounds for pooling of resources. However, this also posed a problem – the combined resources created a huge surplus ! So obviously, it made sense for them to get rid of all excess staff, and naturally, the first to be hit were the probationers and contractual staff. Whilst it is a good humanitarian gesture on part of Jet to take them all back, it still doesn’t make economic sense for them.
Also, this is only the tip of the iceberg. A strategic alliance would also require them to pool resources on the ground. Which obviously means that they now have a huge surplus in terms of ground staff as well. I have the feeling that we have not heard the last of these retrenchments. I could be wrong – and I hope I am, but it would be safe to presume that many ground personnel would also be affected. We will have to wait for the dust to settle down somewhat before the actual picture becomes clearer. But one thing is for sure – the HR departments of these airlines have their work cut out for them. One can’t blame the HR people for implementing the organisational plan, even if that means sacking employees by the hundreds.
Regards,
Rajiv Bajaj
New Delhi
From India, New Delhi
As a former Airline industry professional, currently associated actively with trainings related to aviation, I have been following the developments in the airline industry very keenly. The very day that Jet & Kingfisher announced their strategic alliance, it should have set alarm bells ringing for employees in both the airlines.
The very purpose of having an alliance of this nature is to cut down on overheads wherever possible. These are troubled times for aviation, and the annual salary bill has become a huge burden for most airlines. More so in the case of full service carriers like Jet and Kingfisher, since their business model requires them to have a significantly larger number of cabin crew on board their flights as compared to the Low Cost carriers. And the way things had been moving in aviation till last year, they were obviously in the expansion mode, recruiting staff and gearing up for it.
The slowdown has hit everyone – each airline is struggling hard to keep flying. Jet & KF are no different. Forming the alliance was a brilliant move – it created grounds for pooling of resources. However, this also posed a problem – the combined resources created a huge surplus ! So obviously, it made sense for them to get rid of all excess staff, and naturally, the first to be hit were the probationers and contractual staff. Whilst it is a good humanitarian gesture on part of Jet to take them all back, it still doesn’t make economic sense for them.
Also, this is only the tip of the iceberg. A strategic alliance would also require them to pool resources on the ground. Which obviously means that they now have a huge surplus in terms of ground staff as well. I have the feeling that we have not heard the last of these retrenchments. I could be wrong – and I hope I am, but it would be safe to presume that many ground personnel would also be affected. We will have to wait for the dust to settle down somewhat before the actual picture becomes clearer. But one thing is for sure – the HR departments of these airlines have their work cut out for them. One can’t blame the HR people for implementing the organisational plan, even if that means sacking employees by the hundreds.
Regards,
Rajiv Bajaj
New Delhi
From India, New Delhi
Hi All
That summary of the current scenario from Rajiv was pretty good. I am reminded of Lee Iacocca, who had to shut down many plants and lay off thousands and thousands of employees to save the Chrysler Corporation from bankruptcy. However, Lee Iacocca in his biography mentions the pains he took to lay off these employees in a systematic method and that too with enough notice. Taking back all the employees due to pressure may mean serious financial implications for the company in the near future and could even bring it down to its knees. Of course, we would know about that only after the dust settles down, as Rajiv put it across.
Regards
Mahesh
That summary of the current scenario from Rajiv was pretty good. I am reminded of Lee Iacocca, who had to shut down many plants and lay off thousands and thousands of employees to save the Chrysler Corporation from bankruptcy. However, Lee Iacocca in his biography mentions the pains he took to lay off these employees in a systematic method and that too with enough notice. Taking back all the employees due to pressure may mean serious financial implications for the company in the near future and could even bring it down to its knees. Of course, we would know about that only after the dust settles down, as Rajiv put it across.
Regards
Mahesh
Hi,
In the present topic I want ask the question not only to the HR's even the Bussiness Analysts because they have to understand the needs and the current situation in market.Every one is aware of the market so atleast after estimating the market they might have informed the employees priors so that they might have searched for the alternative.
From India, Hyderabad
In the present topic I want ask the question not only to the HR's even the Bussiness Analysts because they have to understand the needs and the current situation in market.Every one is aware of the market so atleast after estimating the market they might have informed the employees priors so that they might have searched for the alternative.
From India, Hyderabad
This episode has taught us what can be expected in case of mass termination of employees (though they are just probationers).
May be Vijaya Mallya might have been a factor for this change of decision as well.,
The gratitude expressed by an 'Ex-Jet' employee was worthy reading.
Now Raj Thakery might have got 2 more horns :)
From India, Madras
May be Vijaya Mallya might have been a factor for this change of decision as well.,
The gratitude expressed by an 'Ex-Jet' employee was worthy reading.
Now Raj Thakery might have got 2 more horns :)
From India, Madras
Dear All
The CEO of Jet is a Foreigner who was not aware of Indian values & culture of choosing Diwali to do the retrenchment .Timing of Retrenchment is a thumb rule,you dont do it in festive time.Human Relations is more than the Law.
The retrenchment is illegal as Jet Airways is an Industry under Id Act :
j) "industry" means any systematic activity carried on by co-operation between an employer and his workmen (whether such workmen are employed by such employer directly or by or through any agency, including a contractor) for the production, supply or distribution of goods or services with a view to satisfy human wants or wishes (not being wants or wishes which are merely spiritual or religious in nature), whether or not, - (i) any capital has been invested for the purpose of carrying on such activity; or
(ii) such activity is carried on with a motive to make any gain or profit, and includes - (a) any activity of the Dock Labour Board established under section 5A of the Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Act, 1948 (9 of 1949);
(b) any activity relating to the promotion of sales or business or both carried on by an establishment, but does not include - (1) any agricultural operation except where such agricultural operation is carried on in an integrated manner with any other activity (being any such activity as is referred to in the foregoing provisions of this clause) and such other activity is the predominant one.
Explanation : For the purposes of this sub-clause, "agricultural operation" does not include any activity carried on in a plantation as defined in clause (f) of section 2 of the Plantations Labour Act, 1951 (69 of 1951); or
(2) hospitals or dispensaries; or
(3) educational, scientific, research or training institutions; or
(4) institutions owned or managed by organizations wholly or substantially engaged in any charitable, social or philanthropic service; or
(5) khadi or village industries; or
(6) any activity of the Government relatable to the sovereign functions of the Government including all the activities carried on by the departments of the Central Government dealing with defence research, atomic energy and space; or
(7) any domestic service; or
(8) any activity, being a profession practised by an individual or body of individuals, if the number of persons employed by the individuals or body of individuals in relation to such profession is less than ten; or
(9) any activity, being an activity carried on by a co-operative society or a club or any other like body of individuals, if the number of persons employed by the co-operative society, club or other like body of individuals in relation to such activity is less than ten;
Further permission of the Govt is to be taken under this provision of the ID Act:
25N. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT TO RETRENCHMENT OF WORKMEN. - (1) No workman employed in any industrial establishment to which this Chapter applies, who has been in continuous service for not less than one year under an employer shall be retrenched by that employer until, - (a) the workman has been given three months' notice in writing indicating the reasons for retrenchment and the period of notice has expired, or the workman has been paid in lieu of such notice, wages for the period of the notice; and
(b) the prior permission of the appropriate Government or such authority as may be specified by that Government by notification in the Official Gazette (hereafter in this section referred to as the specified authority) has been obtained on an application made in this behalf.
(2) An application for permission under sub-section (1) shall be made by the employer in the prescribed manner stating clearly the reasons for the intended retrenchment and a copy of such application shall also be served simultaneously on the workmen concerned in the prescribed manner.
(3) Where an application for permission under sub-section (1) has been made, the appropriate Government or the specified authority, after making such enquiry as it thinks fit and after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the employer, the workmen concerned and the persons interested in such retrenchment, may, having regard to the genuineness and adequacy of the reasons stated by the employer, the interests of the workmen and all other relevant factors, by order and for reasons to be recorded in writing, grant or refuse to grant such permission and a copy of such order shall be communicated to the employer and the workmen.
(4) Where an application for permission has been made under sub-section (1) and the appropriate Government or the specified authority does not communicate the order granting or refusing to grant permission to the employer within a period of sixty days from the date on which such application is made, the permission applied for shall be deemed to have been granted on the expiration of the said period of sixty days.
(5) An order of the appropriate Government or the specified authority granting or refusing to grant permission shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (6), be final and binding on all the parties concerned and shall remain in force for one year from the date of such order.
(6) The appropriate Government or the specified authority may, either on its own motion or on the application made by the employer or any workman, review its order granting or refusing to grant permission under sub-section (3) or refer the matter or, as the case may be, cause it to be referred, to a Tribunal for adjudication :
Provided that where a reference has been made to a Tribunal under this sub-section, it shall pass an award within a period of thirty days from the date of such reference.
(7) Where no application for permission under sub-section (1) is made, or where the permission for any retrenchment has been refused, such retrenchment shall be deemed to be illegal from the date on which the notice of retrenchment was given to the workman and the workman shall be entitled to all the benefits under any law for the time being in force as if no notice had been given to him.
(8) Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing provisions of this section, the appropriate Government may, if it is satisfied that owing to such exceptional circumstances as accident in the establishment or death of the employer or the like, it is necessary so to do, by order, direct that the provisions of sub-section (1) shall not apply in relation to such establishment for such period as may be specified in the order.
(9) Where permission for retrenchment has been granted under sub-section (3) or where permission for retrenchment is deemed to be granted under sub-section (4), every workman who is employed in that establishment immediately before the date of application for permission under this section shall be entitled to receive, at the time of retrenchment, compensation which shall be equivalent to fifteen days' average pay for every completed year of continuous service or any part thereof in excess of six months.
On whose considered legal advice this ill advised move was done has to be made transparent by the Jet Management.
I believe the statement of the Chairman that he did not know the decison as sometimes CEO 'S grow beyond their shoes & take their own decisons like what is done overseas without understanding the realism & ethos of India and the fundamentals of Indain Management Labour relations in the contex of the ID Act.There is an Indianness in Globalization which our Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said when he started his term i.e: Globalization with a Human Face.Je Airways forgot this doctrine for a moment.
With Regards
V.Sounder Rajan
E-mail :
,
.
From India, Bangalore
The CEO of Jet is a Foreigner who was not aware of Indian values & culture of choosing Diwali to do the retrenchment .Timing of Retrenchment is a thumb rule,you dont do it in festive time.Human Relations is more than the Law.
The retrenchment is illegal as Jet Airways is an Industry under Id Act :
j) "industry" means any systematic activity carried on by co-operation between an employer and his workmen (whether such workmen are employed by such employer directly or by or through any agency, including a contractor) for the production, supply or distribution of goods or services with a view to satisfy human wants or wishes (not being wants or wishes which are merely spiritual or religious in nature), whether or not, - (i) any capital has been invested for the purpose of carrying on such activity; or
(ii) such activity is carried on with a motive to make any gain or profit, and includes - (a) any activity of the Dock Labour Board established under section 5A of the Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Act, 1948 (9 of 1949);
(b) any activity relating to the promotion of sales or business or both carried on by an establishment, but does not include - (1) any agricultural operation except where such agricultural operation is carried on in an integrated manner with any other activity (being any such activity as is referred to in the foregoing provisions of this clause) and such other activity is the predominant one.
Explanation : For the purposes of this sub-clause, "agricultural operation" does not include any activity carried on in a plantation as defined in clause (f) of section 2 of the Plantations Labour Act, 1951 (69 of 1951); or
(2) hospitals or dispensaries; or
(3) educational, scientific, research or training institutions; or
(4) institutions owned or managed by organizations wholly or substantially engaged in any charitable, social or philanthropic service; or
(5) khadi or village industries; or
(6) any activity of the Government relatable to the sovereign functions of the Government including all the activities carried on by the departments of the Central Government dealing with defence research, atomic energy and space; or
(7) any domestic service; or
(8) any activity, being a profession practised by an individual or body of individuals, if the number of persons employed by the individuals or body of individuals in relation to such profession is less than ten; or
(9) any activity, being an activity carried on by a co-operative society or a club or any other like body of individuals, if the number of persons employed by the co-operative society, club or other like body of individuals in relation to such activity is less than ten;
Further permission of the Govt is to be taken under this provision of the ID Act:
25N. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT TO RETRENCHMENT OF WORKMEN. - (1) No workman employed in any industrial establishment to which this Chapter applies, who has been in continuous service for not less than one year under an employer shall be retrenched by that employer until, - (a) the workman has been given three months' notice in writing indicating the reasons for retrenchment and the period of notice has expired, or the workman has been paid in lieu of such notice, wages for the period of the notice; and
(b) the prior permission of the appropriate Government or such authority as may be specified by that Government by notification in the Official Gazette (hereafter in this section referred to as the specified authority) has been obtained on an application made in this behalf.
(2) An application for permission under sub-section (1) shall be made by the employer in the prescribed manner stating clearly the reasons for the intended retrenchment and a copy of such application shall also be served simultaneously on the workmen concerned in the prescribed manner.
(3) Where an application for permission under sub-section (1) has been made, the appropriate Government or the specified authority, after making such enquiry as it thinks fit and after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the employer, the workmen concerned and the persons interested in such retrenchment, may, having regard to the genuineness and adequacy of the reasons stated by the employer, the interests of the workmen and all other relevant factors, by order and for reasons to be recorded in writing, grant or refuse to grant such permission and a copy of such order shall be communicated to the employer and the workmen.
(4) Where an application for permission has been made under sub-section (1) and the appropriate Government or the specified authority does not communicate the order granting or refusing to grant permission to the employer within a period of sixty days from the date on which such application is made, the permission applied for shall be deemed to have been granted on the expiration of the said period of sixty days.
(5) An order of the appropriate Government or the specified authority granting or refusing to grant permission shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (6), be final and binding on all the parties concerned and shall remain in force for one year from the date of such order.
(6) The appropriate Government or the specified authority may, either on its own motion or on the application made by the employer or any workman, review its order granting or refusing to grant permission under sub-section (3) or refer the matter or, as the case may be, cause it to be referred, to a Tribunal for adjudication :
Provided that where a reference has been made to a Tribunal under this sub-section, it shall pass an award within a period of thirty days from the date of such reference.
(7) Where no application for permission under sub-section (1) is made, or where the permission for any retrenchment has been refused, such retrenchment shall be deemed to be illegal from the date on which the notice of retrenchment was given to the workman and the workman shall be entitled to all the benefits under any law for the time being in force as if no notice had been given to him.
(8) Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing provisions of this section, the appropriate Government may, if it is satisfied that owing to such exceptional circumstances as accident in the establishment or death of the employer or the like, it is necessary so to do, by order, direct that the provisions of sub-section (1) shall not apply in relation to such establishment for such period as may be specified in the order.
(9) Where permission for retrenchment has been granted under sub-section (3) or where permission for retrenchment is deemed to be granted under sub-section (4), every workman who is employed in that establishment immediately before the date of application for permission under this section shall be entitled to receive, at the time of retrenchment, compensation which shall be equivalent to fifteen days' average pay for every completed year of continuous service or any part thereof in excess of six months.
On whose considered legal advice this ill advised move was done has to be made transparent by the Jet Management.
I believe the statement of the Chairman that he did not know the decison as sometimes CEO 'S grow beyond their shoes & take their own decisons like what is done overseas without understanding the realism & ethos of India and the fundamentals of Indain Management Labour relations in the contex of the ID Act.There is an Indianness in Globalization which our Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said when he started his term i.e: Globalization with a Human Face.Je Airways forgot this doctrine for a moment.
With Regards
V.Sounder Rajan
E-mail :
.
From India, Bangalore
Dear Friends,
Jet is a company which wants to do some downsizing because of some business issues. As a HR, I will blame the way the issue was handled by the Jet Management and their HR team and not the downsizing move.
Downsizing is part of HR strategy and allowed in the business ethics. Rules are rules and acts are acts. But When a company is facing loses, it has to decide on its own. People quoting all the acts and emotions, "what if Jet gives IP, in days to come because of over manpower and loss due to this".
Let us see this as a crisis in the company which has to be handled by the HR in a professional way.
There are many strategies to do the down sizing without affecting the employees immediately or without attracting the media coverage etc.,
There are ways to come out of all the above acts quoted by Advocates in a professional way.
regds
strategichr
From India, Madras
Jet is a company which wants to do some downsizing because of some business issues. As a HR, I will blame the way the issue was handled by the Jet Management and their HR team and not the downsizing move.
Downsizing is part of HR strategy and allowed in the business ethics. Rules are rules and acts are acts. But When a company is facing loses, it has to decide on its own. People quoting all the acts and emotions, "what if Jet gives IP, in days to come because of over manpower and loss due to this".
Let us see this as a crisis in the company which has to be handled by the HR in a professional way.
There are many strategies to do the down sizing without affecting the employees immediately or without attracting the media coverage etc.,
There are ways to come out of all the above acts quoted by Advocates in a professional way.
regds
strategichr
From India, Madras
No Business is run for charity. The Jet Airways, would have decided the retrenchment based on their convictions that continuing those employees, on their rolls, will serve no purpose and it would be a drain on the company. The management would have given thought at so many levels and so many forums, before arriving at such decision. Now, succumbing to pressures, from all corners, they have taken back all the retrenched employees. It will be a drain on the company. Now it is for the company to find ways and means to sustain. The company is answerable to its stakeholders!
In such of these cases, HR need not feel depressed or feel guilty, in as much as, the decisions are conveyed by the Top Management and HR is only a Wing implementing the decisions.
From India, Hyderabad
In such of these cases, HR need not feel depressed or feel guilty, in as much as, the decisions are conveyed by the Top Management and HR is only a Wing implementing the decisions.
From India, Hyderabad
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.
The Exodus after a Layoff.doc
Destroyed in Seconds - Jet Plane Collision.zip
Five Ways To...Say Final Goodbye to Jet Lag.pdf