Respected All,
The company arbitrarily relieved my services after completion of probation period of 6 months. This is normal practice of the company in its work history. After 6 months, as per the employment letter my salary was to be revised. I had reminded and requested to the company regarding this. 2 days later the company relieved me from the services of the company paying 2 months BASIC SALARY as notice pay. The company had obtained my signature on 3.5 years service bond also. The company didn't pay leave payment at pro rata basis stating that they haven't given my confirmation in writing and so I am not eligible for leave payment. As notice pay they paid just 2 months BASIC NOT GROSS Salary. The company has unilateral terms of notice period clause in the employment letter. If I resign then 3 months notice period or 3 months basic salary in lieu of but if the company terminates my services then 2 months notice period or 2 months BASIC Salary in lieu of. I understand that this terms of the employment is biased and perhaps invalid.
I felt that the company has done gross injustice to me and also not paying a fair full and final with compensation for breaching the 3.5 years' service bond. I sent many emails and tried to call the HR and other officials of the company but they all blocked my number.
Finally through the Government's public Grievance Redressal forum I lodged my Grievance for resolution.
Now the company has sent me a legal notice through their advocate levelling allegations that my approach to the Hon'ble LG's Grievance Redressal portal has affected their reputation and so I have to pay Rs. 50 lacs as compensation in 15 days for defamation otherwise they will file civil as well as criminal case in the court.
Is registering Grievance with the Government's public Grievance Redressal portal which is open to everyone wrong? And can the company file cases for doing this? Please advise.
Thanks,
From India, Mumbai
The company arbitrarily relieved my services after completion of probation period of 6 months. This is normal practice of the company in its work history. After 6 months, as per the employment letter my salary was to be revised. I had reminded and requested to the company regarding this. 2 days later the company relieved me from the services of the company paying 2 months BASIC SALARY as notice pay. The company had obtained my signature on 3.5 years service bond also. The company didn't pay leave payment at pro rata basis stating that they haven't given my confirmation in writing and so I am not eligible for leave payment. As notice pay they paid just 2 months BASIC NOT GROSS Salary. The company has unilateral terms of notice period clause in the employment letter. If I resign then 3 months notice period or 3 months basic salary in lieu of but if the company terminates my services then 2 months notice period or 2 months BASIC Salary in lieu of. I understand that this terms of the employment is biased and perhaps invalid.
I felt that the company has done gross injustice to me and also not paying a fair full and final with compensation for breaching the 3.5 years' service bond. I sent many emails and tried to call the HR and other officials of the company but they all blocked my number.
Finally through the Government's public Grievance Redressal forum I lodged my Grievance for resolution.
Now the company has sent me a legal notice through their advocate levelling allegations that my approach to the Hon'ble LG's Grievance Redressal portal has affected their reputation and so I have to pay Rs. 50 lacs as compensation in 15 days for defamation otherwise they will file civil as well as criminal case in the court.
Is registering Grievance with the Government's public Grievance Redressal portal which is open to everyone wrong? And can the company file cases for doing this? Please advise.
Thanks,
From India, Mumbai
First of all I would say that a probationer has no lien on employment. The employer has the right to terminate the employee without assigning any reason and without any notice before he is given confirmation. But the termination letter should not be stigmatic order. In your case if the reason for termination is mentioned in the letter, certainly, you can challenge it.
Secondly, the employer has paid you two months' notice pay. This implies that the termination is discharge simpliciter. In Anand Lenin Vethanayagam vs The Registrar, Pondicherry University, the Madras High Court has observed that if the appointment order provides that a probationer shall be dismissed from service without assigning any reasons why he is given three months' (2 months' pay in your case) salary in lieu of notice?
Coming to the next question of lodging a compliant before the appropriate authority, I would say that an employee whose is dismissed from service 'illegally' or if the employee feels that the discharge is not legally maintainable, he can certainly approach the authorities concerned. However, if you have been working as a manager with any of the managerial powers and responsibilities like power to appoint an employee, power to transfer an employee, authority to initiate disciplinary action against an employee, authority to sanction leave of a subordinate employee or power to evaluate the performance of subordinates, then you will not get the protection of labour Act (Industrial Disputes Act) or assistance of the labour departments. At the same time, if you do not fall under managerial category, it is open to you to approach the grievance redressal authority or the conciliation officer appointed following the Industrial Disputes Act. Therefore, if you satisfy to be a workman, you just forget the legal notice, the company cannot do anything against you. Obviously, the labour Officer, the person in charge of the Grievance Redressal forum will call both you and the employer for a conciliation and arrive at a settlement. In that meeting, you can say whatever you want to say. In the conciliation process, the matters like the practice of the company appointing an employee for 6 months and terminating shall be discussed. Similarly, you can also tell the officer that there is a bond for 3.5 years, and it is one sided. Again the notice which is against the provision of mandatory service of 3.5 years is 2 months from employer side whereas it is 3 months from employee's side.
I also feel that instead of putting everything in system, it is good if you approach the Labour Officer personally, and also submit that for the reason that you have lodged a compliant the employer has sent a legal notice asking to pay this huge amount. If the Officer is not biased, you should get a favorable help from him. Please do it immediately. Do not wait for the reply from the grievance redressal forum.
From India, Kannur
4263Secondly, the employer has paid you two months' notice pay. This implies that the termination is discharge simpliciter. In Anand Lenin Vethanayagam vs The Registrar, Pondicherry University, the Madras High Court has observed that if the appointment order provides that a probationer shall be dismissed from service without assigning any reasons why he is given three months' (2 months' pay in your case) salary in lieu of notice?
Coming to the next question of lodging a compliant before the appropriate authority, I would say that an employee whose is dismissed from service 'illegally' or if the employee feels that the discharge is not legally maintainable, he can certainly approach the authorities concerned. However, if you have been working as a manager with any of the managerial powers and responsibilities like power to appoint an employee, power to transfer an employee, authority to initiate disciplinary action against an employee, authority to sanction leave of a subordinate employee or power to evaluate the performance of subordinates, then you will not get the protection of labour Act (Industrial Disputes Act) or assistance of the labour departments. At the same time, if you do not fall under managerial category, it is open to you to approach the grievance redressal authority or the conciliation officer appointed following the Industrial Disputes Act. Therefore, if you satisfy to be a workman, you just forget the legal notice, the company cannot do anything against you. Obviously, the labour Officer, the person in charge of the Grievance Redressal forum will call both you and the employer for a conciliation and arrive at a settlement. In that meeting, you can say whatever you want to say. In the conciliation process, the matters like the practice of the company appointing an employee for 6 months and terminating shall be discussed. Similarly, you can also tell the officer that there is a bond for 3.5 years, and it is one sided. Again the notice which is against the provision of mandatory service of 3.5 years is 2 months from employer side whereas it is 3 months from employee's side.
I also feel that instead of putting everything in system, it is good if you approach the Labour Officer personally, and also submit that for the reason that you have lodged a compliant the employer has sent a legal notice asking to pay this huge amount. If the Officer is not biased, you should get a favorable help from him. Please do it immediately. Do not wait for the reply from the grievance redressal forum.
From India, Kannur
Madhu Sir,
Thank you for your insightful reply. But adding few views:
1) Our High courts and Supreme court have also observed that services of the probationers should not also be terminated without a strong and reasonable cause. Probation doesn't mean at-will employment. No society is free when the liberty of the employee is made to bend upon the arbitrary will of another. It's possible only in a dictatorship, not in a democratic country. Employers should not use the probation as tool/strategy to remove the employees. Probation is an opportunity to learn and become fit as an employee. Everyone has the right to life and so right to employment also.
Therefore, it's illegal to remove the services of an employee without a valid reason.
Our courts have also observed that no employer should terminate an employee suddenly/abruptly without providing ample of opportunities for improvement.
Hence I feel the clause stipulated in an employment order that services of a probationer can be terminated without assigning any reason and the management's decision regarding this, is final and binding upon the probationer is devoid of merit and against the observations of our top courts.
In my case, I was working as a plant head but having no such authorities as you have mentioned. All such authorities are vested with the CEO of the company. I had completed 6 months and 2 days. The probation was of 6 months. There was no negative feedback from the HR. The move against me was abruptly and arbitrarily taken as retaliatory action.
I) There were around 25-30 employees old and new left the job because of toxic and unhealthy work environment, reducing leave policy, unauthorised deductions, etc. The history of the company is notorious for high employees change over. The Director insisted me to share the true reason and reluctantly I shared. I also shared the abusive, disparaging and shouting behaviour of the CEO who is the husband of the Director. Earlier she was supporting me but she grew a grudge after I shared the true picture in good faith and betterment.
ii) I requested to revise my salary as 6 months were over as per the offer letter.
iii) A new plant head was hired and I was pressurized to report him. I politely refused it as I felt it's breaching the terms of the employment/discussion based on which I had accepted the offer. The new plant head was junior to me with respect to work experience, education and age. In 2 days, I was relieved stating that I confronted with the directives of the management and this behaviour may be a precedent for the upcoming employees. Helplessly and under the predicament I put my remarks ( illegal, arbitrary,etc) on the receiving of the relieving letter and signed the FnF with 2 months BASIC SALARY. I had no choice also at that moment.
As per my understanding, the notice pay should be equivalent to the notice period (2 months full salary ) not just 2 months BASIC Salary. As such, it should be of 3 months as per the aforesaid discussion.
They refused to pay the payment for the accrued leave of 6 months and 2 days at pro rata basis. I'm not responsible for what happened. It is their arbitrary action.
The ALC has submitted the report which was biased. He stated that the company has terminated me WITHIN 6 months for misconduct. But the fact is I have worked 6 months and 2 days. And there is no mention of misconduct in the relieving letter. I escalated further and the DLC called me up and assured me of all the support and told that she would ensure the company complies the laws. Even the DLC along with team of officers visited the factory. Since the location of the place from my current location is very far, I couldn't attend and telephonically discussed. After 15 days, the DLC perhaps in the presence of the company officials asked me if I was ready to work with the company. After waiting few months having lost my job, I have already joined a new company. So I told everything and also I thought I may be treated bad after rejoining. So I requested her try best to get my accrued leave payment, equivalent notice pay for the notice period and compensation for breaching the 3.5 years service bond signed and employment loss released. Although the DLC assured best, finally they stated my claims are devoid of merit as per the provisions of labour law.
I had shared the legal notice with the DLC and the LC. The DLC said on what basis the company can file a case for lodging a Grievance. And suggested to send a reply through an advocate. I have sent reply myself. I spoke with the DLC 2 days back, and she advised to do a tribunal. I think the company has managed the situation.
I was working so efficiently. The chairman liked me very much. The environment is bad for 1-2 top officials. Situation is sometimes so created that the common people whose interest is to work and earn to run their households, face and suffer unnecessary hardships.
Assume that I am not falling under the workman category under the ID Act 1947, can the company initiate legal proceedings for my approaching to the Govt's Grievance Redressal forum to get justice since I feel whatever happened to me is definitely illegal, unethical and arbitrary and in the scrutiny of the law they can't stand? There is also whistleblowers protection act 2014.
The companies are drafting clauses one-sided and pro-employer. Isn't this coming under the responsibility of labour and employment department to regulate fair and ethical rules to avoid disputes and litigations?
Thanks,
From India, Mumbai
Thank you for your insightful reply. But adding few views:
1) Our High courts and Supreme court have also observed that services of the probationers should not also be terminated without a strong and reasonable cause. Probation doesn't mean at-will employment. No society is free when the liberty of the employee is made to bend upon the arbitrary will of another. It's possible only in a dictatorship, not in a democratic country. Employers should not use the probation as tool/strategy to remove the employees. Probation is an opportunity to learn and become fit as an employee. Everyone has the right to life and so right to employment also.
Therefore, it's illegal to remove the services of an employee without a valid reason.
Our courts have also observed that no employer should terminate an employee suddenly/abruptly without providing ample of opportunities for improvement.
Hence I feel the clause stipulated in an employment order that services of a probationer can be terminated without assigning any reason and the management's decision regarding this, is final and binding upon the probationer is devoid of merit and against the observations of our top courts.
In my case, I was working as a plant head but having no such authorities as you have mentioned. All such authorities are vested with the CEO of the company. I had completed 6 months and 2 days. The probation was of 6 months. There was no negative feedback from the HR. The move against me was abruptly and arbitrarily taken as retaliatory action.
I) There were around 25-30 employees old and new left the job because of toxic and unhealthy work environment, reducing leave policy, unauthorised deductions, etc. The history of the company is notorious for high employees change over. The Director insisted me to share the true reason and reluctantly I shared. I also shared the abusive, disparaging and shouting behaviour of the CEO who is the husband of the Director. Earlier she was supporting me but she grew a grudge after I shared the true picture in good faith and betterment.
ii) I requested to revise my salary as 6 months were over as per the offer letter.
iii) A new plant head was hired and I was pressurized to report him. I politely refused it as I felt it's breaching the terms of the employment/discussion based on which I had accepted the offer. The new plant head was junior to me with respect to work experience, education and age. In 2 days, I was relieved stating that I confronted with the directives of the management and this behaviour may be a precedent for the upcoming employees. Helplessly and under the predicament I put my remarks ( illegal, arbitrary,etc) on the receiving of the relieving letter and signed the FnF with 2 months BASIC SALARY. I had no choice also at that moment.
As per my understanding, the notice pay should be equivalent to the notice period (2 months full salary ) not just 2 months BASIC Salary. As such, it should be of 3 months as per the aforesaid discussion.
They refused to pay the payment for the accrued leave of 6 months and 2 days at pro rata basis. I'm not responsible for what happened. It is their arbitrary action.
The ALC has submitted the report which was biased. He stated that the company has terminated me WITHIN 6 months for misconduct. But the fact is I have worked 6 months and 2 days. And there is no mention of misconduct in the relieving letter. I escalated further and the DLC called me up and assured me of all the support and told that she would ensure the company complies the laws. Even the DLC along with team of officers visited the factory. Since the location of the place from my current location is very far, I couldn't attend and telephonically discussed. After 15 days, the DLC perhaps in the presence of the company officials asked me if I was ready to work with the company. After waiting few months having lost my job, I have already joined a new company. So I told everything and also I thought I may be treated bad after rejoining. So I requested her try best to get my accrued leave payment, equivalent notice pay for the notice period and compensation for breaching the 3.5 years service bond signed and employment loss released. Although the DLC assured best, finally they stated my claims are devoid of merit as per the provisions of labour law.
I had shared the legal notice with the DLC and the LC. The DLC said on what basis the company can file a case for lodging a Grievance. And suggested to send a reply through an advocate. I have sent reply myself. I spoke with the DLC 2 days back, and she advised to do a tribunal. I think the company has managed the situation.
I was working so efficiently. The chairman liked me very much. The environment is bad for 1-2 top officials. Situation is sometimes so created that the common people whose interest is to work and earn to run their households, face and suffer unnecessary hardships.
Assume that I am not falling under the workman category under the ID Act 1947, can the company initiate legal proceedings for my approaching to the Govt's Grievance Redressal forum to get justice since I feel whatever happened to me is definitely illegal, unethical and arbitrary and in the scrutiny of the law they can't stand? There is also whistleblowers protection act 2014.
The companies are drafting clauses one-sided and pro-employer. Isn't this coming under the responsibility of labour and employment department to regulate fair and ethical rules to avoid disputes and litigations?
Thanks,
From India, Mumbai
First, please clarify whether the company you worked for is a government owned company? like a PSU?
whistleblowers protection act 2014 applies to Public Sector Companies only and not to private organisations.
Similarly, the grievance mechanism of Lt. Governor (I assume you are in Delhi) is meant for complaints against the government mechanism and has very little relevance for your private grievance against your private sector employer.
You have tried to get the help of the Labour Commissioner. They tried to get something done, but you are a manager, so not protected under Industrial Dispute Act. Further, you have already joined another company so reinstatement is not possible. All that you could expect is higher payout. But you are paid in accordance with your terms of employment and there is no likelihood of the Labour Commissioner saying otherwise.
Now, your terms of employment has a so called biased terms only to the extent that they are asking for 3 months notice for your resignation but only 2 months for termination. That is not likely to make a difference, In both cases they are asking for Basic Pay in liu of actual work, so you have basically very little to complain on. If you didnt like the terms, you shouldn't have signed it. You are not a low level worker where you can claim you were pressured as you were desparate for a job.
You should have seen the company culture and reputation before joining at that level. Dispute between directors on their approach to you is again not something that the government or courts will bother with or are concerned with. So again, I think nothing will happen there either.
As for the defamation compliant, I think it stupid of the company to take that route. The compliant is to a government official and on a grevience portal. For it to be defamatory, it needs to be made to the public at large or a section of public concerned or connected with the company. I am assuming you didnt make these allegations to employees, customers, etc. So defamation is unlikely to be ruled against you.
However, company has money to fight a case against you and you are at a disadvantage as this case is likely to go on for years and you will have to pay your lawyers. If you have connects to the chairman, I suggest you reach out to him and have the lawyers the case and withdraw the complaints as a compromise (which will not give you results in any case)
From India, Mumbai
whistleblowers protection act 2014 applies to Public Sector Companies only and not to private organisations.
Similarly, the grievance mechanism of Lt. Governor (I assume you are in Delhi) is meant for complaints against the government mechanism and has very little relevance for your private grievance against your private sector employer.
You have tried to get the help of the Labour Commissioner. They tried to get something done, but you are a manager, so not protected under Industrial Dispute Act. Further, you have already joined another company so reinstatement is not possible. All that you could expect is higher payout. But you are paid in accordance with your terms of employment and there is no likelihood of the Labour Commissioner saying otherwise.
Now, your terms of employment has a so called biased terms only to the extent that they are asking for 3 months notice for your resignation but only 2 months for termination. That is not likely to make a difference, In both cases they are asking for Basic Pay in liu of actual work, so you have basically very little to complain on. If you didnt like the terms, you shouldn't have signed it. You are not a low level worker where you can claim you were pressured as you were desparate for a job.
You should have seen the company culture and reputation before joining at that level. Dispute between directors on their approach to you is again not something that the government or courts will bother with or are concerned with. So again, I think nothing will happen there either.
As for the defamation compliant, I think it stupid of the company to take that route. The compliant is to a government official and on a grevience portal. For it to be defamatory, it needs to be made to the public at large or a section of public concerned or connected with the company. I am assuming you didnt make these allegations to employees, customers, etc. So defamation is unlikely to be ruled against you.
However, company has money to fight a case against you and you are at a disadvantage as this case is likely to go on for years and you will have to pay your lawyers. If you have connects to the chairman, I suggest you reach out to him and have the lawyers the case and withdraw the complaints as a compromise (which will not give you results in any case)
From India, Mumbai
There re a number of verdicts which say that so long as the order of termination is not stigmatic, the employer's act of terminating during probation is valid. Moreover, a probationer will continue to be under probation until his service is confirmed by communication in writing.
A unit head is the head of the plant/ undertaking with authorities to take decisions. The authorities that I have mentioned are not exclusive but it shall extend to other responsibilities also. It is true that on the basis of your filing a compliant before any authority the company should not initiate a claim for defamation. If then the very purpose of having a grievance redressal system would be defeated. But the system in India is like if you need to get protection of labour law, you should be a workman. Otherwise, you can file a civil suit. In that also you may find it difficult to establish that your termination was bad in law because your service remained in probation even though the time mentioned is 6 months. In various judgements it is said that probation is not automatic unless it is provided in the contract of employment.
From India, Kannur
A unit head is the head of the plant/ undertaking with authorities to take decisions. The authorities that I have mentioned are not exclusive but it shall extend to other responsibilities also. It is true that on the basis of your filing a compliant before any authority the company should not initiate a claim for defamation. If then the very purpose of having a grievance redressal system would be defeated. But the system in India is like if you need to get protection of labour law, you should be a workman. Otherwise, you can file a civil suit. In that also you may find it difficult to establish that your termination was bad in law because your service remained in probation even though the time mentioned is 6 months. In various judgements it is said that probation is not automatic unless it is provided in the contract of employment.
From India, Kannur
Refer the judgment of the Madurai bench of Madras High court it's clearly stated that the employer shouldn't use probation as tool and strategy to terminate an employee. and their liberty shouldn't be made to bend upon under the arbitrary will of the company or its officials. Everyone has the right to life which includes the right to employment. We are not in a dictatorship but in a democracy.
There are also verdicts from many high courts and Supreme court that it's illegal to terminate an employee without a valid and strong reason and without providing ample of opportunities. It's bad in law and unsustainable to terminate an employee immediately. Arbitrariness has no place in our society.
Yes I had overlooked the advice of my friend and ex-colleague who had also worked there for 1-2 months not to join there. I had efficiently worked and stayed over 6 months. When someone is needy, and has the confidence do accept the offer ignoring the history of the company culture hoping positive prospects. I have done no wrong when I was insisted to share the actual feedback why the employees leaving the jobs once they get the salaries. There is the strong evidence with me that the move against me was taken in retaliation. Is this fair and ethical in the part of the company to have pressurized me to follow an unsuitable and unjustified order in order to cause humiliation and insult to my self dignity and honour.
I have adequate material evidence to establish that the relieving of my services by the company was illegal and the proceedings against me was vires of act.
PG forum is open to everyone. Otherwise my Grievance would haven't be accepted and entertained by the authorities first of all. I haven't shared anything other than the government authorities. The labour and employment department has the responsibility as per the ID Act, 1947 too to meditate the dispute between employees and employees too. I am an employee.
Employers have to adhere to the norms and guidelines of the employment. They are not only to generate profit and wealth from using the resources of our society. There is model standing order act. How many have it certified and are adhering the protocol?
How many of them obeying the basic laws of labour which is undoubtedly applicable to the workman as per the Act? Are the working hours, leaves, wages, bonus, etc followed as per the law? The sad truth is none of either workman or not workman gets the benefits.
Few months back, a CA female employee died because of work pressure and our labour ministry took strong action against the company. Was the CA employee falling in the criteria of workman?
I strongly believe it is illegal to terminate an employee whether parmanent or in probation without reasonable and strong cause. It's the law of the land. After all, the employees in the private sector joining in the middle and upper level are having vast experience and expertise. It's different in the government sector.
Why is no action by the authorities when a company hires and fires so many employees one after another? Are they only licensed to do this? Do they have unlimited freedom doing this? Are the common citizens of this country slaves or bonded labourers and have no value? The employers are no gods.
As per the law there should be Grievance Redressal handling committee in every organisation. How many of the companies have this mechanism in place? There is also provision of whistleblowers policy in the organisation as per the company Act. How many follow this?
There are big lacunae in our system and our government has to control it for a better and wealthier society.
From India, Mumbai
There are also verdicts from many high courts and Supreme court that it's illegal to terminate an employee without a valid and strong reason and without providing ample of opportunities. It's bad in law and unsustainable to terminate an employee immediately. Arbitrariness has no place in our society.
Yes I had overlooked the advice of my friend and ex-colleague who had also worked there for 1-2 months not to join there. I had efficiently worked and stayed over 6 months. When someone is needy, and has the confidence do accept the offer ignoring the history of the company culture hoping positive prospects. I have done no wrong when I was insisted to share the actual feedback why the employees leaving the jobs once they get the salaries. There is the strong evidence with me that the move against me was taken in retaliation. Is this fair and ethical in the part of the company to have pressurized me to follow an unsuitable and unjustified order in order to cause humiliation and insult to my self dignity and honour.
I have adequate material evidence to establish that the relieving of my services by the company was illegal and the proceedings against me was vires of act.
PG forum is open to everyone. Otherwise my Grievance would haven't be accepted and entertained by the authorities first of all. I haven't shared anything other than the government authorities. The labour and employment department has the responsibility as per the ID Act, 1947 too to meditate the dispute between employees and employees too. I am an employee.
Employers have to adhere to the norms and guidelines of the employment. They are not only to generate profit and wealth from using the resources of our society. There is model standing order act. How many have it certified and are adhering the protocol?
How many of them obeying the basic laws of labour which is undoubtedly applicable to the workman as per the Act? Are the working hours, leaves, wages, bonus, etc followed as per the law? The sad truth is none of either workman or not workman gets the benefits.
Few months back, a CA female employee died because of work pressure and our labour ministry took strong action against the company. Was the CA employee falling in the criteria of workman?
I strongly believe it is illegal to terminate an employee whether parmanent or in probation without reasonable and strong cause. It's the law of the land. After all, the employees in the private sector joining in the middle and upper level are having vast experience and expertise. It's different in the government sector.
Why is no action by the authorities when a company hires and fires so many employees one after another? Are they only licensed to do this? Do they have unlimited freedom doing this? Are the common citizens of this country slaves or bonded labourers and have no value? The employers are no gods.
As per the law there should be Grievance Redressal handling committee in every organisation. How many of the companies have this mechanism in place? There is also provision of whistleblowers policy in the organisation as per the company Act. How many follow this?
There are big lacunae in our system and our government has to control it for a better and wealthier society.
From India, Mumbai
Hi Mr. Saswata,
I appreciate your brilliant views on defamation part. Nothing is wrong in approaching the Govt's Grievance Redressal mechanism and it cannot be a defamation so far it's largely not made in public. Now a days, employees are freely writing reviews of their experiences in Ambition box, indeed, Glassdoor after leaving an organization. Can a company initiate defamation case against the employee writing a negative review against it?
However, I am not in agreement with your views of notice pay. The notice period should be equal for both the sides and should be equivalent notice pay for the notice period in lieu of serving it in employment terms. Taking the undue advantage of employment crisis and one's predicament, the employers can't arbitrarily draft favourable terms and conditions for them. Our courts will not accept such biased and one-sided terms. It's only possible in a dictatorship set up, not in democracy. Employees are not to take all the brunt of pains like arbitrary termination, then incomplete FnF dues, etc. That company is not paying and clearing FnF even the ex-employees who have left the company after serving 2-3 months notice period. After my departure, they have paid to some of them. Will we leave all this to God to take care or our government and society should do something? Yes as you questioned, one employee who had travelled from a distant state didn't agree to sign on the 3.5 years service bond, the company cancelled his candidature and he had to go back.
Payment for accrued leave should also be paid. Refer to the clause of 79(3) of the Factories Act, 1948 it's clearly written 80 years ago that accrued leave shall be paid after the resignation/termination/death to the employee or his heir/nominee notwithstanding the conditions of eligibility in 2 working days from his last working day.
The employers should not deprive the benefits under the pretext of still in probation by intentionally prolonging the confirmation even though the employee has satisfactorily worked over 6 months with no negative feedback during the said period. The clause so stipulated in the appointment letter that "you shall be deemed to be in probation until you are given confirmation in writing". It's largely being misused.
From India, Mumbai
I appreciate your brilliant views on defamation part. Nothing is wrong in approaching the Govt's Grievance Redressal mechanism and it cannot be a defamation so far it's largely not made in public. Now a days, employees are freely writing reviews of their experiences in Ambition box, indeed, Glassdoor after leaving an organization. Can a company initiate defamation case against the employee writing a negative review against it?
However, I am not in agreement with your views of notice pay. The notice period should be equal for both the sides and should be equivalent notice pay for the notice period in lieu of serving it in employment terms. Taking the undue advantage of employment crisis and one's predicament, the employers can't arbitrarily draft favourable terms and conditions for them. Our courts will not accept such biased and one-sided terms. It's only possible in a dictatorship set up, not in democracy. Employees are not to take all the brunt of pains like arbitrary termination, then incomplete FnF dues, etc. That company is not paying and clearing FnF even the ex-employees who have left the company after serving 2-3 months notice period. After my departure, they have paid to some of them. Will we leave all this to God to take care or our government and society should do something? Yes as you questioned, one employee who had travelled from a distant state didn't agree to sign on the 3.5 years service bond, the company cancelled his candidature and he had to go back.
Payment for accrued leave should also be paid. Refer to the clause of 79(3) of the Factories Act, 1948 it's clearly written 80 years ago that accrued leave shall be paid after the resignation/termination/death to the employee or his heir/nominee notwithstanding the conditions of eligibility in 2 working days from his last working day.
The employers should not deprive the benefits under the pretext of still in probation by intentionally prolonging the confirmation even though the employee has satisfactorily worked over 6 months with no negative feedback during the said period. The clause so stipulated in the appointment letter that "you shall be deemed to be in probation until you are given confirmation in writing". It's largely being misused.
From India, Mumbai
You have asked to refer to the judgment of the Madurai bench of Madras High court where it is clearly stated that the employer shouldn't use probation as tool and strategy to terminate an employee. But you have not given any citation nor the title of the case so that we can peruse it and suggest any possible way out. Anyway, you have legal knowledge, and I would suggest that you shall proceed with legal action against the employer. All the best.
From India, Kannur
From India, Kannur
You can come up,with thousands of statements and excuses,but the facts do not change. The biggest is that taking the matter to court is expensive and you then basically get blacklisted as a potential employee as no one wants a candidate that is taking legal action against another employer.
When you refer to,law, you need to take a very specific narrow interpretation or you will end up losing. You have specifically mentioned
“Payment for accrued leave should also be paid. Refer to the clause of 79(3) of the Factories Act, 1948 it's clearly written 80 years ago that accrued leave shall be paid after the resignation/termination/death to the employee or his heir/nominee notwithstanding the conditions of eligibility in 2 working days from his last working day.”
You forgot another related thing.
Leave accrues to you on jan 1 every year for the number of days worked in the previous year. It does not accuse to you every day or month. So if you were relieved after working half of the calendar year, these are not accrued leave at all.
From India, Mumbai
When you refer to,law, you need to take a very specific narrow interpretation or you will end up losing. You have specifically mentioned
“Payment for accrued leave should also be paid. Refer to the clause of 79(3) of the Factories Act, 1948 it's clearly written 80 years ago that accrued leave shall be paid after the resignation/termination/death to the employee or his heir/nominee notwithstanding the conditions of eligibility in 2 working days from his last working day.”
You forgot another related thing.
Leave accrues to you on jan 1 every year for the number of days worked in the previous year. It does not accuse to you every day or month. So if you were relieved after working half of the calendar year, these are not accrued leave at all.
From India, Mumbai
Madhu Sir,
This is the case of R Thiagarajan, CISF Sub Inspector Vs. Union Of India. He was terminated because he had approached the court. The High court ruled every man has the right to life, and right to life includes the right to employment.
Mr. Saswata,
The culture of the company is also discussed in the market. If the employee has the potential, he gets a job. There is something abnormally serious problem with the company if it has a trend of high employee change over. There are some companies where a few top officials ruin the work environment even though the company itself is so good. When 25-30 employees leave the jobs in six months, the undeniable fact which indicates some gross problem. The situation and the reputation of the company becomes so in the market that it finds very challenging to get candidates for hiring.
That's the reason there is standing orders, 1946 to guide a company rightfully and ethically. Ethics and values are the soul of a business.
Chapter VIII, clause 79(3) of the Factories Act governs that notwithstanding, the conditions as specified for eligibility of leave (like one leave for every 20 days actually worked in the previous year and 240 days working), payment for the accrued leave shall be paid after the resignation/termination/death in 2 working days even if the specified eligibility conditions are not fulfilled Please refer attached 79(3) of the said rule.
From India, Mumbai
This is the case of R Thiagarajan, CISF Sub Inspector Vs. Union Of India. He was terminated because he had approached the court. The High court ruled every man has the right to life, and right to life includes the right to employment.
Mr. Saswata,
The culture of the company is also discussed in the market. If the employee has the potential, he gets a job. There is something abnormally serious problem with the company if it has a trend of high employee change over. There are some companies where a few top officials ruin the work environment even though the company itself is so good. When 25-30 employees leave the jobs in six months, the undeniable fact which indicates some gross problem. The situation and the reputation of the company becomes so in the market that it finds very challenging to get candidates for hiring.
That's the reason there is standing orders, 1946 to guide a company rightfully and ethically. Ethics and values are the soul of a business.
Chapter VIII, clause 79(3) of the Factories Act governs that notwithstanding, the conditions as specified for eligibility of leave (like one leave for every 20 days actually worked in the previous year and 240 days working), payment for the accrued leave shall be paid after the resignation/termination/death in 2 working days even if the specified eligibility conditions are not fulfilled Please refer attached 79(3) of the said rule.
From India, Mumbai
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.
Company Letter for Completion 01 Month Notice.docx
Legal Notice.pdf