Dear all :
I solicit your input / validation on the clause on resignation vs notice period.
Present terms of appointment states "Your services are liable to be terminated by either party giving to the other party three months notice in writing. The Management, however, may dispense with your services by giving 3 months salary (Basic + DA+VDA) in lieu of notice. During the said period of notice, no leave of whatsoever nature shall be allowed."
Is the clause legally valid. Because as per this clause the employee does not have the option to leave the services by giving 3 months salary. He has to necessarily work for 3 months. Whereas the the company can do so. My contention is that the exist option should be equal for both the parties.
If an employee is leaving for better prospects and the prospective employer insists that the employee has to join in a month's time or else he loses the chance, can the company in which he is working still insist to serve the 3 months term and does not allow him to adjust the short notice period against his accrued PL or against payment . If the present company does not relieve him without serving 3 months, can the employee proceed legally against the company stating that his better prospects is stalled by the organisation.
IF you have similar cases, kindly share the same. Please also clarify on the above.
With thanks & regards. K Venkat
From India, Mumbai
2I solicit your input / validation on the clause on resignation vs notice period.
Present terms of appointment states "Your services are liable to be terminated by either party giving to the other party three months notice in writing. The Management, however, may dispense with your services by giving 3 months salary (Basic + DA+VDA) in lieu of notice. During the said period of notice, no leave of whatsoever nature shall be allowed."
Is the clause legally valid. Because as per this clause the employee does not have the option to leave the services by giving 3 months salary. He has to necessarily work for 3 months. Whereas the the company can do so. My contention is that the exist option should be equal for both the parties.
If an employee is leaving for better prospects and the prospective employer insists that the employee has to join in a month's time or else he loses the chance, can the company in which he is working still insist to serve the 3 months term and does not allow him to adjust the short notice period against his accrued PL or against payment . If the present company does not relieve him without serving 3 months, can the employee proceed legally against the company stating that his better prospects is stalled by the organisation.
IF you have similar cases, kindly share the same. Please also clarify on the above.
With thanks & regards. K Venkat
From India, Mumbai
Present terms of appointment states "Your services are liable to be terminated by either party giving to the other party three months notice in writing. The Management, however, may dispense with your services by giving 3 months salary (Basic + DA+VDA) in lieu of notice. During the said period of notice, no leave of whatsoever nature shall be allowed."
These 2 are different statements
1st statement states that , either party should give 3 months notice .
2nd statement states that , IF YOU WANT TO GET RELIEVED IMMEDIATELY THAN you have to pay 3 months notice period and on the basis of (Basic +DA+VDA).
3rd statement states that - you cannot take any leave , suppose your putting your papers by 1st and your last day is 15th then in this 15 days you cant take any kind of leave .
jyoti.k
From India, Mumbai
These 2 are different statements
1st statement states that , either party should give 3 months notice .
2nd statement states that , IF YOU WANT TO GET RELIEVED IMMEDIATELY THAN you have to pay 3 months notice period and on the basis of (Basic +DA+VDA).
3rd statement states that - you cannot take any leave , suppose your putting your papers by 1st and your last day is 15th then in this 15 days you cant take any kind of leave .
jyoti.k
From India, Mumbai
The clause shall not stand the scrutiny of Law if challenged in a Court. It has to be equal for both the sides. AS
From India, New Delhi
From India, New Delhi
Hi Sabarivenkat,
Your contention is absolutely correct. The exit option should be equal or else it will fail before the judicial scrutiny.
Since the employer has already included the notice pay in lieu of the notice period, an employee should also be able to avail the option to pay in lieu of the notice period. Normally, the accrued PL/EL is also adjusted against the notice period since the calculation of notice pay and encashment of PL/EL are the same.
The condition on leave during notice period can be assumed to be organisation specific and the company might be justified in declining leave during notice period.
Regards
Gautam
From India, Pune
Your contention is absolutely correct. The exit option should be equal or else it will fail before the judicial scrutiny.
Since the employer has already included the notice pay in lieu of the notice period, an employee should also be able to avail the option to pay in lieu of the notice period. Normally, the accrued PL/EL is also adjusted against the notice period since the calculation of notice pay and encashment of PL/EL are the same.
The condition on leave during notice period can be assumed to be organisation specific and the company might be justified in declining leave during notice period.
Regards
Gautam
From India, Pune
Thank you very much every one on the sanctity of resignation clause and validating my interpretation to me correct.
If you could throw some thought on the another point I raised..
== quote ====
If an employee is leaving for better prospects and the prospective employer insists that the employee has to join in a month's time or else he loses the chance, can the company in which he is working still insist to serve the 3 months term and does not allow him to adjust the short notice period against his accrued PL or against payment ?
If the present company does not relieve him without serving 3 months, can the employee proceed legally against the company stating that his better prospects is stalled by the organisation ?
=== unquote ===
Shall be thankful for your validation / comments pls....
Rgds. Venkat
From India, Mumbai
If you could throw some thought on the another point I raised..
== quote ====
If an employee is leaving for better prospects and the prospective employer insists that the employee has to join in a month's time or else he loses the chance, can the company in which he is working still insist to serve the 3 months term and does not allow him to adjust the short notice period against his accrued PL or against payment ?
If the present company does not relieve him without serving 3 months, can the employee proceed legally against the company stating that his better prospects is stalled by the organisation ?
=== unquote ===
Shall be thankful for your validation / comments pls....
Rgds. Venkat
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.
Experts Tips to Make REsume1.jpg
Employee Validation.doc
Case Studies in Performance Management - A Guide from the Experts.[2006.I SBN0471776599]. pdf