Dear Seniors, One of our employee was on probation and completed his probation period on 27th July 2014. As his performance is not satisfactory and he is not able to handle all the responsibility. Hence management has decided to extend his probation period for three months and to reduce his responsibility and at the same time to reduce his salary. Request to pls give your inputs to issue the extension letter with the above condition.
Thanks is Advance.
M.Khan
From India, Bangalore
3Thanks is Advance.
M.Khan
From India, Bangalore
Dear Khan,
In the realm of employment, period of probation is the time-span within which the employee concerned, may him be a fresher to the organization or a promotee from a lower post in the same organization, has to prove that he posseses the minimum capabilities to perform the job to the satisfaction of the employer and to shoulder eventual higher responsibilities that can come across the job. If it happens to be otherwise on any score or both, it is within the discretion and prerogative of the management as well to send him out on discharge simpliciter or extend his period of probation to enable him to cope up with as per the terms of the contract of employment. But, reducing his salary? Unheard of! I think stipulating a fresh condition in the same contract of employment is not permissible.
From India, Salem
In the realm of employment, period of probation is the time-span within which the employee concerned, may him be a fresher to the organization or a promotee from a lower post in the same organization, has to prove that he posseses the minimum capabilities to perform the job to the satisfaction of the employer and to shoulder eventual higher responsibilities that can come across the job. If it happens to be otherwise on any score or both, it is within the discretion and prerogative of the management as well to send him out on discharge simpliciter or extend his period of probation to enable him to cope up with as per the terms of the contract of employment. But, reducing his salary? Unheard of! I think stipulating a fresh condition in the same contract of employment is not permissible.
From India, Salem
It does make sense actually.
Obviously the employee was unfit for the post. So they are now giving him a chance to work for a lower post and ofcourse, the salary would be lower.
To the best of my knowledge, there is no law that says salary can not be reduced or re-negotiated.
However, it is important that the same is made very clear and the employee accepts the same.
In alternate, you can terminate him as his performance does not match the job. Here, he gets a chance to prove himself. If the employee does not want to work in the new job / salary, he can always resign and leave. Since you have changed the terms of employment and he has not accepted the same, he can leave without notice.
From India, Mumbai
Obviously the employee was unfit for the post. So they are now giving him a chance to work for a lower post and ofcourse, the salary would be lower.
To the best of my knowledge, there is no law that says salary can not be reduced or re-negotiated.
However, it is important that the same is made very clear and the employee accepts the same.
In alternate, you can terminate him as his performance does not match the job. Here, he gets a chance to prove himself. If the employee does not want to work in the new job / salary, he can always resign and leave. Since you have changed the terms of employment and he has not accepted the same, he can leave without notice.
From India, Mumbai
Dear Saswata Banerjee,
I think your response takes the discussion to a different line... ... ... of subsequent reappointment in a lower post befitting the individual's lesser capability in view of his poor performance in the job for which he was originally appointed on probation. Whether the employee accepts the fresh offer made in the same contract and continues or leaves by resigning forth with, that's not the subject of discussion. But, the gist of the question posed is whether such a modification to the disadvantage of the employee can be made unilaterally by the employer in the same contract of employment covering a single transaction of appointment on probation basis. In case his performance in the lower post during the extended period of probation also falls below the expectations of the employer, will the process be repeated just because the employee accepts out of necessity?
From India, Salem
I think your response takes the discussion to a different line... ... ... of subsequent reappointment in a lower post befitting the individual's lesser capability in view of his poor performance in the job for which he was originally appointed on probation. Whether the employee accepts the fresh offer made in the same contract and continues or leaves by resigning forth with, that's not the subject of discussion. But, the gist of the question posed is whether such a modification to the disadvantage of the employee can be made unilaterally by the employer in the same contract of employment covering a single transaction of appointment on probation basis. In case his performance in the lower post during the extended period of probation also falls below the expectations of the employer, will the process be repeated just because the employee accepts out of necessity?
From India, Salem
Ok, let's stick to the legal part first.
I do not know of any provision that says employer can not reduce salary (except for a limited purpose in PF act).
Salary is always a matter to be discussed and negotiated between employer and employee. (Subject ofcourse to minimum wages notified)
So, any decrease also needs to be accepted by employee.
To that extent there is no concept of unilateral reduction. In each case the employee has to agree. If the employee does not agree, he can either resign and go somewhere else, or raise an industrial dispute.
In the current case, it being during probation, the employee can not raise an indistrial dispute. The terms of the employment already provides the option to terminate without notice or assign reason. So, if the employee accepts the reduction, he has accepted the new terms of employment. If he doesn't, he can leave.
The parameters of the matter would be different if the employee was a permanent employee.
I hope you agree with my contention.
If I have missed some point or provision of law, I would be happy to be updated
On the last part, I think if he fails to fulfills the lower expectation, the company should terminate him. It would make little sense to go another step lower. I think what the company did in this case was an exception, but a humane approach of giving a chance at a level they think he can handle instead of putting him out of job.
From India, Mumbai
I do not know of any provision that says employer can not reduce salary (except for a limited purpose in PF act).
Salary is always a matter to be discussed and negotiated between employer and employee. (Subject ofcourse to minimum wages notified)
So, any decrease also needs to be accepted by employee.
To that extent there is no concept of unilateral reduction. In each case the employee has to agree. If the employee does not agree, he can either resign and go somewhere else, or raise an industrial dispute.
In the current case, it being during probation, the employee can not raise an indistrial dispute. The terms of the employment already provides the option to terminate without notice or assign reason. So, if the employee accepts the reduction, he has accepted the new terms of employment. If he doesn't, he can leave.
The parameters of the matter would be different if the employee was a permanent employee.
I hope you agree with my contention.
If I have missed some point or provision of law, I would be happy to be updated
On the last part, I think if he fails to fulfills the lower expectation, the company should terminate him. It would make little sense to go another step lower. I think what the company did in this case was an exception, but a humane approach of giving a chance at a level they think he can handle instead of putting him out of job.
From India, Mumbai
I remember a similar case that was on the forum a year back
There was a young hr graduate who had joined a software company as HR. Based on pervious 6 month work experience, the company employed her, convinced by her statements during interview that she knows everything related to hr and compliance. When it came to confirmation, they refused to give her agreed salary as they found she knows very little. They offered her a lower salary and hire a consultant to ensure things are properly done. I guess they were aware that if they terminate and hire afresh, they would lose another 3 months without being sure the next one will be any better
I remember the post asking whether she can take legal action (for offering lower salary) without realising or considering that instead they can simply terminate her as it's still in probation.
I don't remember what the conclusion was from all posts we had.
From India, Mumbai
There was a young hr graduate who had joined a software company as HR. Based on pervious 6 month work experience, the company employed her, convinced by her statements during interview that she knows everything related to hr and compliance. When it came to confirmation, they refused to give her agreed salary as they found she knows very little. They offered her a lower salary and hire a consultant to ensure things are properly done. I guess they were aware that if they terminate and hire afresh, they would lose another 3 months without being sure the next one will be any better
I remember the post asking whether she can take legal action (for offering lower salary) without realising or considering that instead they can simply terminate her as it's still in probation.
I don't remember what the conclusion was from all posts we had.
From India, Mumbai
Dear Umakanth Ji / Saswatabanerji
Thanks for your inputs.
The management after discussion had taken a decision to extend his probation period for the period of two months and assigned him the new responsibility in the same catagoery and we had not reduced the salary. It was also decide he would be terminated if he could not perform in the new job.
We have also changed his reporting boss.
Thanks and regards
M.Khan
From India, Bangalore
Thanks for your inputs.
The management after discussion had taken a decision to extend his probation period for the period of two months and assigned him the new responsibility in the same catagoery and we had not reduced the salary. It was also decide he would be terminated if he could not perform in the new job.
We have also changed his reporting boss.
Thanks and regards
M.Khan
From India, Bangalore
Khan's reply has given a happy end to the issue he raised. Not because it is in a way in tune with my view-point but it makes the decision of the management a perfect one enhancing its image in the eyes of employees on probation. Period of probation, as it is, is an acid test for any new employee whether he is a fresher or an already experienced candidate. It will, in my opinion, be more stressful for a fresher for he has to learn practical applications of what he studied in theory and understand the psychology of the work environment as well. In the other case too, lots of mental adjustments, whether he is willing or not, have to be made by the probationer due to the possible differences in work style and work culture. So, lapse in one way or the other is inevitable. Since evaluation is a process based mostly on subjective considerations of the authority concerned, error of judgement is always possible. That's how the clause permitting extension of the period of probation came to be in place.But, placing the underperforming probationer on a lower job for which he was not selected that too on reduced salary not only nullifies the original appointment but also tantamounts to depromotion which shall be equivalent to a punishment and a bad HR practice. Here, the elements of humane consideration or the meek acceptance of the poor employee are out of context in as much as the action of the management can be considered not only as a breach of contract but also as an act of impropriety. Coming again to Banerjee's presumptions, of course, it is true that no law explicitly prohibits general reduction in the salary of employees. But the reason for the reduction and the wilful concurrence of the employees matter much. At times of adversity beyond correction, as one among the measures of austerity to save the industry, general reduction of salaries of all employees with their consent is a universally accepted method of rehabilitation. It can not be applied to an individual case of inefficient employee on probation for it could be very well construed as an unfair HR practice of selecting the candidate for a higher post but confirming him on a lower one on the subjective presumption of his unsuitability for the job of his initial appointment..
From India, Salem
From India, Salem
Dear Umakanthan,
I am not disputing your points.
However, I take a message / lesson from this that if you find an employee selected is unfit for the job he was originally selected for (or has applied for), then he should be terminated at the end of the probation. The employer should not give him a chance to work at a position that requires lower skill and therefore within his aptitute but carrying lower salary.
He may be ineligible as per company policy to apply again after having been terminated at the end of the probation.
I know this in any case is a rare event.
But considering a hypothetical case, is my understanding correct ?
(no employer will bother to give a lower job at the same scale as he got before just because he applied for a job he was incapable of doing)
From India, Mumbai
I am not disputing your points.
However, I take a message / lesson from this that if you find an employee selected is unfit for the job he was originally selected for (or has applied for), then he should be terminated at the end of the probation. The employer should not give him a chance to work at a position that requires lower skill and therefore within his aptitute but carrying lower salary.
He may be ineligible as per company policy to apply again after having been terminated at the end of the probation.
I know this in any case is a rare event.
But considering a hypothetical case, is my understanding correct ?
(no employer will bother to give a lower job at the same scale as he got before just because he applied for a job he was incapable of doing)
From India, Mumbai
Dear Saswata Banerjee,
Yes; in any rare real life situations like the one we are discussing - particularly in the matter of recruitment and appointment of employees based on certain norms both legal and conventional, the elements of right or wrong are replaced by appropriateness or inappropriateness. At times, a right decision taken out of the compulsion of compassion may turn out to be an inappropriate one for it can become a wrong precident to be followed easily and the feature of rarity may become that of regularity.
Anyway, thank you so much for your brilliant inputs from a different perspective!
From India, Salem
Yes; in any rare real life situations like the one we are discussing - particularly in the matter of recruitment and appointment of employees based on certain norms both legal and conventional, the elements of right or wrong are replaced by appropriateness or inappropriateness. At times, a right decision taken out of the compulsion of compassion may turn out to be an inappropriate one for it can become a wrong precident to be followed easily and the feature of rarity may become that of regularity.
Anyway, thank you so much for your brilliant inputs from a different perspective!
From India, Salem
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.
Employee Appraisal Form new.doc