Is it legal for an employer to use terms that notice period is unavoidable cann not be waived off by forgoing salary
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If the clause is one sided only then will not stand in Court ( Court may deem it void ) but if it is both sided then it is valid & Legal in court.....
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
494From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Pooja ji,
In fact, I have not understood your query but on guesswork, my answer is as follows: If there is a mention in the appointment letter only of either side notice and it is silent on salary in lieu of notice and waiving off notice, the employer will be right in insisting the employee to complete the notice period. It will be justified on the part of the employer not to waive off the notice period by paying salary in lieu of notice or otherwise.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In fact, I have not understood your query but on guesswork, my answer is as follows: If there is a mention in the appointment letter only of either side notice and it is silent on salary in lieu of notice and waiving off notice, the employer will be right in insisting the employee to complete the notice period. It will be justified on the part of the employer not to waive off the notice period by paying salary in lieu of notice or otherwise.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello Poojaachaudhary,
Your posting is confusing. While Prashant & Keshav Korgaonkar have given the apt suggestions based on their understanding of your posting, your posting actually gives a different meaning. You used the words '...to use terms that notice period is unavoidable cannot be waived off...'. This gives a meaning that these words are a part of the Appointment Letter. Is this really so? Or is this your conclusion/understanding of whatever was actually mentioned in the Appointment Letter?
However, whatever be the wordings mentioned, Prashant & Keshav Korgaonkar's suggestions would still be valid. The reason for highlighting the point I mentioned above is to give you feedback to desist from mixing up the facts from your conclusions.
All the best.
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Your posting is confusing. While Prashant & Keshav Korgaonkar have given the apt suggestions based on their understanding of your posting, your posting actually gives a different meaning. You used the words '...to use terms that notice period is unavoidable cannot be waived off...'. This gives a meaning that these words are a part of the Appointment Letter. Is this really so? Or is this your conclusion/understanding of whatever was actually mentioned in the Appointment Letter?
However, whatever be the wordings mentioned, Prashant & Keshav Korgaonkar's suggestions would still be valid. The reason for highlighting the point I mentioned above is to give you feedback to desist from mixing up the facts from your conclusions.
All the best.
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello Puja,
As our members have rightly said, if the clause of notice or notice pay by either side is not clearly mentioned by the employer in the Appointment Letter or in the Service Rules of the organization, it is at the discretion of the employer to decide.
Hope this may give some clarity.
Eswararao Ivaturi
From United States, Cupertino
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
As our members have rightly said, if the clause of notice or notice pay by either side is not clearly mentioned by the employer in the Appointment Letter or in the Service Rules of the organization, it is at the discretion of the employer to decide.
Hope this may give some clarity.
Eswararao Ivaturi
From United States, Cupertino
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Keshav jee,
I need your help in understanding the principle of resignation. If I am not wrong, as per any establishment policy, it is either 1 month notice or 3 months on either side or 1 month pay or 3 months pay in lieu of not serving the terms of 1 month or 3 months.
My query is, does the employer insist staff to work for 1 month or 3 months as per policy without accepting the salary in lieu of not serving the terms?
Any citation of a court in the above matter is welcome. Kindly revert with your valuable advice as it pertains to my own son's case.
In my son's case, the management is not accepting the resignation letter and giving the acknowledgment receipt. Further, in his appointment letter, it is mentioned that on confirmation to give 3 months' notice or pay in lieu of the same.
The management has changed the policy, intimating through an email that from 1st April 13, notice pay in lieu of 3 months' notice the practice has been stopped.
Can the management resort to such practice by intimating through email?
Which clause prevails – the appointment letter clause or the email communication?
What remedy is available if the Branch Head is not giving the acknowledgment receipt?
For your information, there is no union functioning in the establishment.
Kindly revert with your valuable advice.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I need your help in understanding the principle of resignation. If I am not wrong, as per any establishment policy, it is either 1 month notice or 3 months on either side or 1 month pay or 3 months pay in lieu of not serving the terms of 1 month or 3 months.
My query is, does the employer insist staff to work for 1 month or 3 months as per policy without accepting the salary in lieu of not serving the terms?
Any citation of a court in the above matter is welcome. Kindly revert with your valuable advice as it pertains to my own son's case.
In my son's case, the management is not accepting the resignation letter and giving the acknowledgment receipt. Further, in his appointment letter, it is mentioned that on confirmation to give 3 months' notice or pay in lieu of the same.
The management has changed the policy, intimating through an email that from 1st April 13, notice pay in lieu of 3 months' notice the practice has been stopped.
Can the management resort to such practice by intimating through email?
Which clause prevails – the appointment letter clause or the email communication?
What remedy is available if the Branch Head is not giving the acknowledgment receipt?
For your information, there is no union functioning in the establishment.
Kindly revert with your valuable advice.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Keshavjee,
Further to the thread, more clarification is provided herein below.
My son has joined the establishment on 20th August 2012 and tendered the hard copy of resignation on 11th July 2013 in writing to the Branch Head. He has, to date, not received an acknowledgment on the copy that the resignation is received. Unfortunately, my son has not mentioned the last working day but has requested to be relieved "As soon as possible," as he has received a job offer letter from a multinational company based in the UAE, asking him to join the company by 1st August 2013.
The present company's appointment letter states that on confirmation, a 3-month notice on either side or in lieu of the same, 3 months' pay is required.
While referring to the resignation letter, the Branch Head has verbally informed my son that the practice of a 3-month notice in lieu of notice has been stopped from 1st April 2013, and he must work for the full 3 months with no alternative.
As for policy announcements, they are generally made prior to the submission of my son's resignation letter via email from the VP-HR Department and not now.
My son does not wish to serve the complete notice period but is willing to settle the dues in lieu of the notice period.
Can management resort to such a practice by informing through email about the stoppage of the practice in lieu of the notice period?
Which clause prevails - the appointment letter clause or the email generally announced?
What remedy is available if the Branch Head does not provide an acknowledgment receipt?
Kindly revert as time is running out, as 1st August 2013 is approaching very soon.
If the Branch Head declines to provide the acknowledgment copy and my son does not fulfill the terms of the notice period as per the appointment letter on either side,
what action can be contemplated by the employer against my son? As stated in the previous email, no union is functioning in the present establishment.
The UAE company does not require a relieving letter from the present employer.
Regards,
Azim Charania
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Further to the thread, more clarification is provided herein below.
My son has joined the establishment on 20th August 2012 and tendered the hard copy of resignation on 11th July 2013 in writing to the Branch Head. He has, to date, not received an acknowledgment on the copy that the resignation is received. Unfortunately, my son has not mentioned the last working day but has requested to be relieved "As soon as possible," as he has received a job offer letter from a multinational company based in the UAE, asking him to join the company by 1st August 2013.
The present company's appointment letter states that on confirmation, a 3-month notice on either side or in lieu of the same, 3 months' pay is required.
While referring to the resignation letter, the Branch Head has verbally informed my son that the practice of a 3-month notice in lieu of notice has been stopped from 1st April 2013, and he must work for the full 3 months with no alternative.
As for policy announcements, they are generally made prior to the submission of my son's resignation letter via email from the VP-HR Department and not now.
My son does not wish to serve the complete notice period but is willing to settle the dues in lieu of the notice period.
Can management resort to such a practice by informing through email about the stoppage of the practice in lieu of the notice period?
Which clause prevails - the appointment letter clause or the email generally announced?
What remedy is available if the Branch Head does not provide an acknowledgment receipt?
Kindly revert as time is running out, as 1st August 2013 is approaching very soon.
If the Branch Head declines to provide the acknowledgment copy and my son does not fulfill the terms of the notice period as per the appointment letter on either side,
what action can be contemplated by the employer against my son? As stated in the previous email, no union is functioning in the present establishment.
The UAE company does not require a relieving letter from the present employer.
Regards,
Azim Charania
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Sir,
"UAE Company does not need any relieving letter of the present employer." If the UAE company does not want this document, please ignore the process of obtaining a relieving certificate and proceed with the joining process. However, an organization can change its internal policies at any time.
In your son's case, if the amended rule has come into effect after he submitted his resignation (though you vaguely mentioned it), then the old clause stated in his appointment letter will be considered. Arguably, even if the email's posting date appears after he tendered his resignation, it could also work in his favor. Many things can happen within an organization, and unless actions are taken in time, their validity may not come into force.
Advise him to keep a copy of his resignation letter and the email circulation. Additionally, suggest that he updates his new employer regarding this relieving-related issue. The mentioned documents will assist him in substantiating his current situation if the new employer requests them.
Furthermore, if he can persuade his current employer, build their confidence, and maintain a good relationship, he can request them to consider allowing him to pay back the notice period for a harmonious relationship. Some companies may permit this based on the relationship.
Wishing him all the best for his future endeavors.
Suresh
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
"UAE Company does not need any relieving letter of the present employer." If the UAE company does not want this document, please ignore the process of obtaining a relieving certificate and proceed with the joining process. However, an organization can change its internal policies at any time.
In your son's case, if the amended rule has come into effect after he submitted his resignation (though you vaguely mentioned it), then the old clause stated in his appointment letter will be considered. Arguably, even if the email's posting date appears after he tendered his resignation, it could also work in his favor. Many things can happen within an organization, and unless actions are taken in time, their validity may not come into force.
Advise him to keep a copy of his resignation letter and the email circulation. Additionally, suggest that he updates his new employer regarding this relieving-related issue. The mentioned documents will assist him in substantiating his current situation if the new employer requests them.
Furthermore, if he can persuade his current employer, build their confidence, and maintain a good relationship, he can request them to consider allowing him to pay back the notice period for a harmonious relationship. Some companies may permit this based on the relationship.
Wishing him all the best for his future endeavors.
Suresh
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Mr. Azim,
Company can change the policy with time. The new changes ought to be communicated to all the staff. Since it is not possible to print minor changes and distribute to the large number of employees, increasingly the employers are mailing those minor changes over email. Ideally, the company also asks to sign a declaration stating they've read and agree to the new changes. Even if the practice is not adapted, it is assumed that the employees read the mail and since no query was initiated, it is presumed that you have accepted and have no objection to it or seek no clarification on it.
Since emails have been accepted as a legal communication medium and can be used as proof of communication link, I would say that there is nothing wrong in the company clarifying the changes over email. The most important fact is communicating changes - either by appointing a new letter or on the notice board or via email is not the concern....
Secondly, you mention that the amendments were made in April and your son resigned in July. So the new and amended clause will apply which means that the company can't be expected to accept 3 months' salary in lieu of the notice period to be served.
Ideally, when someone is writing a resignation, he should mention the intended last working day. It will give scope for discussion in the exit interviews, and you can put forth your claims and problems and hence seek early relief.... However, since no date was put up, it must have been presumed that you'd resign under normal conditions by serving a 3-month notice period.
With such short notice, I doubt a company would be ready to cooperate, but one can only try to negotiate with the current and the prospective company to respectively relieve as early as possible and try to delay the joining for genuine cases.
All the best.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Company can change the policy with time. The new changes ought to be communicated to all the staff. Since it is not possible to print minor changes and distribute to the large number of employees, increasingly the employers are mailing those minor changes over email. Ideally, the company also asks to sign a declaration stating they've read and agree to the new changes. Even if the practice is not adapted, it is assumed that the employees read the mail and since no query was initiated, it is presumed that you have accepted and have no objection to it or seek no clarification on it.
Since emails have been accepted as a legal communication medium and can be used as proof of communication link, I would say that there is nothing wrong in the company clarifying the changes over email. The most important fact is communicating changes - either by appointing a new letter or on the notice board or via email is not the concern....
Secondly, you mention that the amendments were made in April and your son resigned in July. So the new and amended clause will apply which means that the company can't be expected to accept 3 months' salary in lieu of the notice period to be served.
Ideally, when someone is writing a resignation, he should mention the intended last working day. It will give scope for discussion in the exit interviews, and you can put forth your claims and problems and hence seek early relief.... However, since no date was put up, it must have been presumed that you'd resign under normal conditions by serving a 3-month notice period.
With such short notice, I doubt a company would be ready to cooperate, but one can only try to negotiate with the current and the prospective company to respectively relieve as early as possible and try to delay the joining for genuine cases.
All the best.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Azim ji,
Generally, I avoid giving opinions on specific issues without fully understanding them from all angles and without reading and interpreting the relevant documents. I have many questions and doubts to clear regarding your query, but this platform may not be suitable for addressing them. In any legal issue, the steps taken by each party play a vital role. Proper interpretation of the law and its application to the case are crucial.
In your case, I would like to draw your attention to Section 9A and item no. 9 of the Fourth Schedule to the ID Act. According to this, the introduction of new rules of discipline or alteration of existing rules, except as provided in standing orders, requires a 21-day notice period. It is important for you to understand its relevance to your situation. In my opinion, the notice period is a matter of discipline.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Generally, I avoid giving opinions on specific issues without fully understanding them from all angles and without reading and interpreting the relevant documents. I have many questions and doubts to clear regarding your query, but this platform may not be suitable for addressing them. In any legal issue, the steps taken by each party play a vital role. Proper interpretation of the law and its application to the case are crucial.
In your case, I would like to draw your attention to Section 9A and item no. 9 of the Fourth Schedule to the ID Act. According to this, the introduction of new rules of discipline or alteration of existing rules, except as provided in standing orders, requires a 21-day notice period. It is important for you to understand its relevance to your situation. In my opinion, the notice period is a matter of discipline.
From India, Mumbai
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.