The best option is to stick by the rules of your organization and the governing HR policies as applicable. If this is a "must hire," then present the case to senior management and arrive at a solution by ensuring that the higher-ups in your organization are well aware of the hiring approach and approve bending the existing rules for business reasons.
On the contrary, if you are calling the shots, then the responsibility rests on your shoulders and will be placing your reputation and decision-making prowess at stake should the other employer lodge a complaint to your senior management over unethical hiring (technically "poaching").
If one can't bend the rules, then don't attempt to break them, just live by them.
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
On the contrary, if you are calling the shots, then the responsibility rests on your shoulders and will be placing your reputation and decision-making prowess at stake should the other employer lodge a complaint to your senior management over unethical hiring (technically "poaching").
If one can't bend the rules, then don't attempt to break them, just live by them.
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Sunita,
Do not hire a person without proof that he has been relieved from his last employer. Sooner or later, in the absence of a relieving letter, he will definitely move back to his employer. At least ask him to submit a copy of the resignation duly accepted by his divisional head; however, you will have to check the authenticity of the same. There are more chances of him moving back to his last employer if you allow him to join without any such document.
As far as consequences are concerned, once a candidate signs all the employment forms with the new employer, you may take necessary action against him. But the last employer cannot be blamed for it as they have not given any relieving letter, and the same person cannot be on two payrolls at a time.
Best Regards,
Amit Tomar
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Do not hire a person without proof that he has been relieved from his last employer. Sooner or later, in the absence of a relieving letter, he will definitely move back to his employer. At least ask him to submit a copy of the resignation duly accepted by his divisional head; however, you will have to check the authenticity of the same. There are more chances of him moving back to his last employer if you allow him to join without any such document.
As far as consequences are concerned, once a candidate signs all the employment forms with the new employer, you may take necessary action against him. But the last employer cannot be blamed for it as they have not given any relieving letter, and the same person cannot be on two payrolls at a time.
Best Regards,
Amit Tomar
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Sunita,
A lot of times, it does happen when there are ethical dilemmas due to pressures in hiring and there are pressures from managers to meet deadlines, and we end up hiring the wrong person. It is always better to go through a proper procedure. Though you can always talk to your RM and discuss the situation. To be on the safer side, do a RefCheck on him. As our other members say, buy out his notice period, but do not do this without a proper RefCheck on him.
Regards, Pragya Giri
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
A lot of times, it does happen when there are ethical dilemmas due to pressures in hiring and there are pressures from managers to meet deadlines, and we end up hiring the wrong person. It is always better to go through a proper procedure. Though you can always talk to your RM and discuss the situation. To be on the safer side, do a RefCheck on him. As our other members say, buy out his notice period, but do not do this without a proper RefCheck on him.
Regards, Pragya Giri
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Sunita,
I could not understand why there is such panic if you have recruited a person without a relieving letter. Let's first understand why we ask for documentary proofs such as a payslip, letter of appointment, or relieving letter.
We ask for an appointment letter, payslip, and relieving letter for many reasons:
1. To check his duration in previous employment.
2. To check his growth in the organization and current remuneration.
3. To check that he has not committed any fraud with his previous employer and has cleared his account amicably.
Since you mentioned that it was necessary for your company to hire a person in a very short time, it is obvious he cannot serve the notice period to his current employer. Therefore, the company is going to deduct one month's wages in lieu of the notice period. However, there are possibilities that he might not have that much amount left in his credit or he could have taken a loan which can be forfeited from his account, then probably he will not go for taking his full and final settlement. In such circumstances, there is a doubt on his integrity.
He could have left the company without giving notice, but after selling his one month's wages to the company, and your company should have bought it. If your company is not ready to buy it, then you should not be worried whether he has settled his account or not.
Although the employee should settle his account with his previous employer, whether paying one month's salary or getting it waived off, and in both cases, the employer will issue him a relieving letter. However, in cases where an employee has joined without serving notice, it is probable that he cannot produce a relieving letter at the time of joining, but he should submit it later.
One thing is sure that it is going to cost the employee as he may need to travel to the previous company to settle his account and obtain a relieving letter. He has to bear the traveling expenses, notice pay cost, and the wages cost for the period he will be on leave for this purpose.
If he can produce an appointment letter and last month's payslip, your purpose of knowing his previous employment and pay history is served, but the credential check remains in doubt unless he produces a relieving letter.
Ultimately, it is up to the management. There is nothing against policy. Policies are made to facilitate the organization, and you have done the same.
From India, Coimbatore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I could not understand why there is such panic if you have recruited a person without a relieving letter. Let's first understand why we ask for documentary proofs such as a payslip, letter of appointment, or relieving letter.
We ask for an appointment letter, payslip, and relieving letter for many reasons:
1. To check his duration in previous employment.
2. To check his growth in the organization and current remuneration.
3. To check that he has not committed any fraud with his previous employer and has cleared his account amicably.
Since you mentioned that it was necessary for your company to hire a person in a very short time, it is obvious he cannot serve the notice period to his current employer. Therefore, the company is going to deduct one month's wages in lieu of the notice period. However, there are possibilities that he might not have that much amount left in his credit or he could have taken a loan which can be forfeited from his account, then probably he will not go for taking his full and final settlement. In such circumstances, there is a doubt on his integrity.
He could have left the company without giving notice, but after selling his one month's wages to the company, and your company should have bought it. If your company is not ready to buy it, then you should not be worried whether he has settled his account or not.
Although the employee should settle his account with his previous employer, whether paying one month's salary or getting it waived off, and in both cases, the employer will issue him a relieving letter. However, in cases where an employee has joined without serving notice, it is probable that he cannot produce a relieving letter at the time of joining, but he should submit it later.
One thing is sure that it is going to cost the employee as he may need to travel to the previous company to settle his account and obtain a relieving letter. He has to bear the traveling expenses, notice pay cost, and the wages cost for the period he will be on leave for this purpose.
If he can produce an appointment letter and last month's payslip, your purpose of knowing his previous employment and pay history is served, but the credential check remains in doubt unless he produces a relieving letter.
Ultimately, it is up to the management. There is nothing against policy. Policies are made to facilitate the organization, and you have done the same.
From India, Coimbatore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Relieving letter is important, but remember in today's world, nobody wants to relieve a competent person. That exactly happened to me as well. I could not submit my relieving letter to my present company. However, I showed them the resignation letter which indicated that I had served the notice period.
In your case, he has not served the notice period and jumped on a lucrative offer. So, it is natural to assume that he is of such kind. When a person works with a company, they have certain legal as well as moral responsibilities that they should fulfill. I believe he should serve the notice period and provide clear evidence of doing so, making the relieving letter unnecessary.
A question may arise as to why, generally, companies do not issue experience or relieving letters after the notice period, citing financial discrepancies as an excuse. In such cases, you can pay a fee.
If the previous employer files a case after the notice period has been served (even without pay), the court will take a liberal view of the candidate, even if monetary matters are involved. However, not serving the notice period is immoral, unethical, and illegal.
From India, Calcutta
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
3In your case, he has not served the notice period and jumped on a lucrative offer. So, it is natural to assume that he is of such kind. When a person works with a company, they have certain legal as well as moral responsibilities that they should fulfill. I believe he should serve the notice period and provide clear evidence of doing so, making the relieving letter unnecessary.
A question may arise as to why, generally, companies do not issue experience or relieving letters after the notice period, citing financial discrepancies as an excuse. In such cases, you can pay a fee.
If the previous employer files a case after the notice period has been served (even without pay), the court will take a liberal view of the candidate, even if monetary matters are involved. However, not serving the notice period is immoral, unethical, and illegal.
From India, Calcutta
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Sunitha,
A HR professional has to act on a situation basis. You can start by conducting a reference check. Collect the references of the candidate's reporting person and HR contact. Reach out to them via telephone (using the company landline) to have a conversation and confirm the details. Additionally, request the candidate's last three months' salary slips and offer letter. This documentation should suffice if the candidate does not have relieving papers to submit.
Regards,
Anu
From India, Kochi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
A HR professional has to act on a situation basis. You can start by conducting a reference check. Collect the references of the candidate's reporting person and HR contact. Reach out to them via telephone (using the company landline) to have a conversation and confirm the details. Additionally, request the candidate's last three months' salary slips and offer letter. This documentation should suffice if the candidate does not have relieving papers to submit.
Regards,
Anu
From India, Kochi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Relieving letter is always a requirement of the recruiting organization, not the potential employee or the relieving company. It is unethical for any company to withhold a relieving letter, but it is equally unethical for the recruiter to make it a condition for employment. It's like playing god. Why not start a strong reference-based recruiting instead, that saves a lot of doubting time.
Anandarup
From India, Madgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Anandarup
From India, Madgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
There is no need of relieving letter if the person has resigned from previous organisation. pls get the copy of resignation as submitted by him to his previous organisation. All the best
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Sunita,
There are a lot of good candidates working in small to medium-scale sectors. So you have to look into this "Relieving letter issue" in the macro situation and pay emphasis to the situation. If everyone wants an experienced candidate, from where do you get experience?
So if everything is to be done, then there is no need for an experienced HR Manager for the company in the first place.
You should view where he worked, how he worked, and how long he worked. Today, 90% of Pvt. Ltd. companies never give a relieving letter for the fear of non-registering PF, ESIC, Workmen's Compensation Act, BMC Labour tax every 6 months return submission, and TDS not deducting, etc.
It is a well-known factor, so you should understand the situation.
Secondly, if the person comes from a reputed company but is unable to get a relieving letter, then:
1. Obtain a Resignation letter which should be with a notice period.
2. If the notice period is not fulfilled, then they will not pay their salary, so you have to compensate him.
3. When you need a good candidate but the present company he works for does not pay well and also does not relieve him officially, then that is not a big issue for you. As far as the salary and TDS are concerned, you will deduct as to what you pay him.
4. No need to worry.
5. Credentials can be checked through his contacts, who would vouch for him; say his company's Bank Manager, or some other officer, or some CA who knows him well, etc.
On the whole, HR should not stand as a threatening issue but a cordial relationship should be made, and when you have a free discussion with the candidate, you will know the person's difficulty.
After all, we are all human beings living the life with all-round problems. So we should all be helpful, but workwise be alert.
From Saudi Arabia
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
There are a lot of good candidates working in small to medium-scale sectors. So you have to look into this "Relieving letter issue" in the macro situation and pay emphasis to the situation. If everyone wants an experienced candidate, from where do you get experience?
So if everything is to be done, then there is no need for an experienced HR Manager for the company in the first place.
You should view where he worked, how he worked, and how long he worked. Today, 90% of Pvt. Ltd. companies never give a relieving letter for the fear of non-registering PF, ESIC, Workmen's Compensation Act, BMC Labour tax every 6 months return submission, and TDS not deducting, etc.
It is a well-known factor, so you should understand the situation.
Secondly, if the person comes from a reputed company but is unable to get a relieving letter, then:
1. Obtain a Resignation letter which should be with a notice period.
2. If the notice period is not fulfilled, then they will not pay their salary, so you have to compensate him.
3. When you need a good candidate but the present company he works for does not pay well and also does not relieve him officially, then that is not a big issue for you. As far as the salary and TDS are concerned, you will deduct as to what you pay him.
4. No need to worry.
5. Credentials can be checked through his contacts, who would vouch for him; say his company's Bank Manager, or some other officer, or some CA who knows him well, etc.
On the whole, HR should not stand as a threatening issue but a cordial relationship should be made, and when you have a free discussion with the candidate, you will know the person's difficulty.
After all, we are all human beings living the life with all-round problems. So we should all be helpful, but workwise be alert.
From Saudi Arabia
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
As an HR professional in the U.S., I have a few thoughts after reading your posting. Ethics is always what you live by, but in the case of your ethics being challenged by a hire, you must take a couple of actions. Always protect yourself!
1. Don't ever make it your decision to change company policy! Challenging company policy is good, but it must make sense. In this case, I would not challenge the policy. Go to the hiring manager and senior management in HR and let them work together on making the decision. This takes the decision off of your hands and puts it in the hands of management. Management will then have to answer to the executives for any decision.
2. When it comes to documentation, you can always ask for supporting documents. In the states, asking for taxes to prove income, especially in a sales or IT position. Check stubs or offer letter from the previous employer, certificates earned (these often have the company's name on it).
From United States, Schiller Park
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
1. Don't ever make it your decision to change company policy! Challenging company policy is good, but it must make sense. In this case, I would not challenge the policy. Go to the hiring manager and senior management in HR and let them work together on making the decision. This takes the decision off of your hands and puts it in the hands of management. Management will then have to answer to the executives for any decision.
2. When it comes to documentation, you can always ask for supporting documents. In the states, asking for taxes to prove income, especially in a sales or IT position. Check stubs or offer letter from the previous employer, certificates earned (these often have the company's name on it).
From United States, Schiller Park
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.
Resignation cum relieving letter.doc