Notice Period Dilemma: Should HR Allow New Joiners to Complete Their Previous Commitments?

Dear All,

I have observed over various posts that we generally complain that employees do not serve their notice period once they resign. It is not only a problem but also creates lots of hassles in the normal working of both the Department and HR. In short, it can be termed as a menace.

On the other hand, we in HR only insist that people join as early as possible, forcing new joiners to start without serving their notice period in the previous company.

As responsible professionals, can we take a pledge that we will allow the new joiners to serve the notice period in their previous company?

Please give your opinion.

Ethically, you are right. However, practically speaking, how many of us actually provide adequate joining time? The industry operates on a yesterday hiring basis. Acquiring high-quality candidates poses a challenge for us. Hiring them and arranging timely induction is no longer an easy task.

Dear,

Because the job market is volatile and companies want to attract talent immediately at all costs, all this happens. Market forces decide this, and HR managers have little to say. The idea behind a notice period is a transparent method of the employee saying, "I am leaving, please find a replacement within that time." It is a gentleman's code of conduct.

With regards,
HR-related Law Consultants
E-mail: rajanassociates@eth.net
Mobile: 9025792684.