As per the contract, I have to serve a 2-month notice period if I wish to leave the company. If I don't serve the full notice period, then I have to pay 2 months' salary to the employer.
My question here is, what amount do I have to pay to the employer for the shortfall in the notice period? Is it the monthly basic salary or the gross salary (monthly salary with other entitlements)? Is there any law for such a situation? Because nowadays, companies have defined their own laws, rules, and regulations. They can relieve you in 2 days, or they can threaten you to serve the full notice period.
The government should establish and enforce strict policies for both the company and the employee. If it is a one-month notice, no employee could leave the company, and the company could not ask a working professional to join on an immediate basis.
God, please help us.
From United Kingdom, London
My question here is, what amount do I have to pay to the employer for the shortfall in the notice period? Is it the monthly basic salary or the gross salary (monthly salary with other entitlements)? Is there any law for such a situation? Because nowadays, companies have defined their own laws, rules, and regulations. They can relieve you in 2 days, or they can threaten you to serve the full notice period.
The government should establish and enforce strict policies for both the company and the employee. If it is a one-month notice, no employee could leave the company, and the company could not ask a working professional to join on an immediate basis.
God, please help us.
From United Kingdom, London
Stay audit-ready with auto-generated ESI reports, contribution summaries, and employee eligibility tracking?all in one place. See It In Action - Book Your Demo
When it is a private limited company, the company defines the rules and regulations. The normal notice period in most companies is 1-3 months (depending on the industry and designation as well).
A person who is resigning can adjust their unavailed leaves against the notice period (most companies allow this; ask your HR for the same). Usually, no one is very picky about it and allows it unless you have to hand over something important that cannot be done in the time stipulated by you.
In your case, the notice period is 60 days. If, for example, you can only serve 45 days, you can adjust the remaining 15 days with your leave or let go of your salary. The salary would be the salary drawn (with all compensation).
From India, Mumbai
742A person who is resigning can adjust their unavailed leaves against the notice period (most companies allow this; ask your HR for the same). Usually, no one is very picky about it and allows it unless you have to hand over something important that cannot be done in the time stipulated by you.
In your case, the notice period is 60 days. If, for example, you can only serve 45 days, you can adjust the remaining 15 days with your leave or let go of your salary. The salary would be the salary drawn (with all compensation).
From India, Mumbai
Yes, I too feel there should be some restriction for employers. One of my friends got an excellent offer from a reputed concern. When he approached his present manager with his resignation letter, his manager asked him to compulsory serve a notice period of 2 months or else he was asked to pay the gross salary for the 2 months. My friend somehow managed to collect and gave the management the 2-month gross salary which they asked for, but they didn't accept it and asked him to serve the 2-month compulsory notice period so that his offer may expire, leaving him with no other option but to work in the same concern. What filthy human beings these people are...
My friend explained a lot, but they were not ready to hear anything from his side. He served the 2-month notice period and is now searching for a job. There should be some law to hold these people accountable.
From United Kingdom, London
My friend explained a lot, but they were not ready to hear anything from his side. He served the 2-month notice period and is now searching for a job. There should be some law to hold these people accountable.
From United Kingdom, London
Karumahe,
Firstly, we are not here to judge anyone.
Secondly, how can you blame someone personally? Do you think HR professionals have something personal against the person they want to ruin the career of?
Please understand the fact that though HR takes the initiative to make HR policies, it is the top management that has to accept or reject it.
HR is not the supreme authority; HR is also answerable to someone. So when the top person asks HR to do a task, whether or not they like it, they have to do it. They are bound by their employment to carry out the orders of their seniors.
Another thing, HR themselves are merely employees just like you, bound by the same employment as is offered to you, and they also have to follow the same processes and procedures expected from you. So, how is HR the "culprit?"
Neither can you say "top management" is a culprit because every individual has experiences that direct their decisions accordingly. Perhaps you would be in a better position to understand top management's/director's/CEO's plight when you yourself own your business and have people working under you.
Try to walk a mile in a person's shoes before you critique their style of walking. That is all I would say at the end.
And about rules and regulations - though private companies have their own rules, please note that they are at par with other organizations in the same industry.
You can surely challenge the policies of a company if they are legally wrong. Try to find a legal error in one, and you wouldn't notice any.
Whatever policies are crafted, HR first studies the laws and implications that the government imposes, for minimum things to be implemented. So rest assured that whatever you're getting would not be below the minimum standards prescribed by the government.
Sorry if I've been rude anywhere in my post, didn't intend to, but I guess it was necessary for all to know how an HR works. The hate policy against HR should be discontinued.
From India, Mumbai
Firstly, we are not here to judge anyone.
Secondly, how can you blame someone personally? Do you think HR professionals have something personal against the person they want to ruin the career of?
Please understand the fact that though HR takes the initiative to make HR policies, it is the top management that has to accept or reject it.
HR is not the supreme authority; HR is also answerable to someone. So when the top person asks HR to do a task, whether or not they like it, they have to do it. They are bound by their employment to carry out the orders of their seniors.
Another thing, HR themselves are merely employees just like you, bound by the same employment as is offered to you, and they also have to follow the same processes and procedures expected from you. So, how is HR the "culprit?"
Neither can you say "top management" is a culprit because every individual has experiences that direct their decisions accordingly. Perhaps you would be in a better position to understand top management's/director's/CEO's plight when you yourself own your business and have people working under you.
Try to walk a mile in a person's shoes before you critique their style of walking. That is all I would say at the end.
And about rules and regulations - though private companies have their own rules, please note that they are at par with other organizations in the same industry.
You can surely challenge the policies of a company if they are legally wrong. Try to find a legal error in one, and you wouldn't notice any.
Whatever policies are crafted, HR first studies the laws and implications that the government imposes, for minimum things to be implemented. So rest assured that whatever you're getting would not be below the minimum standards prescribed by the government.
Sorry if I've been rude anywhere in my post, didn't intend to, but I guess it was necessary for all to know how an HR works. The hate policy against HR should be discontinued.
From India, Mumbai
No, please, I am not offended, but I offer to answer all your queries here.
Please understand that the reply for the answer remains the same as I stated in post no 3.
Let me explain and elaborate.
If the notice period states - 2 months' notice period or salary in lieu of it, the employee can be relieved in those 2 months. Or if he doesn't wish to serve the 2 months' notice period, he should pay the salary against it and get it done.
However, sometimes it so happens that you have certain important responsibilities/tasks in the ongoing project. In such a case, you leaving the organization may leave the project clueless. You are expected to serve the 2 months' notice so that you can do a proper handover.
The only meaning of my such comments was, even if the HR understands that you have a great opportunity, it is not always in the hands of HR to give you a relieving letter. An HR can't relieve you unless your supervisor, your head of the department, your project lead give a green signal. Please understand that. It is just that on the face value of it, HR would come to you and say a big NO that you hate HR, while the NO was directed from somewhere else.
I am not here to prove anyone right or wrong, as I already said before. I am just saying how things work actually. I just wish to ask why would an HR stop you from leaving an organization when he/she has no idea what you perform in your team? How important are you in your team or what is the progress of the project on which you're working. All these details are with your supervisor, and when one files the paper, HR needs to get approval from all your supervisors. Unless they relieve you from your duties, HR can't hand you the relieving letter. HR is not just a top-bottom communication link. It is also a bottom-top communication link. I have seen that in bigger organizations, I myself practice it and say so. There may be a few people who might be doing "Haa ji sir ji," but just for a very less percentage of such people, we can't say all HR are bad.
I can just state this - My appointment letter says 1 month's notice from both ends. However, today if I wish to resign, I'll have to serve more than that as I'm the only HR and need to find a suitable candidate, ensure a proper handover, and things like that. It sometimes goes unsaid when you're having an important role to play.
There are certain people who you want to get rid of, and a company would not try to retain them. If a company tries to retain you, understand you're important to them. That's it. In fact, a company trying to retain you is one of the best compliments you could get for your work. No one would like to retain someone who's not performing or who's performing below standards.
Just because someone is at the top, doesn't mean they're high performers.
Also, as I said, HR is influenced by seniors, and they have to do what seniors say. Again, we never know what kind of role such people are playing in their team, so I wouldn't comment by taking a side. I would rather be neutral on this one, just because I haven't had this experience to comment/advice.
Hope you understand.
Again, I would suggest this, if you have a good rapport with your superiors, you can always tell them you need growth. You want to spread your wings further. Give this every few days, and wait back to see their reply.
Either they'll start taking you seriously and discuss what growth you need - salary/roles/etc., and you can negotiate, or you can say you would like to work for some brand.
That way you're indicating to your senior that you may leave if you get a chance. Do this after you know you would be called for an interview at least to 4-5 places, and it would click at least at 1 place.
Try to convince your superiors and work extra if needed to do a proper handover and relieve from work.
That's the only advice I give, and that's the only way I'm planning to do when I look for a change.
If you would analyze, there is still the craze of getting a govt job, mostly because it's a fixed-hours job, you get a pension after retirement, you get all other facilities and benefits. With the private sector, there's more competition. The top competitors in most industries, if you note, are from the private sector. Why was that possible? Because of the people who work for them, right? How can someone just let go of someone who's so responsible and contributing to their success? Why not take things in a positive spirit? If you think negatively, you would be frustrated, agitated, and it would affect you. If you consider things positively, you'd be calm and can strategize better. Don't you think so?
Of course, we do. The thing is when HR communicates to the most contributing people - operations top management knows what we talk (mostly because it's their message we're passing, and also because it's a part of our duty and we're going to abide by it).
When we communicate to the top management, operations people do not know, because they feel it's a one-way communication. In my current organization, I have been taking an employee's viewpoint indirectly and communicating it to our CEO. My colleagues don't know about it. Does it mean I am blinded and not understanding their viewpoint? You never know what was discussed in the cabin; you'd only know what was decided upon. HR is to maintain things at a confidential level.
Just want to ask you - How would you feel when someone curses you for something that you've not meant, you've not said, neither have you thought of? You just passed the message, but you're the one who is in the hate file. Don't hate HR; instead, go to them, share concern, and trust them to take it forward sometime.
Again, as I had said, I'm not here to say who's right or who's wrong.
I just wanted to give you a complete scenario of work.
Hope I wasn't rude. Apology if it hurt.
From India, Mumbai
Please understand that the reply for the answer remains the same as I stated in post no 3.
Let me explain and elaborate.
If the notice period states - 2 months' notice period or salary in lieu of it, the employee can be relieved in those 2 months. Or if he doesn't wish to serve the 2 months' notice period, he should pay the salary against it and get it done.
However, sometimes it so happens that you have certain important responsibilities/tasks in the ongoing project. In such a case, you leaving the organization may leave the project clueless. You are expected to serve the 2 months' notice so that you can do a proper handover.
The only meaning of my such comments was, even if the HR understands that you have a great opportunity, it is not always in the hands of HR to give you a relieving letter. An HR can't relieve you unless your supervisor, your head of the department, your project lead give a green signal. Please understand that. It is just that on the face value of it, HR would come to you and say a big NO that you hate HR, while the NO was directed from somewhere else.
I am not here to prove anyone right or wrong, as I already said before. I am just saying how things work actually. I just wish to ask why would an HR stop you from leaving an organization when he/she has no idea what you perform in your team? How important are you in your team or what is the progress of the project on which you're working. All these details are with your supervisor, and when one files the paper, HR needs to get approval from all your supervisors. Unless they relieve you from your duties, HR can't hand you the relieving letter. HR is not just a top-bottom communication link. It is also a bottom-top communication link. I have seen that in bigger organizations, I myself practice it and say so. There may be a few people who might be doing "Haa ji sir ji," but just for a very less percentage of such people, we can't say all HR are bad.
I can just state this - My appointment letter says 1 month's notice from both ends. However, today if I wish to resign, I'll have to serve more than that as I'm the only HR and need to find a suitable candidate, ensure a proper handover, and things like that. It sometimes goes unsaid when you're having an important role to play.
There are certain people who you want to get rid of, and a company would not try to retain them. If a company tries to retain you, understand you're important to them. That's it. In fact, a company trying to retain you is one of the best compliments you could get for your work. No one would like to retain someone who's not performing or who's performing below standards.
Just because someone is at the top, doesn't mean they're high performers.
Also, as I said, HR is influenced by seniors, and they have to do what seniors say. Again, we never know what kind of role such people are playing in their team, so I wouldn't comment by taking a side. I would rather be neutral on this one, just because I haven't had this experience to comment/advice.
Hope you understand.
Again, I would suggest this, if you have a good rapport with your superiors, you can always tell them you need growth. You want to spread your wings further. Give this every few days, and wait back to see their reply.
Either they'll start taking you seriously and discuss what growth you need - salary/roles/etc., and you can negotiate, or you can say you would like to work for some brand.
That way you're indicating to your senior that you may leave if you get a chance. Do this after you know you would be called for an interview at least to 4-5 places, and it would click at least at 1 place.
Try to convince your superiors and work extra if needed to do a proper handover and relieve from work.
That's the only advice I give, and that's the only way I'm planning to do when I look for a change.
If you would analyze, there is still the craze of getting a govt job, mostly because it's a fixed-hours job, you get a pension after retirement, you get all other facilities and benefits. With the private sector, there's more competition. The top competitors in most industries, if you note, are from the private sector. Why was that possible? Because of the people who work for them, right? How can someone just let go of someone who's so responsible and contributing to their success? Why not take things in a positive spirit? If you think negatively, you would be frustrated, agitated, and it would affect you. If you consider things positively, you'd be calm and can strategize better. Don't you think so?
Of course, we do. The thing is when HR communicates to the most contributing people - operations top management knows what we talk (mostly because it's their message we're passing, and also because it's a part of our duty and we're going to abide by it).
When we communicate to the top management, operations people do not know, because they feel it's a one-way communication. In my current organization, I have been taking an employee's viewpoint indirectly and communicating it to our CEO. My colleagues don't know about it. Does it mean I am blinded and not understanding their viewpoint? You never know what was discussed in the cabin; you'd only know what was decided upon. HR is to maintain things at a confidential level.
Just want to ask you - How would you feel when someone curses you for something that you've not meant, you've not said, neither have you thought of? You just passed the message, but you're the one who is in the hate file. Don't hate HR; instead, go to them, share concern, and trust them to take it forward sometime.
Again, as I had said, I'm not here to say who's right or who's wrong.
I just wanted to give you a complete scenario of work.
Hope I wasn't rude. Apology if it hurt.
From India, Mumbai
My question here is, what amount do I have to pay to the employer for a shortfall in the notice period? Is it the monthly basic salary or the gross salary (monthly salary with other entitlements)?
Ashish Bhai, it is stated in the Shops and Establishment Act that an employee is required to serve at least a month's notice period or pay salary in lieu of it. As far as my knowledge is concerned, there is no law defining the calculation of the notice amount based on basic salary or gross salary. Therefore, at this stage, the company can deduct the amount either based on the basic salary or the gross salary.
Seniors, please provide feedback if there are any inaccuracies.
From India, Delhi
Ashish Bhai, it is stated in the Shops and Establishment Act that an employee is required to serve at least a month's notice period or pay salary in lieu of it. As far as my knowledge is concerned, there is no law defining the calculation of the notice amount based on basic salary or gross salary. Therefore, at this stage, the company can deduct the amount either based on the basic salary or the gross salary.
Seniors, please provide feedback if there are any inaccuracies.
From India, Delhi
Dear Himanshu and all,
Ankita is correct regarding the concerns she has raised about HR professionals. Many employees misunderstand us, thinking we are like Hitler and believe everything is solely in our hands.
Regarding your notice period, as per the S&E Act, it is typically one month's notice period, and the calculation to deduct salary in lieu of it is generally based on the Basic salary. However, please carefully read your Appointment letter first. This is where most of us get confused. Without understanding the proper terms and conditions, we often try to prove ourselves.
If you have a good rapport with your immediate boss, it may not be a big issue. As someone rightly mentioned in this thread, your employer will only urge you to complete your notice period if there are very important tasks or projects. In that case, take responsibility for your current job and leave on a good note. If they are making efforts to retain you in any way, it means you are an asset to them.
In short, consider all factors carefully before taking action and proceed smartly.
From Japan
Ankita is correct regarding the concerns she has raised about HR professionals. Many employees misunderstand us, thinking we are like Hitler and believe everything is solely in our hands.
Regarding your notice period, as per the S&E Act, it is typically one month's notice period, and the calculation to deduct salary in lieu of it is generally based on the Basic salary. However, please carefully read your Appointment letter first. This is where most of us get confused. Without understanding the proper terms and conditions, we often try to prove ourselves.
If you have a good rapport with your immediate boss, it may not be a big issue. As someone rightly mentioned in this thread, your employer will only urge you to complete your notice period if there are very important tasks or projects. In that case, take responsibility for your current job and leave on a good note. If they are making efforts to retain you in any way, it means you are an asset to them.
In short, consider all factors carefully before taking action and proceed smartly.
From Japan
If you're not able to serve the notice period, as far as my knowledge goes, you pay the same amount that the employer pays you every month... which is your monthly gross salary. Seniors, please validate.
From India, Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
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.
