Hi, I need a expert advice on the consequences for any issue which can happen due to the following:
1. Now iam working for company A and got a offer from company B, however the company B is small company with 5 people working on new technology and Do not provide PF and accepted offer and job security will not be there and huge risk is involved.
2. With company A, I shall be on medical leave for 3months unpaid leave and join company B to check the stability and if everything goes well continue and if not the continue company A
3. But the issue is, if company A can check whether I have worked during 3months leave and what are the other possibility to identify this ? Worst case if they found then whether the employment termination is the implication or any other issues as well ? Please advice.
4. To company B what are precautionary measure to be taken care to avoid the conflict?
From India, Bengaluru
1. Now iam working for company A and got a offer from company B, however the company B is small company with 5 people working on new technology and Do not provide PF and accepted offer and job security will not be there and huge risk is involved.
2. With company A, I shall be on medical leave for 3months unpaid leave and join company B to check the stability and if everything goes well continue and if not the continue company A
3. But the issue is, if company A can check whether I have worked during 3months leave and what are the other possibility to identify this ? Worst case if they found then whether the employment termination is the implication or any other issues as well ? Please advice.
4. To company B what are precautionary measure to be taken care to avoid the conflict?
From India, Bengaluru
While working in some company during medical leave, you will be leaving a paper trail.
God forbid some legal issue takes place in this 3 months in new company , you will be in focus
Some employee of your company may notice you going to a new office while you were supposed to be on medical leave.
The concept is flawed ab initio.
You are providing a false excuse using medical condition to take leave, while being fit enough to work.
Ask yourself whether such actions are right?
“Many people pray to be kept out of unexpected problems. but you are inviting problems.
From India, Pune
3131God forbid some legal issue takes place in this 3 months in new company , you will be in focus
Some employee of your company may notice you going to a new office while you were supposed to be on medical leave.
The concept is flawed ab initio.
You are providing a false excuse using medical condition to take leave, while being fit enough to work.
Ask yourself whether such actions are right?
“Many people pray to be kept out of unexpected problems. but you are inviting problems.
From India, Pune
In the first place, I think that the pin pricking moral laxity emanating from his/her own mind of the questioner regarding the very concept of dual employment has prompted this question.
1)Basically employment of a person is a continuous process in contra distinction of engagement of a person. In the case of paid employment, the process gets cemented by the lasting bond of employer-employee relationship which creates mutual obligations of legal and moral import between them. Therefore, in the realm of employment dual employment, even if not explicitly proscribed but not allowed by conventional implication.
2) The term "leave" in employment parlance means the approval or consent of the employer to permit the employee to be away from his work/place of work for certain period on account of some personal reasons.Therefore, there is no severance in their employment relationship during such leave of absence period not withstanding the employee's entitlement to salary or otherwise for such period. As such, the subsisting contract between the employer and employee automatically prohibits his simultaneous contract with another employer during his leave period even on trial basis.
3) In view of the position thus explained already, I think that the last two questions deserve no answers.
From India, Salem
1)Basically employment of a person is a continuous process in contra distinction of engagement of a person. In the case of paid employment, the process gets cemented by the lasting bond of employer-employee relationship which creates mutual obligations of legal and moral import between them. Therefore, in the realm of employment dual employment, even if not explicitly proscribed but not allowed by conventional implication.
2) The term "leave" in employment parlance means the approval or consent of the employer to permit the employee to be away from his work/place of work for certain period on account of some personal reasons.Therefore, there is no severance in their employment relationship during such leave of absence period not withstanding the employee's entitlement to salary or otherwise for such period. As such, the subsisting contract between the employer and employee automatically prohibits his simultaneous contract with another employer during his leave period even on trial basis.
3) In view of the position thus explained already, I think that the last two questions deserve no answers.
From India, Salem
Hi,
With the current company I have some of components I will get if I continue on the service for 3months, else I will lose those components, with the new company I shall be joining relatively very new and not sure what is the job security, so in this context I want to have backup without any financial implication which iam currently undergoing.
From India, Bengaluru
With the current company I have some of components I will get if I continue on the service for 3months, else I will lose those components, with the new company I shall be joining relatively very new and not sure what is the job security, so in this context I want to have backup without any financial implication which iam currently undergoing.
From India, Bengaluru
Dear colleague,
You are knowingly flouting the legal and moral obligation towards your present employer by choosing to join another company albeit on trial basis under false medical pretext.
You are chasing two rabbits which can cost you your present job if they come to know of it as double employment is usually not permitted and many appointment letters carry specific clause to that effect.
Choice is yours.
Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR-Consultant
From India, Mumbai
You are knowingly flouting the legal and moral obligation towards your present employer by choosing to join another company albeit on trial basis under false medical pretext.
You are chasing two rabbits which can cost you your present job if they come to know of it as double employment is usually not permitted and many appointment letters carry specific clause to that effect.
Choice is yours.
Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR-Consultant
From India, Mumbai
As fellow members in the forum, we cannot advice how to do a wrong thing i.e double employment.
From India, Pune
From India, Pune
If you know that company is new and doesn't have any statutory and compliance related things added. Then why do you want to join?
If really want to Join then go join there and tell your company A that can i have a chance to get back if the company B is not good. So that you can join back after 3 months or so.
In company B, You definitely have to focus on your job for 6 months atleast and try for another job updating the cons to Company C.
From India, Hyderabad
If really want to Join then go join there and tell your company A that can i have a chance to get back if the company B is not good. So that you can join back after 3 months or so.
In company B, You definitely have to focus on your job for 6 months atleast and try for another job updating the cons to Company C.
From India, Hyderabad
Dear Collegues,
There is nothing clarity in law about "Double Employment". Yes, there are reference regarding double employment' in Factories Act and Shops & Establishment Act but are contradictory.
The ‘double employment’ means holding two jobs at onetime. Many companies issued appointment letter bearing clause of double employment also kept provision under Standing Order to combat double employment,in order of violation to clause seized the job.
Some people do it in otherways after their office time and operating from own house holding a firm on name of the keen.
To make it clear just citing an example to be followed: What I rembered we terminated service a group consisting of 5 workmen, those who were working for other company either taking leave or on off hour. The dismissal case fought at all levels(labour office, tribunal, High court & finally at the Apex Court. In that case all the laws prevailing were reffered & supplemented ins spite of provision in certified standing orders. That case was won by us under the pretext of "Intelectual Property Right".
Though there is no specific law but double employment is an offense under moral torpitude.
From India, Mumbai
There is nothing clarity in law about "Double Employment". Yes, there are reference regarding double employment' in Factories Act and Shops & Establishment Act but are contradictory.
The ‘double employment’ means holding two jobs at onetime. Many companies issued appointment letter bearing clause of double employment also kept provision under Standing Order to combat double employment,in order of violation to clause seized the job.
Some people do it in otherways after their office time and operating from own house holding a firm on name of the keen.
To make it clear just citing an example to be followed: What I rembered we terminated service a group consisting of 5 workmen, those who were working for other company either taking leave or on off hour. The dismissal case fought at all levels(labour office, tribunal, High court & finally at the Apex Court. In that case all the laws prevailing were reffered & supplemented ins spite of provision in certified standing orders. That case was won by us under the pretext of "Intelectual Property Right".
Though there is no specific law but double employment is an offense under moral torpitude.
From India, Mumbai
Dear Prabhat,
My views on Double employment
In common terms, the term ‘double employment’ is holding two jobs. But, in terms of our labour laws, the Factories Act and the Shops and Establishments Acts of each State, govern ‘double employment’, and indicate the meanings io the term. However, funnily, the meaning of ‘double employment’ in the Factories Act differs from that contained in the Shops and Establishments Acts.
The Bombay Shops & Establishments Act: provides in section 65 that no employee shall work in any establishment, nor shall any employer knowingly permit an employee to work in any establishment, on a day on which the employee is given a holiday or is on leave as per the Act.(old act)
Industrial Employment (standing Orders) Central Rules: Schedule I-B section 8 of central rules “A workman shall not at any time work against the interest of the industrial establishment in which he is employed and shall not take any employment in addition to his job in the establishment, which may adversely affect the interest of his employer”.
One of the reasons behind restriction of double employment is --Man is not a machine, and working for 8 hours or more in a day cannot be continued indefinitely without health consequences.
It really is not an act of moral turpitude.
The word turpitude is defined as a shameful, vile, or corrupt character or acts. Moral turpitude refers to conduct that shocks the public conscience, or which does not fall within the moral standards held by the community.
In a poor country like ours, many workers try to do double duty to earn more.Many Guards in housing societies do double duty on same day.
It is economic deprivation which drives people to do this, rather than turpitude of mind.
From India, Pune
My views on Double employment
In common terms, the term ‘double employment’ is holding two jobs. But, in terms of our labour laws, the Factories Act and the Shops and Establishments Acts of each State, govern ‘double employment’, and indicate the meanings io the term. However, funnily, the meaning of ‘double employment’ in the Factories Act differs from that contained in the Shops and Establishments Acts.
The Bombay Shops & Establishments Act: provides in section 65 that no employee shall work in any establishment, nor shall any employer knowingly permit an employee to work in any establishment, on a day on which the employee is given a holiday or is on leave as per the Act.(old act)
Industrial Employment (standing Orders) Central Rules: Schedule I-B section 8 of central rules “A workman shall not at any time work against the interest of the industrial establishment in which he is employed and shall not take any employment in addition to his job in the establishment, which may adversely affect the interest of his employer”.
One of the reasons behind restriction of double employment is --Man is not a machine, and working for 8 hours or more in a day cannot be continued indefinitely without health consequences.
It really is not an act of moral turpitude.
The word turpitude is defined as a shameful, vile, or corrupt character or acts. Moral turpitude refers to conduct that shocks the public conscience, or which does not fall within the moral standards held by the community.
In a poor country like ours, many workers try to do double duty to earn more.Many Guards in housing societies do double duty on same day.
It is economic deprivation which drives people to do this, rather than turpitude of mind.
From India, Pune
Dear professional colleagues,
While I am generally for not allowing double employment on legal , ethical and health grounds, in certain very exceptional circumstances, like meeting huge hospital expenses, education abroad, marriage expenses , double employment with the consent of the current employer may be permitted. The exceptional circumstances cannot be defined precisely which has to be left to the discretion of the deciding authority.
This thought is prompted mainly by looking at predicament largely of the poverty stricken workers who really slog even to meet two ends every day and if some one honestly wants to earn additional money, to meet contingencies by means of double employment, in my view calls for humane approach keeping legality aside
Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR-Consultant
From India, Mumbai
While I am generally for not allowing double employment on legal , ethical and health grounds, in certain very exceptional circumstances, like meeting huge hospital expenses, education abroad, marriage expenses , double employment with the consent of the current employer may be permitted. The exceptional circumstances cannot be defined precisely which has to be left to the discretion of the deciding authority.
This thought is prompted mainly by looking at predicament largely of the poverty stricken workers who really slog even to meet two ends every day and if some one honestly wants to earn additional money, to meet contingencies by means of double employment, in my view calls for humane approach keeping legality aside
Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR-Consultant
From India, Mumbai
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.
Enforcement of negative covenants in employment terms.pdf