Notice Period Duration: Who Decides?
Who has decided the notice period duration for 3 months? Have all companies decided on their own, or are there any government restrictions involved? Some companies are trying to extend it to 4 months now...!!! It should be 14 days or less, like in the US and European countries.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
Who has decided the notice period duration for 3 months? Have all companies decided on their own, or are there any government restrictions involved? Some companies are trying to extend it to 4 months now...!!! It should be 14 days or less, like in the US and European countries.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Who created the practice of a three-month notice period is a stimulating question. I wish I had known the answer. However, a three-month notice period is a double-edged sword. Whenever a good employee leaves, three months seem too short. Whenever we believe we have recruited a good candidate and he wants three months to join, three months seem to be too long!
Regards,
V. Raghunathan
From India
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
1335Regards,
V. Raghunathan
From India
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Actually, there is no three-month notice period as everyone claims. Yet, three months are being followed for making alternative arrangements. In the Government Sector, there is a one-month notice period of pay, one month's salary for immediate relief. That is really the right direction to follow since keeping an employee who is not interested is not a worthy decision. I do enclose a copy in this regard. If the post is confirmed, then a three-month notice is advisable, duly considering the training provided to the employee, etc.
Regards.
From India, Arcot
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Regards.
From India, Arcot
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Notice Period and Service Conditions
Notice period/pay is part of service conditions governed by various enactments applicable to establishments and employees, such as the (Name of the state) Shops and Commercial Establishment Act. This act was enacted to govern the service conditions of employees working in establishments covered by this enactment.
Standing Orders (certified/model) dictate that the notice period in these enactments is based on the length of service/status of employment, whether under probation or confirmed, and is either NIL or a maximum of 30 days.
Any private agreement created by the employer and signed with the employee, or any policy inconsistent with such enactment/instrument of law statute, shall not survive. Hence, the employees that are covered are protected.
The establishment may claim the employee is not covered; however, a capable Labor Law Consultant or Service Matters lawyer may ask a set of structured questions and opine that you are covered.
For employees that are not covered, they should negotiate service conditions. Employees at any level can form unions/IC.
From India, Chandigarh
Acknowledge(1)
Amend(0)
Notice period/pay is part of service conditions governed by various enactments applicable to establishments and employees, such as the (Name of the state) Shops and Commercial Establishment Act. This act was enacted to govern the service conditions of employees working in establishments covered by this enactment.
Standing Orders (certified/model) dictate that the notice period in these enactments is based on the length of service/status of employment, whether under probation or confirmed, and is either NIL or a maximum of 30 days.
Any private agreement created by the employer and signed with the employee, or any policy inconsistent with such enactment/instrument of law statute, shall not survive. Hence, the employees that are covered are protected.
The establishment may claim the employee is not covered; however, a capable Labor Law Consultant or Service Matters lawyer may ask a set of structured questions and opine that you are covered.
For employees that are not covered, they should negotiate service conditions. Employees at any level can form unions/IC.
From India, Chandigarh
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Who has decided the notice period duration for 3 months? All companies have decided on their own. Are there any government restrictions involved? Some companies are trying to make it 4 months now...!!! It should be 14 days or less, like in the US and European Countries.
Case Study: Management Cadre Employee Resignation
Can you help me solve a case? A management cadre employee served a resignation letter with a three-month notice period as per his appointment letter. Now the company is willing to release him immediately, but the person concerned is willing to serve the three-month notice. Can management release him immediately? Is there any legal or Supreme Court ruling on this matter?
From India, Durgapur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Case Study: Management Cadre Employee Resignation
Can you help me solve a case? A management cadre employee served a resignation letter with a three-month notice period as per his appointment letter. Now the company is willing to release him immediately, but the person concerned is willing to serve the three-month notice. Can management release him immediately? Is there any legal or Supreme Court ruling on this matter?
From India, Durgapur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If management wish to release him immediately then he has to be paid in for the notice period unless it is mutually agreed.
From India, Calcutta
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Calcutta
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Pl quote any reference of Act/rule/Regulation or SC ruling, so that higher management can be advised.
From India, Durgapur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Durgapur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Supreme Court of India
Nand Keshwar Prasad vs Indian Farmers Fertilizers ... on 1 April, 1998
http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/1452145/
“11. After giving our careful consideration to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears to us that the law is well settled by this Court in a number of decisions that unless controlled by conditions of service or the statutory provisions, the retirement mentioned in the letter of resignation must take effect from the date mentioned therein, and such a date cannot be advanced by accepting the resignation from an earlier date when the employee concerned did not intend to retire from such an earlier date. It has also been held by this Court that it is open to the employee concerned to withdraw the letter of resignation before the same becomes effective...”
>>>> The Supreme Court judgment by Justice B N Srikrishna, Justice C K Thakker
“...holding that an employee can withdraw his resignation during the notice period and is entitled to consequential benefits from the company if he is not allowed to work.”
Supreme Court of India
Srikantha S.M vs Bharath Earth Movers Ltd on 7 October, 2005
http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/1097853/
“The appellant was informed that his resignation had been accepted and he would be relieved 'with immediate effect'. It was also stated that the appellant would be entitled to pay towards the notice period as per Company rules.”
“It was urged on behalf of the Bank that Regulation 20(2) provided for notice to protect the interest only of the employer (Bank) and to enable it to make other arrangements in the place of the resigning employee. The proviso to clause (2) enabled the Bank to reduce the notice period to less than three months and as such it was not obligatory for the Bank to wait till the notice period would expire.”
"We are of the opinion that clause (2) of the regulation and its provisions are intended not only for the protection of the bank but also for the benefit of the employee. It is common knowledge that a person proposing to resign often wavers in his decision, and even in a case where he has taken a firm decision to resign, he may not be ready to go out immediately. In most cases, he would need a period of adjustment and hence like to defer the actual date of relief from duties for a few months for various personal reasons. Equally, an employer may like to have time to make some alternative arrangement before relieving the resigning employee. Clause (2) is carefully worded keeping both these requirements in mind. It gives the employee a period of adjustment and rethinking. It also enables the bank to have some time to arrange its affairs, with the liberty, in an appropriate case, to accept the resignation of an employee even without the requisite notice if he so desires it. The proviso, in our opinion, should not be interpreted as enabling a bank to thrust a resignation on an employee with effect from a date different from the one on which he can make his resignation effective under the terms of the regulation. We, therefore, agree with the High Court that in the present case, the resignation of the employee could have become effective only on or about April 21, 1986, or on June 30, 1986, and that the bank could not have 'accepted' that resignation on any earlier date. The letter dated February 7, 1986, was, therefore, without jurisdiction."
From India, Chandigarh
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Nand Keshwar Prasad vs Indian Farmers Fertilizers ... on 1 April, 1998
http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/1452145/
“11. After giving our careful consideration to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears to us that the law is well settled by this Court in a number of decisions that unless controlled by conditions of service or the statutory provisions, the retirement mentioned in the letter of resignation must take effect from the date mentioned therein, and such a date cannot be advanced by accepting the resignation from an earlier date when the employee concerned did not intend to retire from such an earlier date. It has also been held by this Court that it is open to the employee concerned to withdraw the letter of resignation before the same becomes effective...”
>>>> The Supreme Court judgment by Justice B N Srikrishna, Justice C K Thakker
“...holding that an employee can withdraw his resignation during the notice period and is entitled to consequential benefits from the company if he is not allowed to work.”
Supreme Court of India
Srikantha S.M vs Bharath Earth Movers Ltd on 7 October, 2005
http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/1097853/
“The appellant was informed that his resignation had been accepted and he would be relieved 'with immediate effect'. It was also stated that the appellant would be entitled to pay towards the notice period as per Company rules.”
“It was urged on behalf of the Bank that Regulation 20(2) provided for notice to protect the interest only of the employer (Bank) and to enable it to make other arrangements in the place of the resigning employee. The proviso to clause (2) enabled the Bank to reduce the notice period to less than three months and as such it was not obligatory for the Bank to wait till the notice period would expire.”
"We are of the opinion that clause (2) of the regulation and its provisions are intended not only for the protection of the bank but also for the benefit of the employee. It is common knowledge that a person proposing to resign often wavers in his decision, and even in a case where he has taken a firm decision to resign, he may not be ready to go out immediately. In most cases, he would need a period of adjustment and hence like to defer the actual date of relief from duties for a few months for various personal reasons. Equally, an employer may like to have time to make some alternative arrangement before relieving the resigning employee. Clause (2) is carefully worded keeping both these requirements in mind. It gives the employee a period of adjustment and rethinking. It also enables the bank to have some time to arrange its affairs, with the liberty, in an appropriate case, to accept the resignation of an employee even without the requisite notice if he so desires it. The proviso, in our opinion, should not be interpreted as enabling a bank to thrust a resignation on an employee with effect from a date different from the one on which he can make his resignation effective under the terms of the regulation. We, therefore, agree with the High Court that in the present case, the resignation of the employee could have become effective only on or about April 21, 1986, or on June 30, 1986, and that the bank could not have 'accepted' that resignation on any earlier date. The letter dated February 7, 1986, was, therefore, without jurisdiction."
From India, Chandigarh
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
37653d122153947 1-abstracts-var ious-labour-law s-display-notic e-board-maharas htra-maternity- benefi.pdf
Withdrawl of Resignation and Notice period.doc