Dear members,
I have some queries regarding a case of ambiguity about an employee's joining or not joining in an organization. I will keep identities anonymous.
The concerned company is a reputed Indian IT company with over 30,000 employees.
Pretext: Employee receives an offer from this company 1-2 months before the joining date. Accepts the offer. Gets offers from other companies also (very common).
On the date of joining (virtual onboarding), the company just does some document verification (Aadhar, PAN, marksheets, previous company relieving letters) over a 10-minute video call. Other joining and onboarding formalities are to be completed the following day, including induction, document signing, joining acceptance letter, EPF forms, and other statutory forms.
The employee wants to get some clarifications on this video call on the date of joining and is told he can connect with onboarding HR the next day, and the actual joining formalities will be completed then.
Problem/queries:
On the next day/date of induction, the employee clearly discusses his queries and dilemma with onboarding HR over the call and confirms multiple times that if he wishes not to join, he can do so, and his joining will not be processed. It will be marked as absent, and no employment record will be there, no payroll, etc., will be processed. It will be considered as not joined instead of joined and left. After clearly discussing this, the employee decides not to join and sends an email to cancel the joining. The onboarding HR acknowledges the email. The employee was sent an email by the company on this day to fill mandatory statutory forms as part of the onboarding process: Form Q, Joining report / Joining acceptance, EPF form 11, EPF form 2, Gratuity form. The employee doesn't sign/submits any of these forms.
The employee joins another company.
Now, due to some internal errors/delays in properly closing this by the onboarding HR, the company creates a PF account for this employee after around 10 days of this incident. This reflects incorrectly in the employee's service history.
The employee later raises this with the company and doesn't get any proper response, and everyone in the company keeps passing the blame and baton to another team. After a lot of follow-up, the company closes the PF account with again an incorrect date of exit, overall showing 7-8 days of service. No contribution is made in the PF account. No payroll is generated.
PF account/member ID, once created, cannot be deleted as per EPFO.
Now, after multiple follow-ups and escalations, the company agrees to submit a joint declaration form to the PF office to update the date of exit to the same date as the date of joining. The PF office rejects this after 1 month, saying the date of joining and date of exit cannot be the same and asks the employer to provide a clarification why the PF account was created without joining. The employer since then is not responding at all.
Now, the employee is concerned that during his current employer's background check and any future employment background check, this will reflect incorrectly in the service history and can cause issues.
Please share your thoughts/suggestions on how this situation can be dealt with.
Few specific queries:
1) There are mandatory statutory forms to be collected by employers as per various labor law acts, like Form Q, Joining report/acceptance, EPF form 11, EPF form 2, etc. If the employee doesn't submit these documents as he/she did not join as explained above, based on this, can the person complain to any authority about the incorrect service history created by the employer? Please share some details. What are the various authorities which can be approached? Labor officer, labor commissioner, etc.?
2) Can the employer, to safeguard their interest in fear of action being taken by EPFO if they accept that they created a PF account by mistake without the employee joining, say that the employee actually joined even in the absence of any signed documents/forms by the employee?
3) What is the best way to deal with this for the employee? Are there labor lawyers who take such individual cases and help negotiate with the company and seek a clarification letter, and if it doesn't get resolved, help take the matter to a legal forum?
4) What is the best source to search for an appropriate lawyer in this regard? Based on my limited research, it seems most labor lawyers work for employers and hardly any for employees. Not sure about this.
This can be a very serious issue for an individual throughout a career if not resolved properly.
From India, Kolkata
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
I have some queries regarding a case of ambiguity about an employee's joining or not joining in an organization. I will keep identities anonymous.
The concerned company is a reputed Indian IT company with over 30,000 employees.
Pretext: Employee receives an offer from this company 1-2 months before the joining date. Accepts the offer. Gets offers from other companies also (very common).
On the date of joining (virtual onboarding), the company just does some document verification (Aadhar, PAN, marksheets, previous company relieving letters) over a 10-minute video call. Other joining and onboarding formalities are to be completed the following day, including induction, document signing, joining acceptance letter, EPF forms, and other statutory forms.
The employee wants to get some clarifications on this video call on the date of joining and is told he can connect with onboarding HR the next day, and the actual joining formalities will be completed then.
Problem/queries:
On the next day/date of induction, the employee clearly discusses his queries and dilemma with onboarding HR over the call and confirms multiple times that if he wishes not to join, he can do so, and his joining will not be processed. It will be marked as absent, and no employment record will be there, no payroll, etc., will be processed. It will be considered as not joined instead of joined and left. After clearly discussing this, the employee decides not to join and sends an email to cancel the joining. The onboarding HR acknowledges the email. The employee was sent an email by the company on this day to fill mandatory statutory forms as part of the onboarding process: Form Q, Joining report / Joining acceptance, EPF form 11, EPF form 2, Gratuity form. The employee doesn't sign/submits any of these forms.
The employee joins another company.
Now, due to some internal errors/delays in properly closing this by the onboarding HR, the company creates a PF account for this employee after around 10 days of this incident. This reflects incorrectly in the employee's service history.
The employee later raises this with the company and doesn't get any proper response, and everyone in the company keeps passing the blame and baton to another team. After a lot of follow-up, the company closes the PF account with again an incorrect date of exit, overall showing 7-8 days of service. No contribution is made in the PF account. No payroll is generated.
PF account/member ID, once created, cannot be deleted as per EPFO.
Now, after multiple follow-ups and escalations, the company agrees to submit a joint declaration form to the PF office to update the date of exit to the same date as the date of joining. The PF office rejects this after 1 month, saying the date of joining and date of exit cannot be the same and asks the employer to provide a clarification why the PF account was created without joining. The employer since then is not responding at all.
Now, the employee is concerned that during his current employer's background check and any future employment background check, this will reflect incorrectly in the service history and can cause issues.
Please share your thoughts/suggestions on how this situation can be dealt with.
Few specific queries:
1) There are mandatory statutory forms to be collected by employers as per various labor law acts, like Form Q, Joining report/acceptance, EPF form 11, EPF form 2, etc. If the employee doesn't submit these documents as he/she did not join as explained above, based on this, can the person complain to any authority about the incorrect service history created by the employer? Please share some details. What are the various authorities which can be approached? Labor officer, labor commissioner, etc.?
2) Can the employer, to safeguard their interest in fear of action being taken by EPFO if they accept that they created a PF account by mistake without the employee joining, say that the employee actually joined even in the absence of any signed documents/forms by the employee?
3) What is the best way to deal with this for the employee? Are there labor lawyers who take such individual cases and help negotiate with the company and seek a clarification letter, and if it doesn't get resolved, help take the matter to a legal forum?
4) What is the best source to search for an appropriate lawyer in this regard? Based on my limited research, it seems most labor lawyers work for employers and hardly any for employees. Not sure about this.
This can be a very serious issue for an individual throughout a career if not resolved properly.
From India, Kolkata
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
is this issue resolved? I am facing the same problem.Please help
From India, Kolkata
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Kolkata
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The situation you've described is complex and raises several legal and procedural questions. Here are insights and suggestions regarding your queries:
1) Complaining to Authorities:
If the employer has incorrectly created a PF account without the employee's actual joining, it can lead to an incorrect service history. If discussions and attempts to resolve the matter internally are not fruitful, the employee can consider approaching relevant labor authorities. This could include labor officers, labor commissioners, or EPFO officials. The process may vary based on local labor laws and regulations. Consulting a labor lawyer is recommended before taking this step.
2) Employer's Response to EPFO:
Employers should maintain transparency and accuracy in their dealings with EPFO to avoid legal consequences. Claiming that an employee joined without proper documentation or against the employee's intentions could raise ethical and legal concerns. Providing false information to safeguard interests may not be a sustainable approach and could lead to disputes.
3) Dealing with the Situation:
The best way for the employee to address this situation is to engage a labor lawyer who specializes in employee rights and labor law. A labor lawyer can help negotiate with the company, request clarification letters, and take appropriate legal action if necessary. The labor lawyer can guide the employee on the best course of action to resolve the matter and protect their service history.
4) Finding an Appropriate Lawyer:
While it's true that many labor lawyers often represent employers, there are labor lawyers who work with employees to ensure their rights are protected. To find a suitable labor lawyer, consider online legal directories, law firm websites, or labor law associations. Seek referrals from friends, family, or colleagues who might have dealt with labor-related legal matters. It's important to approach this situation in a systematic and legal manner to ensure the employee's rights are upheld and their service history is accurate. Engaging a labor lawyer with expertise in employee rights will provide the employee with the necessary guidance and support throughout the process.
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
361) Complaining to Authorities:
If the employer has incorrectly created a PF account without the employee's actual joining, it can lead to an incorrect service history. If discussions and attempts to resolve the matter internally are not fruitful, the employee can consider approaching relevant labor authorities. This could include labor officers, labor commissioners, or EPFO officials. The process may vary based on local labor laws and regulations. Consulting a labor lawyer is recommended before taking this step.
2) Employer's Response to EPFO:
Employers should maintain transparency and accuracy in their dealings with EPFO to avoid legal consequences. Claiming that an employee joined without proper documentation or against the employee's intentions could raise ethical and legal concerns. Providing false information to safeguard interests may not be a sustainable approach and could lead to disputes.
3) Dealing with the Situation:
The best way for the employee to address this situation is to engage a labor lawyer who specializes in employee rights and labor law. A labor lawyer can help negotiate with the company, request clarification letters, and take appropriate legal action if necessary. The labor lawyer can guide the employee on the best course of action to resolve the matter and protect their service history.
4) Finding an Appropriate Lawyer:
While it's true that many labor lawyers often represent employers, there are labor lawyers who work with employees to ensure their rights are protected. To find a suitable labor lawyer, consider online legal directories, law firm websites, or labor law associations. Seek referrals from friends, family, or colleagues who might have dealt with labor-related legal matters. It's important to approach this situation in a systematic and legal manner to ensure the employee's rights are upheld and their service history is accurate. Engaging a labor lawyer with expertise in employee rights will provide the employee with the necessary guidance and support throughout the process.
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively - share and document your knowledge. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Join & Be Part Of Our Community.
Employer-PF-res trict to wages of Rs 6500.pdf