Thread Started by #Anonymous

One of my friend has joined a company 2 months back. He has submitted all the relevant documents provided at the time of joining.
His first job was in company A, where is worked for 5 years and then he resigned on 10 Dec and left the company on 15th December 2015. He didnt serve the notice period. His dues were all cleared few months later and 1 year later he received a reliving letter from the company with the date of reliving mentioned as 1st January 2016, however it is also mentioned in the letter that he has stopped working from 15th Decemeber . No money was paid to him after 15th December but he has no proof for the same to show.
He got a job in new Company B and joined the same on 21st Dec 2015 (no issues with his previous work experience, only resignation acceptance was required from the previous company) and worked for 3 years in the same. After 3 years he resigned from the company and served his full notice period in the same.
Now he has again switched a job and joined Company C in 2018. All the documents were submitted before the joining along with the reliving letter from company A. But after 1.5 months of the joining, HR is saying that he didn't serve the full notice period in company A and also accounting for dual employment. Its been 2 months of his joining and decision is still pending.
Can this be a case of termination? What could be the consequences?
28th September 2018 From India, Delhi
If 03rd Company is raising in trivial issues that means they may not be happy with performance of the employee and extending the lame excuses this what I personally feel.
28th September 2018 From India, Pune
#Anonymous
But the employee has joined 2 months before only and is been on training. All his managers are okay with his performance. Only the HR is creating an issue.
28th September 2018 From India, Delhi
Dear Abhilasha,
I think that the HR of the Company-C seems to be an over-enthusiastic person digging deep into the past unnecessarily.
When Company-A mentions the fact that though his relieving date was 1st January,2016, he stopped working from 15th December,2015. Therefore, his service under them ended actually on 15-12-2015 itself. Naturally, his terminal benefits settled later would have been calculated upto 15-12-2015 only and paid by them.
He joined the next Company-B on 21st December,2015 i.e prior to the release of the belated official relieving letter dt 01-01-2016 as per your post. Since there is no mention in the post about the reaction of Company-B to this issue, one has to presume that no issue was raised by the Company-B perhaps because of the reason that he would have been a perfect choice for them which is also vindicated by the fact that the individual had subsequently served it for 3 years and had a smooth separation.
Had the individual mentioned all these facts in the same chronological order in his resume, the gap between 16-12-2015 and 20-12-2015 could be convincingly explained as the period of non employment only and certainly not a phase of dual employment.
One can not say exactly whether it would result in his termination or not. It depends on the Management. That's why it is insisted that when switching jobs, every employee should strictly abide by the notice conditions of the contract of employment.
Of course, no doubt, a HR can influence the decision making process but the Management can adopt a different view based on the employment potential of your friend. Therefore, your friend can seek an audience with the C.E.O of the present organization and make a polite representation in this regard.
28th September 2018 From India, Salem
#Anonymous
Hello,
Thank you for sharing your views. Its been 2 months of his joining and no decision has been made yet.
Also offer was made to him 1 month before his joining. They had enough time to do the back ground check. But now after joining HR is creating an issue.
1st October 2018 From India, Delhi
It's obvious the HR is taken kindly. Normally, many HR insist that an employee is required to produce relieving letter from the previous employer. For various reasons, some employers bypass this requirement and land in this kind of situation. For having allowed to report for duty with 'C' it's only reasonable to ignore the issue provided his performance is found to be satisfactory unless & until, if & when the prev.employer sends an alert reg. his past service reqt. And in this case what's ironical is having submitted the relieving letter from 'A' where's the question of not serving the notice period in 'A', they aren't justified, may be 'an after thought' there. As such, taking shelter on the 'A's relieving letter he can continue with 'C'. Hope there won't another salvo from 'B' as well like this AND make it safe with 'C' for now.
2nd October 2018 From India, Bangalore
Reply (Add What You Know) Start New Discussion

Cite.Co - is a repository of information created by your industry peers and experienced seniors. Register Here and help by adding your inputs to this topic/query page.
Prime Sponsor: TALENTEDGE - Certification Courses for career growth from top institutes like IIM / XLRI direct to device (online digital learning)





About Us Advertise Contact Us
Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service



All rights reserved @ 2019 Cite.Co™