15th December 2018 From India, Bangalore
Second, calling it as "maternity leave" is itself using a misnomer for it is a benefit conferred upon a women to be away from work for a certain period in view of her pregnancy and delivery for a certain period with wages based on her average daily wages.
Third, "increment" being a periodical hike in wages granted by the employer subject to certain conditions, the universal practice is that the employee should be on duty on the date of its sanction to earn the hike prospectively. If the employee is not on duty on account of any reason including authorized leave on the actual date of sanction of increment, if he is otherwise eligible, increment would be sanctioned subject to the condition of its monetary effect commencing only from the date of his rejoining duty.
Therefore, the employee on maternity leave need not wait for the sanction of her normal increment for a period proportionate to the period of maternity benefit availed by her. Her increment has to be sanctioned on the usual date but its monetary effect would be from the date of her rejoining only.
15th December 2018 From India, Salem
I beg to differ with the view that the annual increment is a matter of right and has to be given regardless of the fact that the employee has attended and performed during the whole of the previous year or not.
Unless it is timescale increment, increment is left to decision , discretion and policy of the management and cannot be a matter of legal right.
In case of maternity, absence of six months is pretty long and if happens to cover large chunk of appraisal year, then to expect increment is inappropriate. At the most, for partial attendance and depending on performance rating, she may be considered for pro rata increment.
16th December 2018 From India, Mumbai