This is an article from the TIMES OF INDIA ASCENT. And I wish to express, my opinion on the same, and would like you to share your valuable comments.
END OF ARTICLE
There should not be any professional and private mix of the employees life. It is NOT necessary that if you see some person in a PUB for example
your colleague ,,
your boss,
your subordinate ...
all indulging in unruly behaviour, then what will u do, ??????
What I want to say is if YOU or ANYOTHER person, sees your colleague, boss, subordinate outside the office, after working hours, your discussion should be purely personal and must have no relevance to you thinking the next day in office, in a HR s clothing about your colleague, boss, subordinate behaviour at the club, mall, film etc.
There are also some people who maintain a low profile at work, always and hate to mix professional and personal lives, [like me],
For 8 hours I keep my personal life aside and work with full concentration on office work, as soon as I leave office, I throw the office work at the office work and carry my personal life with me...
So if you find difference between my behaviour at office and outside, it is YOU who needs to stop peeping into others lives [which u did when u saw me outside office, and deeply thought that how come my behaviour is different in office and outside] , and not me WHO needs counselling. Professionals always put up a clear line between work and personal life. Which everyone should do. Even if you see any office person outside, you can just tell hi, or if u hav good personal relations with them u can indulge in deep conversation.
But having some other perception about the person when u go in office and put ur thinking cap is totally unethical and CRAP.
From India, Pune
54END OF ARTICLE
There should not be any professional and private mix of the employees life. It is NOT necessary that if you see some person in a PUB for example
your colleague ,,
your boss,
your subordinate ...
all indulging in unruly behaviour, then what will u do, ??????
What I want to say is if YOU or ANYOTHER person, sees your colleague, boss, subordinate outside the office, after working hours, your discussion should be purely personal and must have no relevance to you thinking the next day in office, in a HR s clothing about your colleague, boss, subordinate behaviour at the club, mall, film etc.
There are also some people who maintain a low profile at work, always and hate to mix professional and personal lives, [like me],
For 8 hours I keep my personal life aside and work with full concentration on office work, as soon as I leave office, I throw the office work at the office work and carry my personal life with me...
So if you find difference between my behaviour at office and outside, it is YOU who needs to stop peeping into others lives [which u did when u saw me outside office, and deeply thought that how come my behaviour is different in office and outside] , and not me WHO needs counselling. Professionals always put up a clear line between work and personal life. Which everyone should do. Even if you see any office person outside, you can just tell hi, or if u hav good personal relations with them u can indulge in deep conversation.
But having some other perception about the person when u go in office and put ur thinking cap is totally unethical and CRAP.
From India, Pune
9 VIEWS and NO REPLY :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:
From India, Pune
From India, Pune
Hi Ravi,
The article you have shared provides good food for thought.
I am sure there most of us here agree with the ideas expressed in the article. However, there a few points that appear to have been missed out in the article.
For ex: As a part of the selection process, it is a common practice to discuss the personal preferences like habbies, family background, marital status etc. The reasons for this are obvious. Now, this very point could be argued both ways - as Intrusion into the Personal Life of the candidate; or, as an indicator of the psycho-social implications.
As I see it, what the article says is true to a large extent - Personal Life HAS to be separate from Professional Life. However, there has to be a sub-clause to this statement, which goes something like, "as long as the individual does not indulge in illegal, un-ethical conduct, in his/ her personal life".
Now, the reason for this is obvious (at least to me). The personal idiosyncrasies & preferences of any employee (if not brought into the office) do not effect the Professional Life.
However, any unethical or illegal actions/ activities of the individual do have socio-legal effects and it it these that DO affect the Organization employing the individual.
So, what do you say??
regards
VAMSI
The article you have shared provides good food for thought.
I am sure there most of us here agree with the ideas expressed in the article. However, there a few points that appear to have been missed out in the article.
For ex: As a part of the selection process, it is a common practice to discuss the personal preferences like habbies, family background, marital status etc. The reasons for this are obvious. Now, this very point could be argued both ways - as Intrusion into the Personal Life of the candidate; or, as an indicator of the psycho-social implications.
As I see it, what the article says is true to a large extent - Personal Life HAS to be separate from Professional Life. However, there has to be a sub-clause to this statement, which goes something like, "as long as the individual does not indulge in illegal, un-ethical conduct, in his/ her personal life".
Now, the reason for this is obvious (at least to me). The personal idiosyncrasies & preferences of any employee (if not brought into the office) do not effect the Professional Life.
However, any unethical or illegal actions/ activities of the individual do have socio-legal effects and it it these that DO affect the Organization employing the individual.
So, what do you say??
regards
VAMSI
Dear All,
What I am going to express are my personal views. I implemented these very successfully as the head of my establishment and earlier when I worked for a large company as the head of the region. In my office during the working hours be that during the late night hours, since my office remained open till about midnight I was a very strict disciplinarian, every aspect of employees behaviour was watched and taken into cognizance as per set norms. As soon as he or she went off duty that discipline was no more applicable. However, there was a caveate, there were some aspects which could not be condoned even after office hours.
Let us take a situation, after office hours an employee met with an accident, we including me were there to take care of all aspects including legal where required. If an employee indulged in excessive liquor after office hours, but it did not affect his behaviour or standard of work in office the next day, it was okay, however, if the same employee indulged in a brawl after consuming excessive liquor then matter was serious, if he indulged in roudy behaviour under the influence of liquor he was liable for action for unruly behaviour. Now if he indulged in drugs which is illegal activity then he commits a very serious offence and is liable to be dismissed from service, if he misbehaves with a lady and it becomes a cognizable offence then too he becomes liable to be dismissed.
So the laxman rekha that can be drawn is that if he or she commits any action which is illegal and is an cognizable offence, it has to be taken note of by the organization where he/she works, but family disputes, unruly behaviour within reasonable limits, not cognizable could be treated as off the office hour misdemeanour. When it inlvolves the organiizations name in any mannerwith any illegal act, then I believe dismissal should be the only punishment.
Overall the authorities have to consider each case on it's gravity, and to be considered whether the organizations name is being tarnished in public or in the eyes of the law.
Thanking you........Loveindra
What I am going to express are my personal views. I implemented these very successfully as the head of my establishment and earlier when I worked for a large company as the head of the region. In my office during the working hours be that during the late night hours, since my office remained open till about midnight I was a very strict disciplinarian, every aspect of employees behaviour was watched and taken into cognizance as per set norms. As soon as he or she went off duty that discipline was no more applicable. However, there was a caveate, there were some aspects which could not be condoned even after office hours.
Let us take a situation, after office hours an employee met with an accident, we including me were there to take care of all aspects including legal where required. If an employee indulged in excessive liquor after office hours, but it did not affect his behaviour or standard of work in office the next day, it was okay, however, if the same employee indulged in a brawl after consuming excessive liquor then matter was serious, if he indulged in roudy behaviour under the influence of liquor he was liable for action for unruly behaviour. Now if he indulged in drugs which is illegal activity then he commits a very serious offence and is liable to be dismissed from service, if he misbehaves with a lady and it becomes a cognizable offence then too he becomes liable to be dismissed.
So the laxman rekha that can be drawn is that if he or she commits any action which is illegal and is an cognizable offence, it has to be taken note of by the organization where he/she works, but family disputes, unruly behaviour within reasonable limits, not cognizable could be treated as off the office hour misdemeanour. When it inlvolves the organiizations name in any mannerwith any illegal act, then I believe dismissal should be the only punishment.
Overall the authorities have to consider each case on it's gravity, and to be considered whether the organizations name is being tarnished in public or in the eyes of the law.
Thanking you........Loveindra
Thank you LOVEINDRA and VAMSI for sparing your valuable time for your comments . Rest members who are only reading this topic should care to put their inputs / thoughts.
From India, Pune
From India, Pune
hi
got a doubt from the the above statements. if a person meet with an accident when he is back home from the office,he is liable for the compensation.what if the the person met with the accident because he is drunken?
does the company has to bear even in this situations ?
regards
Deepthi
From India, Bangalore
got a doubt from the the above statements. if a person meet with an accident when he is back home from the office,he is liable for the compensation.what if the the person met with the accident because he is drunken?
does the company has to bear even in this situations ?
regards
Deepthi
From India, Bangalore
Deepthi,
your four lines question forces me to ask you more questions, regarding compensation which is paid for accident.
FIRST, Any compensation plan of any company has certain clauses, which apply to their plan.
Second. Accident means it has two meaning, one is only the employee, i.e Dashing against wall, skidding, etc. second is the employee and some other person, i.e head to head collision, bumping etc. In case the case is second one then whether there is police case or not.
If there has been a police case registered, then situation further gets complicated.
Then the nature of injury, and so on etc.
So in this way there no of situations that can occur, and for each situation a solution needs to be decided, which differs from company to company.
Though ur question is valid, at this point I cant think of any specific answer to your question..
From India, Pune
your four lines question forces me to ask you more questions, regarding compensation which is paid for accident.
FIRST, Any compensation plan of any company has certain clauses, which apply to their plan.
Second. Accident means it has two meaning, one is only the employee, i.e Dashing against wall, skidding, etc. second is the employee and some other person, i.e head to head collision, bumping etc. In case the case is second one then whether there is police case or not.
If there has been a police case registered, then situation further gets complicated.
Then the nature of injury, and so on etc.
So in this way there no of situations that can occur, and for each situation a solution needs to be decided, which differs from company to company.
Though ur question is valid, at this point I cant think of any specific answer to your question..
From India, Pune
[/quote]Though ur question is valid, at this point I cant think of any specific answer to your question..[quote]
hey Saitan,
i got answer for the question i asked( accident when the employee is drunk). it seems that employee cannot claim for any compensation if he is drunk and meet with the accident.
we have been talking about the compensation all the way. i have a doubt , is there any special insurance like group insurance which comes into scene when it is matter of compensation for accident . or thing carry on with medical insurance.
is there any special book where i can know these things or is Company law enough ?
regards
Deepthi
From India, Bangalore
hey Saitan,
i got answer for the question i asked( accident when the employee is drunk). it seems that employee cannot claim for any compensation if he is drunk and meet with the accident.
we have been talking about the compensation all the way. i have a doubt , is there any special insurance like group insurance which comes into scene when it is matter of compensation for accident . or thing carry on with medical insurance.
is there any special book where i can know these things or is Company law enough ?
regards
Deepthi
From India, Bangalore
Dear Deepthi,
If the employee is drunk and has accident and is helped by his friends, but he is drunk this fact is known only to his friends and not the company, still he can claim compensation nnaaa
So i told naa , this depends on a lot of factors, even if the company person knew that he was drunk just because he is his frnd he will give compensation .
In practical the decisions are taken based on situations
From India, Pune
If the employee is drunk and has accident and is helped by his friends, but he is drunk this fact is known only to his friends and not the company, still he can claim compensation nnaaa
So i told naa , this depends on a lot of factors, even if the company person knew that he was drunk just because he is his frnd he will give compensation .
In practical the decisions are taken based on situations
From India, Pune
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.
Lets chat.pdf
Lets get real.ppt
Lets talk Blood borne Pathogen Language.doc