Dear Balaji,
Please calm down and read the story just above your post. Many times an employee is told the highlights of the company and not the hardships he will be facing, such as transport problems, excessive workload, or high expectations. If you think that during probation a company has the right to terminate an employee for any misconduct, whether grave or minor, you are mistaken, my friend. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has laid down rulings stating that even if you wish to terminate a probationer for misconduct, you must conduct an inquiry. The Supreme Court's direction is also the law of the land, so there would be a breach of the law if you terminate an employee this way.
This is the legal aspect of the problem. Another part is I agree that there could be situations with the employee. Even if there is any misunderstanding, please try to take feedback from the employee and attempt to solve their problem. You will not only gain the respect of the employee but also motivate him to give his best for the company. We should think in a positive way.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
320Please calm down and read the story just above your post. Many times an employee is told the highlights of the company and not the hardships he will be facing, such as transport problems, excessive workload, or high expectations. If you think that during probation a company has the right to terminate an employee for any misconduct, whether grave or minor, you are mistaken, my friend. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has laid down rulings stating that even if you wish to terminate a probationer for misconduct, you must conduct an inquiry. The Supreme Court's direction is also the law of the land, so there would be a breach of the law if you terminate an employee this way.
This is the legal aspect of the problem. Another part is I agree that there could be situations with the employee. Even if there is any misunderstanding, please try to take feedback from the employee and attempt to solve their problem. You will not only gain the respect of the employee but also motivate him to give his best for the company. We should think in a positive way.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
Let me quote a relevant case here. One of the IT companies (my friend is the HR head there) had a similar case happen. After attending a two-day induction program, a Software Engineer did not show up from the third day. He had completed all joining formalities, including the issuance of the appointment letter and its acceptance. He also signed a service agreement to serve the company for two years. My friend succeeded in contacting him over the phone, and to his surprise, the following were the reasons for his discontinuation:
(1) The job description discussed by HR at the time of recruitment did not match with the one discussed/given by his HoD upon joining.
(2) There was a mismatch between the position offered and that of the hierarchy conveyed in the department.
(3) The perception developed during the induction about the culture of the organization (the reason quoted was that during the introduction, one of the employees did not bother to look at him or wish him).
There was not much my friend could do to retain the person. He felt no need to send any warning letter/termination letter, etc., as one of the clauses in the appointment letter on automatic termination of services in case of continuous absenteeism for seven days and above addressed the same. My friend took the feedback in a positive manner and made necessary processes in place to improve the gray areas to prevent employee churn on such grounds in the future.
You may also try to find out the reason for his departure and take corrective measures. "Prevention is better than cure."
Contribute as a "Change Agent" and bring changes in the organizational culture, if need be.
All the best,
From India, Jaipur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Let me quote a relevant case here. One of the IT companies (my friend is the HR head there) had a similar case happen. After attending a two-day induction program, a Software Engineer did not show up from the third day. He had completed all joining formalities, including the issuance of the appointment letter and its acceptance. He also signed a service agreement to serve the company for two years. My friend succeeded in contacting him over the phone, and to his surprise, the following were the reasons for his discontinuation:
(1) The job description discussed by HR at the time of recruitment did not match with the one discussed/given by his HoD upon joining.
(2) There was a mismatch between the position offered and that of the hierarchy conveyed in the department.
(3) The perception developed during the induction about the culture of the organization (the reason quoted was that during the introduction, one of the employees did not bother to look at him or wish him).
There was not much my friend could do to retain the person. He felt no need to send any warning letter/termination letter, etc., as one of the clauses in the appointment letter on automatic termination of services in case of continuous absenteeism for seven days and above addressed the same. My friend took the feedback in a positive manner and made necessary processes in place to improve the gray areas to prevent employee churn on such grounds in the future.
You may also try to find out the reason for his departure and take corrective measures. "Prevention is better than cure."
Contribute as a "Change Agent" and bring changes in the organizational culture, if need be.
All the best,
From India, Jaipur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I fully agree and endorse the views expressed by Mr. V Balaji.
In short, what Mr. Balaji is suggesting is that there is no need to issue a show cause to an employee who has worked only for a day and is absconding without giving any intimation or reason from the very second day of joining the new employment. So, set aside the procedure; there is no need to call for a reason and explanation from the absconding employee, simply treat their case as someone who never joined your company. Mr. Balaji has also added that, in case the employee turns up after a few days with a genuine reason for absconding, you may consider their rejoining on merits.
I agree with the views of the other citehr members that one needs to find out internal and external reasons for such behavior by new joiners and corrective action needs to be taken. But that does not mean that you need to send a show cause to such employees. Your show cause is not going to get any reply, and it is sheer waste.
I do not find any negative attitude in the suggestions of Mr. Balaji. His attitude appears to be very proactive to me.
Mark my words, a person who is absconding from the very second day of joining without any reason is already having employment offers from other employers and has jumped to another company, showing no commitment, ethics, or consideration to inform you about their decision. So, simply ignore them.
Dear Balaji,
Having dealt with vigilance and disciplinary cases for about 45 years in the past, one might have expected me to have a more negative attitude, but I find a negative attitude more prevalent in the HR executives dealing with general administration.
It should not be overlooked that HR does not only represent human resources literally but also human relations in the form of staff or employee relations. HR does not allow adopting a negative attitude without conducting a detailed analysis. A negative attitude can be costly, especially for HR personnel.
In fact, HR plays a crucial role as a link between the management and employees, with the prime responsibility of maintaining a balance on both sides. A positive attitude in human relations is essential unless there is certainty that the other party is at fault.
The first step is to analyze the issue with an impartial attitude. Therefore, investigating and analyzing the reasons for the employee's absence are necessary before taking any stringent action. Even if the employee is proven to be at fault, the management has the discretion to take stricter action, such as dismissal, due to unauthorized absence from duty and taking another job without formal release, but only if the employee is at fault for reasons within their control.
Shortcuts in HR processes can be dangerous not only for employees but also for the organization's reputation and trust with all its employees.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In short, what Mr. Balaji is suggesting is that there is no need to issue a show cause to an employee who has worked only for a day and is absconding without giving any intimation or reason from the very second day of joining the new employment. So, set aside the procedure; there is no need to call for a reason and explanation from the absconding employee, simply treat their case as someone who never joined your company. Mr. Balaji has also added that, in case the employee turns up after a few days with a genuine reason for absconding, you may consider their rejoining on merits.
I agree with the views of the other citehr members that one needs to find out internal and external reasons for such behavior by new joiners and corrective action needs to be taken. But that does not mean that you need to send a show cause to such employees. Your show cause is not going to get any reply, and it is sheer waste.
I do not find any negative attitude in the suggestions of Mr. Balaji. His attitude appears to be very proactive to me.
Mark my words, a person who is absconding from the very second day of joining without any reason is already having employment offers from other employers and has jumped to another company, showing no commitment, ethics, or consideration to inform you about their decision. So, simply ignore them.
Dear Balaji,
Having dealt with vigilance and disciplinary cases for about 45 years in the past, one might have expected me to have a more negative attitude, but I find a negative attitude more prevalent in the HR executives dealing with general administration.
It should not be overlooked that HR does not only represent human resources literally but also human relations in the form of staff or employee relations. HR does not allow adopting a negative attitude without conducting a detailed analysis. A negative attitude can be costly, especially for HR personnel.
In fact, HR plays a crucial role as a link between the management and employees, with the prime responsibility of maintaining a balance on both sides. A positive attitude in human relations is essential unless there is certainty that the other party is at fault.
The first step is to analyze the issue with an impartial attitude. Therefore, investigating and analyzing the reasons for the employee's absence are necessary before taking any stringent action. Even if the employee is proven to be at fault, the management has the discretion to take stricter action, such as dismissal, due to unauthorized absence from duty and taking another job without formal release, but only if the employee is at fault for reasons within their control.
Shortcuts in HR processes can be dangerous not only for employees but also for the organization's reputation and trust with all its employees.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear VK,
Both Balaji and you seem to be advising to adopt shortcuts to a person who has sought sincere advice from community members, so that he may not be wrong in taking any action as a part of his duty. But the advice of both Balaji and you clearly seems to be forbidding him from discharging his genuine duties as an HR personnel.
I am not at all surprised with your presumption also, "Mark my words, a person who is absconding from the very second day of his/her joining without any reason is already having employment offers from other employers and has jumped to another company, and he/she has no commitment, ethics, or a heart to inform you about his decision," without resorting to any investigation or trying to know the full background of the case, as many people prefer to work on a presumption basis rather than observing any laid-down processes, formalities, and HR ethics.
Your other advice "so simply ignore him/her" is also like advising the poster of the question to shirk from his genuine duties.
As an HR personnel, your firm conviction like presumption is totally uncalled for in view of the fact that neither the poster of the question has stated that the absentee has joined another post, nor has he mentioned that there is any clause of termination in the appointment letter or the agreement with the absentee employee.
It is a matter of common sense; if a formality of recruitment has been done by the organization, it is also obliged to complete necessary formalities for the discharge of the employee by taking all necessary steps to terminate, remove, or dismiss from the organization only by observing due formal processes laid down by the organization. Otherwise, the employee would still remain on the rolls of the organization and can put forward his claim at any time if no formal action is taken to remove him by observing due process.
So, if you prefer to adopt shortcuts or presumptions in doing your duty, at least don't advise others not to observe the due policies and formalities of HR.
I fully agree and endorse the views expressed by Mr. V Balaji.
In short, what Mr. Balaji is suggesting is that there is no need to issue a show cause to an employee who has worked only for a day and is absconding without giving any intimation or reason from the very second day of his joining the new employment. So keep aside the procedure; there is no need to call for a reason and explanation from the absconding employee, simply treat his/her case as someone who never joined your company. Mr. Balaji has also added that, in case the employee turns up after a few days with some genuine reason for absconding, you may consider his/her rejoining on merits.
I agree with the views of other citehr members that one needs to find out internal and external reasons for such behavior by new joiners and corrective action needs to be taken. But that does not mean that you need to send a show cause to such employees. Your show cause is not going to get any reply, and it is sheer waste.
I do not find any negative attitude in the suggestions of Mr. Balaji. His attitude appears to be very proactive to me.
Mark my words, a person who is absconding from the very second day of his/her joining without any reason is already having employment offers from other employers and has jumped to another company, and he/she has no commitment, ethics, or a heart to inform you about his decision. So simply ignore him/her.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Both Balaji and you seem to be advising to adopt shortcuts to a person who has sought sincere advice from community members, so that he may not be wrong in taking any action as a part of his duty. But the advice of both Balaji and you clearly seems to be forbidding him from discharging his genuine duties as an HR personnel.
I am not at all surprised with your presumption also, "Mark my words, a person who is absconding from the very second day of his/her joining without any reason is already having employment offers from other employers and has jumped to another company, and he/she has no commitment, ethics, or a heart to inform you about his decision," without resorting to any investigation or trying to know the full background of the case, as many people prefer to work on a presumption basis rather than observing any laid-down processes, formalities, and HR ethics.
Your other advice "so simply ignore him/her" is also like advising the poster of the question to shirk from his genuine duties.
As an HR personnel, your firm conviction like presumption is totally uncalled for in view of the fact that neither the poster of the question has stated that the absentee has joined another post, nor has he mentioned that there is any clause of termination in the appointment letter or the agreement with the absentee employee.
It is a matter of common sense; if a formality of recruitment has been done by the organization, it is also obliged to complete necessary formalities for the discharge of the employee by taking all necessary steps to terminate, remove, or dismiss from the organization only by observing due formal processes laid down by the organization. Otherwise, the employee would still remain on the rolls of the organization and can put forward his claim at any time if no formal action is taken to remove him by observing due process.
So, if you prefer to adopt shortcuts or presumptions in doing your duty, at least don't advise others not to observe the due policies and formalities of HR.
I fully agree and endorse the views expressed by Mr. V Balaji.
In short, what Mr. Balaji is suggesting is that there is no need to issue a show cause to an employee who has worked only for a day and is absconding without giving any intimation or reason from the very second day of his joining the new employment. So keep aside the procedure; there is no need to call for a reason and explanation from the absconding employee, simply treat his/her case as someone who never joined your company. Mr. Balaji has also added that, in case the employee turns up after a few days with some genuine reason for absconding, you may consider his/her rejoining on merits.
I agree with the views of other citehr members that one needs to find out internal and external reasons for such behavior by new joiners and corrective action needs to be taken. But that does not mean that you need to send a show cause to such employees. Your show cause is not going to get any reply, and it is sheer waste.
I do not find any negative attitude in the suggestions of Mr. Balaji. His attitude appears to be very proactive to me.
Mark my words, a person who is absconding from the very second day of his/her joining without any reason is already having employment offers from other employers and has jumped to another company, and he/she has no commitment, ethics, or a heart to inform you about his decision. So simply ignore him/her.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mr. Dhingra,
Let's see the case carefully. The question was "what to do with the absconding employee on the second day?". What I am suggesting is that there is no need to do anything big, like issuing show cause notice, conducting domestic enquiry, and terminating him.
All these formalities apply only when someone works for the organization and also the organization intends to initiate disciplinary proceedings. What do we suggest here? Do we think that a person who was present for only a day can go for conciliation proceedings? What is his locus standi? If at all he goes, what is the company's stance? In what section of the ID Act can he invoke? (2A cannot be invoked as the company did not discharge/dismiss him) It is not that the company terminated him or wants to terminate, but he is the one absconding the next day.
Finding reasons for his disinterest, etc., are internal issues that can always be addressed. I knew some people who joined in the morning, went for lunch, and never turned back thereafter. People normally come with preconceived notions, big organization set up, expectations, etc. Once they join the organization, things appear to be different than what they perceived. When things do not seem to be in their taste, they simply vanish without telling the employer. This is exactly what has happened in this case.
If you suggest initiating disciplinary proceedings for those who had shown their faces for 2 hrs, 1/2 day, and one day and sincerely adopt the procedures to be followed as per the law, I have no problem with your spending time on this.
V. Balaji
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Let's see the case carefully. The question was "what to do with the absconding employee on the second day?". What I am suggesting is that there is no need to do anything big, like issuing show cause notice, conducting domestic enquiry, and terminating him.
All these formalities apply only when someone works for the organization and also the organization intends to initiate disciplinary proceedings. What do we suggest here? Do we think that a person who was present for only a day can go for conciliation proceedings? What is his locus standi? If at all he goes, what is the company's stance? In what section of the ID Act can he invoke? (2A cannot be invoked as the company did not discharge/dismiss him) It is not that the company terminated him or wants to terminate, but he is the one absconding the next day.
Finding reasons for his disinterest, etc., are internal issues that can always be addressed. I knew some people who joined in the morning, went for lunch, and never turned back thereafter. People normally come with preconceived notions, big organization set up, expectations, etc. Once they join the organization, things appear to be different than what they perceived. When things do not seem to be in their taste, they simply vanish without telling the employer. This is exactly what has happened in this case.
If you suggest initiating disciplinary proceedings for those who had shown their faces for 2 hrs, 1/2 day, and one day and sincerely adopt the procedures to be followed as per the law, I have no problem with your spending time on this.
V. Balaji
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Well, even we have faced instances where an employee has absconded after just 1 or 2 days of work.
In such situations, we only try to contact the person by phone. If they answer, we inquire about the reason. If the reason is genuine, we ask them to come back after some time. If not, we inform them over the phone that, as per their appointment letter, being absent from duty without information is misconduct. If they are not willing to return and rejoin, a termination letter is sent to their address within 3 days, referencing the conversation, especially if they expressed unwillingness to return.
If the person does not answer calls or emails, after a week, a show-cause letter is sent. If there is no response after the 10th day, a termination letter is issued, stating that despite our numerous attempts to contact them, the individual has been absent without information and is therefore terminated.
After about 5 days, we begin the search for a new person because typically someone who has not shown up within 5-7 days will likely not come.
From India, Chandigarh
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In such situations, we only try to contact the person by phone. If they answer, we inquire about the reason. If the reason is genuine, we ask them to come back after some time. If not, we inform them over the phone that, as per their appointment letter, being absent from duty without information is misconduct. If they are not willing to return and rejoin, a termination letter is sent to their address within 3 days, referencing the conversation, especially if they expressed unwillingness to return.
If the person does not answer calls or emails, after a week, a show-cause letter is sent. If there is no response after the 10th day, a termination letter is issued, stating that despite our numerous attempts to contact them, the individual has been absent without information and is therefore terminated.
After about 5 days, we begin the search for a new person because typically someone who has not shown up within 5-7 days will likely not come.
From India, Chandigarh
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
if the employee absconding from job for a two days, he should not be terminated, best hr practices say that management should first recognise the problem than take a further step.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear gsk42,
Please read the thread carefully, understand the subject, and post your comments. Here, the discussion is about an employee who is absconding from the 2nd day of joining a new job and not about an employee absconding for 2 days.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Please read the thread carefully, understand the subject, and post your comments. Here, the discussion is about an employee who is absconding from the 2nd day of joining a new job and not about an employee absconding for 2 days.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mr. Dhingra,
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
- Myself and Mr. Balaji have offered a solution to a common problem faced by many of us from HR fraternity. I am facing this situation for almost 2 times every month and I am sure there are many others who are facing it at even higher frequency. Solution offered by Mr. Balaji is practiced by me and I have not faced any problem so far, as feared by you.
- You are at liberty to label our practice as a ‘shortcut’ but I feel it is a practical solution tried and tested by me.
- We are not forbidding anybody from discharging their duties. We have given a advice and you and some others have also given a advice. It is upto the advice seeker to carefully choose from the many alternatives available keeping in view the actual reality and situation, best known to him/her.
- I am not presuming anything. But I do not understand what makes you presume that a person who has joined just a day before dares to abscond from the new job on a very second day and who is not bothered to inform anyone in office, has a intention and seriousness to continue to work with you?
- My commonsense will never allow someone to remain on rolls, who has joined and absconded from 2nd day, as feared by you. I think most organizations have a very basic function of Attendance & Time Office in place.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Neha,
I am surprised that HR people get this much time to spend on a new person whose trustworthiness towards the organization or continuity is under a big question mark! You should do a PONC to find out the cost implication on the organization on such issues. In the modern HR context, Personnel Management has a limited role to play.
I am 100% in agreement with what V. Balaji commented in the third para above. In my view, if there are no positive results on the initial probing, one should not spend much time on such non-productive activities.
Mr. Dhingra, in response to the last para (highlighted in Red) of your reply to V. Balaji, I would suggest that if you could quote any relevant rulings of any learned court in India ordering for the reinstatement of an employee whose services were terminated on similar grounds under the subject matter in discussion.
Thanks!
From India, Jaipur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am surprised that HR people get this much time to spend on a new person whose trustworthiness towards the organization or continuity is under a big question mark! You should do a PONC to find out the cost implication on the organization on such issues. In the modern HR context, Personnel Management has a limited role to play.
I am 100% in agreement with what V. Balaji commented in the third para above. In my view, if there are no positive results on the initial probing, one should not spend much time on such non-productive activities.
Mr. Dhingra, in response to the last para (highlighted in Red) of your reply to V. Balaji, I would suggest that if you could quote any relevant rulings of any learned court in India ordering for the reinstatement of an employee whose services were terminated on similar grounds under the subject matter in discussion.
Thanks!
From India, Jaipur
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.