Whether can an establishment initiate disciplinary action against a trainee for the suppression of facts in collusion with a regular employee? Although it was advised that termination of the trainee employee can be effected immediately without assigning any reason in line with the terms of the Training Order, the management is specific in initiating disciplinary action against the trainee, and if proved, the term of the training period of the trainee will be terminated with sound reasons. In the classification "Trainee" is also defined as a workman. The said trainee is not an Act Apprentice. Request senior's views, please.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
25From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear member,
You have provided good information; however, you could have quoted what exactly the issue was. What kind of facts have been suppressed, who discovered it, and how it was discovered? How will it impact your ongoing operations or the image of the company?
If there is collusion between a newly appointed employee and a regular employee, then you may order a domestic inquiry. Let the facts be investigated independently and impartially. Based on the outcome of the inquiry, you may take suitable disciplinary action against the trainee as well as the regular employee.
Once again, I appreciate the clarity of your post. Such posts are few and far between, at least on this forum.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You have provided good information; however, you could have quoted what exactly the issue was. What kind of facts have been suppressed, who discovered it, and how it was discovered? How will it impact your ongoing operations or the image of the company?
If there is collusion between a newly appointed employee and a regular employee, then you may order a domestic inquiry. Let the facts be investigated independently and impartially. Based on the outcome of the inquiry, you may take suitable disciplinary action against the trainee as well as the regular employee.
Once again, I appreciate the clarity of your post. Such posts are few and far between, at least on this forum.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The fact that collusion is suspected with a permanent employee makes it essential that a domestic enquiry be conducted to find out specific details and involvement of the permanent employee. Removal of a trainee alone without knowing or finding out about the role of the permanent employee is dangerous.
An enquiry can bring out facts, and based on the report, action can be initiated.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
An enquiry can bring out facts, and based on the report, action can be initiated.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Disciplinary action against the trainee but nothing against the regular employee may go against principles of natural justice, and the company may well have to answer if the trainee takes it up with the concerned authorities. Is the company contemplating termination or only giving a caution notice to the trainee? It's better to take action as per the report [as indicated by the seniors, domestic inquiry] and ensure that the purpose is served rather than a lopsided issue which may give you all more headaches than solutions.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you very much to Sri Dinesh Divekar sir and all others for providing me with a way out. The commission of the act was that a regular employee, in collusion with a trainee, suppressed the incident that took place on the premises of the establishment, causing psychological injury to a member of the public.
During a fact-finding inquiry, no employee came forward to admit to such actions until the victim returned and identified the errant employees. Due to the injury caused to a member of the public, we were concerned that it may affect the reputation of the establishment. However, as we are taking significant steps to address the victim's injury, we believe it will not cause any further harm on either side. Disciplinary action has already been initiated against the regular employee, and a decision is pending regarding the trainee.
Thanks & regards,
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
During a fact-finding inquiry, no employee came forward to admit to such actions until the victim returned and identified the errant employees. Due to the injury caused to a member of the public, we were concerned that it may affect the reputation of the establishment. However, as we are taking significant steps to address the victim's injury, we believe it will not cause any further harm on either side. Disciplinary action has already been initiated against the regular employee, and a decision is pending regarding the trainee.
Thanks & regards,
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.