if a employee is suspended for almost 3 month against a pending enquiry where in there are several other employees involved and should also be suspended for the same, but were not. after 3 month the suspended employee is asked to rejoin where company mentions that there are no allegation as if now proved but the enquiry is still on. What about the defamation and damage caused for the past 3 months to the suspended employees in the industry as the news was leaked in media with names where only one employee was suspended and defamed. what are the employees rights for the same.
From India, Delhi
From India, Delhi
Dear Friend,
On going through the paragraph it seems there were no allegations and the suspension seems done hesitantly. Never go back on these cases as it will give more pain to the management and the employee. Now, revoke the suspension, and give full benefits to the employee immediately as the suspension seems done without motive or no substantial evidence to prove the issue whatever took earlier.
What are the number of employee involved for generating the suspension? Had prima facie you have/the authorities in position done enquiry properly such things avoided at the initial stage itself. Media is not a part and parcel of your company, they have highlighted the issues or whatever the things that had happen on a particular day or specific incident. If you give much importance to the media then always keep in mind your boss is running the company and not the media, your shift in preference may damage the reputation of your own. Struggles and obstacles always strengthen your work and did not put them to dent your work and energy.
Since, you have given part of your problem this will enough to cope up..
Have a good day ...
From India, Arcot
175On going through the paragraph it seems there were no allegations and the suspension seems done hesitantly. Never go back on these cases as it will give more pain to the management and the employee. Now, revoke the suspension, and give full benefits to the employee immediately as the suspension seems done without motive or no substantial evidence to prove the issue whatever took earlier.
What are the number of employee involved for generating the suspension? Had prima facie you have/the authorities in position done enquiry properly such things avoided at the initial stage itself. Media is not a part and parcel of your company, they have highlighted the issues or whatever the things that had happen on a particular day or specific incident. If you give much importance to the media then always keep in mind your boss is running the company and not the media, your shift in preference may damage the reputation of your own. Struggles and obstacles always strengthen your work and did not put them to dent your work and energy.
Since, you have given part of your problem this will enough to cope up..
Have a good day ...
From India, Arcot
Dear Sir,
As if u talk from a company point of view u seem right but what about the employee who is defamed in the industry who would not have any option to and join other companies as the investigations are still on and he has not be given a clean chit after 3 months suspension. either a clean chit should be given or the suspension should be continued till the investigation is finished . what say
From India, Delhi
As if u talk from a company point of view u seem right but what about the employee who is defamed in the industry who would not have any option to and join other companies as the investigations are still on and he has not be given a clean chit after 3 months suspension. either a clean chit should be given or the suspension should be continued till the investigation is finished . what say
From India, Delhi
Dear Preeti,
In a murky situation of any serious misconduct allegedly involving many employees, any management would lay its hand upon an employee based on the preponderance of probability as a result of the discreet inquiries made by it. Therefore, Management might have thought it prudent to place the particular employee under suspension pending a full-fledged enquiry. It is well within the discretion of the management in the matter of disciplinary control and the affected employee can not question it or criticize it as a selective one. Suspension pending enquiry is not at all a punishment. If the management is not able to make out a case against the suspended employee, it will revoke his suspension forthwith and continue the enquiry further. This is exactly what happened in the case cited in the post. Therefore one should not be too sensitive for Caesar's wife must be above suspicion. Instead of lamenting over the suspension that stands revoked as of now for want of prima facie evidence, the employee should remember the proverb that there is no smoke without fire and avoid even allegedly being part of any such undesirable situation in future.
From India, Salem
In a murky situation of any serious misconduct allegedly involving many employees, any management would lay its hand upon an employee based on the preponderance of probability as a result of the discreet inquiries made by it. Therefore, Management might have thought it prudent to place the particular employee under suspension pending a full-fledged enquiry. It is well within the discretion of the management in the matter of disciplinary control and the affected employee can not question it or criticize it as a selective one. Suspension pending enquiry is not at all a punishment. If the management is not able to make out a case against the suspended employee, it will revoke his suspension forthwith and continue the enquiry further. This is exactly what happened in the case cited in the post. Therefore one should not be too sensitive for Caesar's wife must be above suspicion. Instead of lamenting over the suspension that stands revoked as of now for want of prima facie evidence, the employee should remember the proverb that there is no smoke without fire and avoid even allegedly being part of any such undesirable situation in future.
From India, Salem
Dear friend
PREETITANDON ,
On going through the first and the second mentioned paras the way of given particulars seems differ, please give right and correct picture of the case. If there is no allegations and no evidences found against the employee there is nothing that restrain from giving the job again to the particular person. As regard defame of the employee you are looked into, the situation warranted during the period to take certain decisions, you have not dismissed/put an end of the service to the person, however, put under suspension for getting the things correct duly conducting enquiries/inquiries by an appropriate authority, and now you are very much come to the conclusion that the employee was not responsible for that particular incident or situation, thus the suspension revoked and directing him to join duty with all benefits. In case if the organisation feel the defame occurred beyond their control, better transfer the person to the nearest unit or give transfer with additional promotion to the other units etc., in a way the employee get a relief, and this situation occur in all the Units/organisations/office/departments irrespective of the circumstances beyond control. We must not live with the situation and dwell on it. This is a procedure and not a home work, every one should adapt to the procedures of circumstances laid down, abiding by the rules can not be vitiated with emotional aspects...
have a good day ...Always go with pride and not with the wind ..
From India, Arcot
PREETITANDON ,
On going through the first and the second mentioned paras the way of given particulars seems differ, please give right and correct picture of the case. If there is no allegations and no evidences found against the employee there is nothing that restrain from giving the job again to the particular person. As regard defame of the employee you are looked into, the situation warranted during the period to take certain decisions, you have not dismissed/put an end of the service to the person, however, put under suspension for getting the things correct duly conducting enquiries/inquiries by an appropriate authority, and now you are very much come to the conclusion that the employee was not responsible for that particular incident or situation, thus the suspension revoked and directing him to join duty with all benefits. In case if the organisation feel the defame occurred beyond their control, better transfer the person to the nearest unit or give transfer with additional promotion to the other units etc., in a way the employee get a relief, and this situation occur in all the Units/organisations/office/departments irrespective of the circumstances beyond control. We must not live with the situation and dwell on it. This is a procedure and not a home work, every one should adapt to the procedures of circumstances laid down, abiding by the rules can not be vitiated with emotional aspects...
have a good day ...Always go with pride and not with the wind ..
From India, Arcot
I would like to clarify as follows:
1. Suspension pending enquiry and revocation of suspension while enquiry is in progress are common occurrences. If the company feels there is a case against the employee, it can keep the enquiry going on although it has revoked suspension. As pointed out by Shri Umakanthan Sir, suspension is not a punishment, the employer employee relationship continues with the employee during the period of suspension and it is only that the employer has decided not to take work from the concerned employee.
2. Management has right to choose whom to suspend. The suspension of an employee cannot be challenged in courts of law on the ground that other involved persons have not been suspended. So suspension is a discretionary right of the management.
3. Suspending an employee or taking disciplinary action against an employee does not amount to defamation, civil or criminal as per law.
Hope the above clarifies. KK!HR
From India, Mumbai
1. Suspension pending enquiry and revocation of suspension while enquiry is in progress are common occurrences. If the company feels there is a case against the employee, it can keep the enquiry going on although it has revoked suspension. As pointed out by Shri Umakanthan Sir, suspension is not a punishment, the employer employee relationship continues with the employee during the period of suspension and it is only that the employer has decided not to take work from the concerned employee.
2. Management has right to choose whom to suspend. The suspension of an employee cannot be challenged in courts of law on the ground that other involved persons have not been suspended. So suspension is a discretionary right of the management.
3. Suspending an employee or taking disciplinary action against an employee does not amount to defamation, civil or criminal as per law.
Hope the above clarifies. KK!HR
From India, Mumbai
Dear Friend KK! HR...
I would like to clarify as follows:
1. Suspension pending enquiry and revocation of suspension while enquiry is in progress are common occurrences. If the company feels there is a case against the employee, it can keep the enquiry going on although it has revoked suspension. As pointed out by Shri Umakanthan Sir, suspension is not a punishment, the employer employee relationship continues with the employee during the period of suspension and it is only that the employer has decided not to take work from the concerned employee.
2. Management has right to choose whom to suspend. The suspension of an employee cannot be challenged in courts of law on the ground that other involved persons have not been suspended. So suspension is a discretionary right of the management.
3. Suspending an employee or taking disciplinary action against an employee does not amount to defamation, civil or criminal as per law.
Hope the above clarifies. KK!HR
Reading your clarification enlighten me :
Go through the clarification once twice atleast umpteems times, do you think you have given clear clarification?
What do you mean by Management has right to choose whom to suspend?..
Can they suspend any one at their will? why not they suspend the person at the highest helm because he is the person held responsible for all the mess? why not we suspend the HR who initiated recruitment process and the only responsible person for disruption? The cannot select at the will of management, cannot bring in scapegoat, In the mass they can suspend none.
How do you say that cannot be challenged in the Court?
The substances, evidences and related articles when proved false every thing can be challenged.
And It is not a common occurrence suspension and revocation, we cannot suspend at the will of officials and at the will of management, unless you need to with evidences and existence, so, it is not a matter of whims and fancies.
Disciplinary proceedings are not defaming the employee or organisation, it is the truth finding post mortem for the errors done, loss incurred, where the system halted and need nourishment..
Please before posting read your post not once umpteem times...
When time permits, go through the postings of Shri Dinesh Diwekar, Shri Umakanthan and senior persons who are active and giving suggestions from their heart...
BEst of Luck ... HAve a Good Day...
From India, Arcot
I would like to clarify as follows:
1. Suspension pending enquiry and revocation of suspension while enquiry is in progress are common occurrences. If the company feels there is a case against the employee, it can keep the enquiry going on although it has revoked suspension. As pointed out by Shri Umakanthan Sir, suspension is not a punishment, the employer employee relationship continues with the employee during the period of suspension and it is only that the employer has decided not to take work from the concerned employee.
2. Management has right to choose whom to suspend. The suspension of an employee cannot be challenged in courts of law on the ground that other involved persons have not been suspended. So suspension is a discretionary right of the management.
3. Suspending an employee or taking disciplinary action against an employee does not amount to defamation, civil or criminal as per law.
Hope the above clarifies. KK!HR
Reading your clarification enlighten me :
Go through the clarification once twice atleast umpteems times, do you think you have given clear clarification?
What do you mean by Management has right to choose whom to suspend?..
Can they suspend any one at their will? why not they suspend the person at the highest helm because he is the person held responsible for all the mess? why not we suspend the HR who initiated recruitment process and the only responsible person for disruption? The cannot select at the will of management, cannot bring in scapegoat, In the mass they can suspend none.
How do you say that cannot be challenged in the Court?
The substances, evidences and related articles when proved false every thing can be challenged.
And It is not a common occurrence suspension and revocation, we cannot suspend at the will of officials and at the will of management, unless you need to with evidences and existence, so, it is not a matter of whims and fancies.
Disciplinary proceedings are not defaming the employee or organisation, it is the truth finding post mortem for the errors done, loss incurred, where the system halted and need nourishment..
Please before posting read your post not once umpteem times...
When time permits, go through the postings of Shri Dinesh Diwekar, Shri Umakanthan and senior persons who are active and giving suggestions from their heart...
BEst of Luck ... HAve a Good Day...
From India, Arcot
Dear Gopinath, By stating that the Management has the right to suspend or has the discretion to suspend an employee, it is meant that the management is within its powers in suspending an employee. By suspending an employee the management has only chosen not to take work from the employee but the liabilities regarding the employee still continues. The suspended employee is entitled to various other benefits like any other employee (Like New Year gift, uniform, even annual increment - MP High Court has given this decision though there is no Supreme Court decision in this regard). In situations like this where a big group of employees are involved in the misconduct, the management can pick and choose the employee to be suspended, may be looking to the evidence available, the leadership role played, the extent of provocation made or the weakest possible. But there cannot be a valid defence that other similarly placed employees have not been suspended, so I cannot be suspended. The management does not owe an explanation as to why it has suspended a particular employee. In case there is no adequate evidence to support the action, then management will have to pay the price by way of back wages, restoration of all other facilities etc besides, most importantly loss of face. So before suspending an employee lot of thought has to be there. So also Supreme Court has mandated that there has o be periodical review of suspension cases, in Government it has to be done once in six months.
I do not subscribe to your view that in mass situations, none can be suspended. There is all the more the need for Management to act decisively and strike with force in such situations. Personally, I have dealt with a situation of 37 days strike involving nearly 10,000 workmen, caused by inter-union rivalry and in the process we had terminated 3 employees and suspended nearly 70. I feel the situation could come under control because of these actions. What all would have happened if such action was not taken cannot be even guessed. At the end, the strike was called off and the management did not concede a single demand and wage cut was imposed. Though in such situations no victory could be claimed but the fact remains that industrial peace remained for long and the impression gained ground that management cannot be taken for granted.
I also value immensely the comments of Shri Dinesh Diwekar, Shri Umakanthan and other senior persons and has endorsed the views of Shri Umakanthan Sir. In deed I was trying to add to it, and thought that I could add looking to my nearly four decade experience in HRM in manufacturing sector.
I have a habit of reading my post many times before posting, any way thanks for reminding me.
From India, Mumbai
I do not subscribe to your view that in mass situations, none can be suspended. There is all the more the need for Management to act decisively and strike with force in such situations. Personally, I have dealt with a situation of 37 days strike involving nearly 10,000 workmen, caused by inter-union rivalry and in the process we had terminated 3 employees and suspended nearly 70. I feel the situation could come under control because of these actions. What all would have happened if such action was not taken cannot be even guessed. At the end, the strike was called off and the management did not concede a single demand and wage cut was imposed. Though in such situations no victory could be claimed but the fact remains that industrial peace remained for long and the impression gained ground that management cannot be taken for granted.
I also value immensely the comments of Shri Dinesh Diwekar, Shri Umakanthan and other senior persons and has endorsed the views of Shri Umakanthan Sir. In deed I was trying to add to it, and thought that I could add looking to my nearly four decade experience in HRM in manufacturing sector.
I have a habit of reading my post many times before posting, any way thanks for reminding me.
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.
Check LisCheck List ofr Disciplinary Proceedings Domestic Enquiry 11 Sep 09.doc
Final Enquiry Report.pdf