Hello,
I resigned from Kolkata based company XXX, which is owned by well reputed, digital marketing & analytics agency in Singapore YYY, one month after I joined (for whatsoever reasons!)
At the time I resigned, they asked me to serve 45d notice period, to which I agreed. A week later, I was suddenly told to discontinue anymore and the company no longer wants me to serve rest of my notice period. They agree to pay the salary for whatever days I worked. But not for unserved notice period, on the pretext that I was new employee (on probation), although no where we had any communication that said notice period during probation period is "just a moment's notice"!
I understand it’s at company’s discretion to let or not let an employee serve the notice period, but are they also in full right to not pay for un-served notice period? Sounds un-fair / one-sided to me (employee can’t leave without fulfilling notice period obligation, but employer can at it’s will enforce employee to not serve any notice period Without any Pay in lieu of notice?!)
Any clarification will be highly appreciable on how things work (or should work) in such situations.
Thanks in advance & pls. let me know if you need more info on the case.!
From India, Kolkata
1I resigned from Kolkata based company XXX, which is owned by well reputed, digital marketing & analytics agency in Singapore YYY, one month after I joined (for whatsoever reasons!)
At the time I resigned, they asked me to serve 45d notice period, to which I agreed. A week later, I was suddenly told to discontinue anymore and the company no longer wants me to serve rest of my notice period. They agree to pay the salary for whatever days I worked. But not for unserved notice period, on the pretext that I was new employee (on probation), although no where we had any communication that said notice period during probation period is "just a moment's notice"!
I understand it’s at company’s discretion to let or not let an employee serve the notice period, but are they also in full right to not pay for un-served notice period? Sounds un-fair / one-sided to me (employee can’t leave without fulfilling notice period obligation, but employer can at it’s will enforce employee to not serve any notice period Without any Pay in lieu of notice?!)
Any clarification will be highly appreciable on how things work (or should work) in such situations.
Thanks in advance & pls. let me know if you need more info on the case.!
From India, Kolkata
An employer employee relationship can come to an end either by serving notice period or by paying equivalent amount thereof, especially during the period of probation. If the company agreed to allow you to serve the notice period, then they cannot in between of such period, terminate your service.
However, for better advice, it is important to go through your letter of appointment letter, resignation letter, acceptance of resignation, notice of serving 45 days notice period and final letter of discontinuation and other documents, if any.
From India, Kolkata
However, for better advice, it is important to go through your letter of appointment letter, resignation letter, acceptance of resignation, notice of serving 45 days notice period and final letter of discontinuation and other documents, if any.
From India, Kolkata
Thank you for the clarification.
what does "probation period" technically mean actually? Does it automatically mean (even if not agreed beforehand) there's no min. 'x' days notice period (meaning employer fully justified terminating the contract same day even if usual notice period agreed is 45 days)?
From India, Kolkata
what does "probation period" technically mean actually? Does it automatically mean (even if not agreed beforehand) there's no min. 'x' days notice period (meaning employer fully justified terminating the contract same day even if usual notice period agreed is 45 days)?
From India, Kolkata
Probation period is a period where the employee is tested for a period of 3/ 6 months and after completing of such probationary period, the employer has to a) absorb the employee or b) terminate the employee. If you are serving a probationary period, then it has to be mentioned in the appointment letter itself.
During a probationary period, employer and employee can end the relationship by giving notice period/ pay in lieu thereof. However, once an employee becomes permanent, then for the purpose of terminating his service one needs to follow the procedure of law.
Since you have joined the company, I assumed/ asked about the probationary period, if any.
From India, Kolkata
During a probationary period, employer and employee can end the relationship by giving notice period/ pay in lieu thereof. However, once an employee becomes permanent, then for the purpose of terminating his service one needs to follow the procedure of law.
Since you have joined the company, I assumed/ asked about the probationary period, if any.
From India, Kolkata
The company has the right to waive the notice period upon your resignation and let you go, even if you have not requested the waiver. They don't need to pay you for the remaining notice period which was not served. They are right.
From Indonesia, Jakarta
From Indonesia, Jakarta
I echo Ritesh, since you were yet to be confirmed, there is not notice period that you need to serve. Hence, the employer do not need to pay you for it.
I wonder how did they ask you to serve the notice period in the first place. Looks like either a miscommunication made initially or absence of clarity in HR Policies.
Since you were the one who initiated the separation, I assume you already have a job in hand. Hence, requesting you to focus on that new role for now and take a clean exit from this employer.
Wish you all the best !
From India, Mumbai
I wonder how did they ask you to serve the notice period in the first place. Looks like either a miscommunication made initially or absence of clarity in HR Policies.
Since you were the one who initiated the separation, I assume you already have a job in hand. Hence, requesting you to focus on that new role for now and take a clean exit from this employer.
Wish you all the best !
From India, Mumbai
hmmm.. now I hear conflicting messages.
one from professional lawyer (which says they ned to pay out rest of notice period)
other from 'anonymous' [wish there was a name, to bring more credibility to the response!], which says they don't need to.
can anyone clarify pls whats correct?
@(Cite Contribution), you mean you don't agree with Ritesh and intact echo with 'Anonymous'?
Thanks in advance!
From India, Kolkata
one from professional lawyer (which says they ned to pay out rest of notice period)
other from 'anonymous' [wish there was a name, to bring more credibility to the response!], which says they don't need to.
can anyone clarify pls whats correct?
@(Cite Contribution), you mean you don't agree with Ritesh and intact echo with 'Anonymous'?
Thanks in advance!
From India, Kolkata
The topic is a complex one that rarely has a single straight answer. Different individuals will give different answers and the courts also, have given differing answers depending on how the lawyers presented the matter.
If you look strictly as per law of contracts, you are required to serve a minimum notice period when you resign and the company is required to pay you for notice period if they terminate you. When you send a notice of resignation it is a notice of termination of employment. The other party then has 'the right to accept with the notice period or decide to accept with immediate effect. Since you resigned, it is not necessary to pay the balance of notice pay they have waived.
But again, there is no stated clear law on this, and the above is also derived from various clauses of contract act and not a direct reference to a section. Therefore a lot depends on factors Ritesh mentioned.
But in the end, what's the solution ? The Comoany realised that your staying full term is meaningless to them... It may have reflected in your quality of worker attitude post resignation, for example. And they are not interested in paying someone who resigned after a month. Complaining to labour officials is meaningless in an unclear situation and trying a legal route would cost far more than the balance notice pay. So suggested, forget it and move on
From India, Mumbai
If you look strictly as per law of contracts, you are required to serve a minimum notice period when you resign and the company is required to pay you for notice period if they terminate you. When you send a notice of resignation it is a notice of termination of employment. The other party then has 'the right to accept with the notice period or decide to accept with immediate effect. Since you resigned, it is not necessary to pay the balance of notice pay they have waived.
But again, there is no stated clear law on this, and the above is also derived from various clauses of contract act and not a direct reference to a section. Therefore a lot depends on factors Ritesh mentioned.
But in the end, what's the solution ? The Comoany realised that your staying full term is meaningless to them... It may have reflected in your quality of worker attitude post resignation, for example. And they are not interested in paying someone who resigned after a month. Complaining to labour officials is meaningless in an unclear situation and trying a legal route would cost far more than the balance notice pay. So suggested, forget it and move on
From India, Mumbai
hey guys, thanks for all your suggestions.
It was very helpful to understand the things better
Staying full term is meaningless - yes, correct!
Trying a legal route - yes, will cost money, energy etc. & not always the best way for long term relations (better negotiate through mutual discussions first and reach a consensus)
Forget it & move on - sorry, but I also believe strongly about justice & fair play. If we keep ignoring "unfair practices" [just because legal route if complex, painful, slow], people will keep exploiting such loopholes. We shdn't let these people go away so easily, so that next time anyone tries play unfairly, they're forced to think twice! What say?
I'll speak with them to try resolve in friendly manner, lets see if they don't agree. as pe ray calculations - the'll owe >rs. 1L (not a small amount!)
Thanks for taking your time and attention to my query!
From India, Kolkata
It was very helpful to understand the things better
Staying full term is meaningless - yes, correct!
Trying a legal route - yes, will cost money, energy etc. & not always the best way for long term relations (better negotiate through mutual discussions first and reach a consensus)
Forget it & move on - sorry, but I also believe strongly about justice & fair play. If we keep ignoring "unfair practices" [just because legal route if complex, painful, slow], people will keep exploiting such loopholes. We shdn't let these people go away so easily, so that next time anyone tries play unfairly, they're forced to think twice! What say?
I'll speak with them to try resolve in friendly manner, lets see if they don't agree. as pe ray calculations - the'll owe >rs. 1L (not a small amount!)
Thanks for taking your time and attention to my query!
From India, Kolkata
Find answers from people who have previously dealt with business and work issues similar to yours - Please Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query.
Amendment to Payment of Bonus Act 2015.jpg
Online payment of PF mandatory from 1.1.2016.pdf
PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT 2009.doc