Freelancer in HR &Indirect taxes for services indusrty.

Hi ,
Here in this case,my view is that employee in question if gone legal,then the case should be handled with the legal limits.
Second,As HR I personally feel that an amicable exit of employee and an amicable release/clearance given by the employer to employees is always beneficial to both the parties and sends positive vibes in favor of company and employee as well.Having said this ,hr has the very responsibility to ensure right hiring,right induction ,training, prolonged retention and performance and talent up gradation etc,and all this be supported by the management through established process,procedures and documentation.An employee can never dare to go legal unless provoked, instigated or harassed to that level. to conclude in this fast moving world time is valuable and companies don,t have time to waste around such legal and unproductive activity therefore best way is to find a amicable and respectful way out to resolve such issues within least time.

From India, Vadodara
Agreeing with Bijoy, the case needs to be handled from HR perspective rather than from legal perspective, considering the minor nature of the issue and try to arrive at a win-win situation.The judgement made by the poster that he is a poor performer is open to question since the other party is not heard and there may be factors like biased supervisor or poor feed back to the employee or' poor training etc.which might contribute to poor performance also .Similarly, the poster's statement that the allegations made by the employee about OT are false, is also unilateral. He may be true or he may be false but the statement is open to question again.It may also raise a doubt whether the management wants to counter his OT claims by labeling him as poor performer and so terminated him to avoid further claims.

The management has already taken action for his poor performance by terminating him which itself can be open to question by the employee if he feels such termination is not satisfied with his performance. Now, the employee accepted his termination and what all he wants, is only an experience certificate.To have a win-win situation, it is fair that an employee who worked in a company deserves an experience certificate.If the management does not want say that his performance is not satisfactory, it need not and but then, can issue a simple service certificate that the employee worked in the company from ..... to.... and handled the job of ....... and he was relieved on so and so date.That may settle the issue.

As HR professionals, one should make the severances/separations smooth and peaceful in the interest of employer branding as reputations reach the market faster than light in the technology driven communications and this globe is made smaller by technology and who knows we may bump into each other sometimes so early, finding, to our surprise, that the so called poor performer, is now a Vice-President in a company since each of us grow in our time zones.


HR & Labour Law Advisor

Navi Mumbai .

From India, Mumbai
Sorry, there are two mistakes in the second para.
The sentence is not satisfied with his performance" shall be omitted and the sentence ."If the management does not want say that his performance is not satisfactory," shall be read as "If the management does not want say that his performance is satisfactory".

From India, Mumbai

This discussion thread is closed. If you want to continue this discussion or have a follow up question, please post it on the network.
Add the url of this thread if you want to cite this discussion.

About Us Advertise Contact Us
Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service

All rights reserved @ 2021 Cite.Co™