Stuck in a Long Notice Period with Overwork: How Can I Navigate This Situation?

I am working in a small software company and am currently serving my notice period. I had mentioned a notice period of 1 month in my resignation, but they are adamant about a notice period of 2.5 months (the company has a 3-month notice rule). Since the start of my notice, they have been overburdening me with work. The work culture here is very bad, which is the reason I want to leave, as there have been many cases in the past where they have troubled employees.

They are not negotiating the notice period anymore. I don't want to serve them for 2.5 months as there is a lot of pressure on me. Please tell me how I can proceed with this. Is there any alternative if they don't give me a relieving/experience letter?

You are free to take your own option. It may be like 1 month notice + 2 months salary, 2 months notice + 1 month salary, or immediate release with 3 months salary as a downpayment.

Hi Vir, since it is a small company, they have few people to work and thus are adamant about 2.5 months. My new employer wants an experience letter for HR formality. What should I do?

Hi Rajat, I can understand what you are going through, but you know the company has a rule to serve a notice of 3 months before leaving, and you agreed to the employment terms while joining them, so you have to spend your time there. I also understand that the work pressure and their behavior are bothering you, but seriously, is this the genuine reason that you mentioned for leaving this organization due to their bad work culture or it not being suitable for you?

You must understand that the culture of any organization/company can be different from your style, and you have to adjust yourself. Please let me know the other reasons for this decision because I don't think one can leave a job solely because of culture. What kind of culture are you talking about? Can you please explain?

Secondly, have you applied for a job elsewhere or received any offers? We all know that we should not take this kind of action in our life just because of this culture problem, as every industry/company has its own culture and work style. The IT industry has its own style and culture, and a manufacturing company has its own. If you ask me, I can tell you about the Retail, Engineering, Manufacturing, and Garment industries too because in my long but short career, I have worked with them and seen their different cultures and styles of work. However, I don't think your decision to leave your current job because of a culture problem is right.

Anyway, if you really don't want to continue your job or have other options in your hand, you have to spend your time because until then they will give you exit clearance, and your salary for this period and experience certificate can't be offered to you. My advice is that you need to ask your boss again, tell him/her that you have to go early with a valid reason, and request to be relieved. That's the only and simple way to tackle your problem; otherwise, you have to spend your time and serve your notice.

Regards,

I completely agree with what Mr. Anil has said. Really, if you have a better opportunity, then it's good. But are you sure you will like that work culture? Just think about it.

Best wishes.

Regards,
Sujata

I have seen several 'leaving' employees being harassed. So, I don't buy your logic. It is interesting, but I am curious to understand if there is any immunity possible for the leaving employee. We are seeing several posts and probably, 'smart' answers are less important than 'practical' ones...

I believe most people posting in this forum may be really smart, but may not be smart enough to handle the diplomatic requirements of the situation. So, a 'practical' solution might help.

Hi Vir, there are so many people who have suggested, but no one has given a concrete solution. Still, I respect every individual. Please refer to your appointment letter and what it says about the notice period.

Suggestion 1: If it says one month, please hand over all the assets of the company and send a written email stating that you have served the sufficient period. The copy of the email is sufficient for your new employer to show that your move is legal.

Suggestion 2: If it says 2/3 months, you need to serve and bear all the pressures (work-wise) and maintain good relations with the present employer. Who knows, they may become big tomorrow? One can't violate HR rules; it will lead to other complications in your future employment.

Regards,
Raju.

I agree with Nikhil. What does an employee do in a small company having around 20-25 employees? Employers of small companies harass the employees with work pressure and other things. When such companies fire people, they don't give any notice. There needs to be some regulation so that such things can be avoided. This kind of situation makes employees helpless.

Recruitment and Selection Dynamics

Recruitment and selection purely depend on a mutual decision between employees and employers. There is no compulsion on it; neither can you impose your decision nor the employer.

Changing Job Market Scenario

Nowadays, the job market scenario has changed, and everyone desires to advance in their careers within a shorter period of time. Consequently, they abruptly change jobs, causing companies to suffer huge losses. When an employee joins an organization, they require at least three months for adjustment, and thereafter, they start producing results.

Employer's Perspective

From the employer's perspective, they select an employee and nurture them to achieve good results, expecting the same in return. Due to the high investment in employees (from selection to confirmation), conditions are set that must be maintained by both parties. Therefore, companies have increased the notice period from one month to three months.

If you sign the employment contract letter and accept the contract conditions, you have to adhere to them until your last day in the organization. There are no fundamental rules that breach the contract unless one of the parties violates the conditions.

Ok Dude

Addressing Employee Harassment During Notice Period

Anil, I have seen several 'leaving' employees being harassed, so I don't buy your logic. It is interesting, but I am curious to understand if there is any immunity possible for the leaving employee. We are seeing several posts, and probably 'smart' answers are less important than 'practical' ones.

I believe most people posting in this forum may be really smart but may not be smart enough to handle the diplomatic requirements of the situation. So, a 'practical' solution might help.

Mr. Gurjar, thank you for your comments. I'm not surprised to hear this statement because I know there are a number of people who don't even try to accept the situation. However, your statement "We are seeing several posts and probably, 'smart' answers are less important than 'practical' ones" is addressed to whom? What exactly do you want to say here? Please let me know, as I didn't get that.

I agree with you that everyone wants a practical and easy solution to their problem, and not everyone can handle the diplomatic requirements. However, making fake certificates, as someone has suggested here, is not the right way to tackle the problem.

One more thing, can anyone assure me here that they will definitely experience a good atmosphere and culture in a company in the future or according to them, and they will like the culture? Anyone?

All of you must have had some complaints about the things happening in and around your company. Are you all in agreement with them?

I mentioned in my earlier message that every employee has to serve and complete their notice period before leaving the current organization as agreed to in the terms when joining a company. If an employee has the right to show their concerns or preferences (resignation because one doesn't like the culture of an organization), the employer has the right to ask the employee to serve the notice period according to the agreed rules and terms of the company.

It seems people are just making comments without reading the thread. Also, Mr. Gurjar, I agree with your statement that most people posting in this forum may be really smart but may not be smart enough.

And back to the logic, Mr. Gurjar, that you were talking about: you really don't think that an employee has to serve/complete the notice period before leaving the organization because an employee and an employer, I think so!

Regards

I fully wish to see that the employee serves the notice period. We are on the same page. Being an employer, I certainly do wish that.

However, I don't buy a situation where THERE IS A WORSENING OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND ATTITUDES TOWARDS A LEAVING EMPLOYEE just because he is on notice. The post says that this problem has come up during the notice period. A notice period is meant to help the company look for a replacement, train the replacement, and ensure a smooth handover without compromising the business objective.

A notice period is NOT MEANT TO HARASS A LEAVING EMPLOYEE BY OVERBURDENING HIM WITH WORK. Neither is it meant to GIVE HIM TASKS THAT HE NEVER DID BEFORE. That is what I mean to say.

Your answer stating that you have to serve is bought well, but your stand is simplistically put, not quite right. As the HR, if such an employee comes to you, you need to check if he is doing the task that he has been doing to date or if this is something new. See what the normal timelines for such a task are and understand if there is undue pressure being put on the leaving employee and probably counsel the manager of the employee to ensure that the exit is smooth. After all, if you are the kind of person believing in referrals and networking and background checks, you will agree that happy alumni are the biggest assets of a company.

And most of the answers I see on this forum are stating about the work-life, culture, maintaining relationships, etc. No one would complain about a notice period if it is like 'every other day' they were in the company. Hence, what I wish to say is that the fundamental phenomenon THAT THE COMPANY HAS CHANGED THE WAY THEY ARE DEALING WITH THEIR EMPLOYEE DURING THE NOTICE PERIOD IS BEING IGNORED. And believe me, it is easy to prove it in a court of law and it is punishable in a court of law. Worse, the HR could be proved as the alibi.

I know going to a court of law may not be practical for many. But you need to understand that many employees are not smart enough to 'avoid' doing work assigned to them even during their notice period.

Dear All,

I have gone through the interesting views submitted by distinguished members of this community, and I agree with Mr. Nikhil. I have a query for which I am expecting a reply from all of you.

Employee Rights and Unethical Practices

I do agree that an employee has agreed to certain terms and conditions to serve the employer, but is it anywhere mentioned in the terms of the contract that "EMPLOYEE HAS TO TOLERATE EVERYTHING WHICH IS UNETHICAL"? Who has given the rights to the employer to torture the employee? How can the employer overrule everything? For example, if an employee wants to be relieved before the end of the notice period on genuine grounds, he/she will not get his experience certificate, relieving letter, benefits, etc.

Advice for TRAJAT

1. I do understand your feelings and the pain you are going through, but if you really want to overcome hurdles in your life, then you need to gain patience levels. You have to learn how to tackle situations at the workplace diplomatically, as there are better ways to complete your notice period without inviting troubles that may spoil your career record.

2. If you have an offer in hand, it's up to you how you want to get yourself relieved because it's your life, and you only have the right to assign priorities.

3. If you don't have an offer in hand, you have got 8 hours/day to offer to your employer. Whatever you can do, do it with full passion. Accept it as a challenge. Allow dogs to bark and bark, remain cool without losing your patience levels, and try your best to enjoy the daily show at the workplace.

With profound regards,

Right, Mr. Gurjar, I agree with you that a notice period is not meant to harass a leaving employee by overburdening them with work. I am also against these practices and have never supported harassment by superiors in this regard.

Definitely, we should raise questions about the behavior of superiors with an employee during the notice period. However, people didn't understand that I was simply trying to say that employees like Rajat, who are not in service or completing their notice period while making statements or asking for help to be relieved soon by the employer, must complete their notice period.

Also, if an employee faces harassment from their superior, they can talk to HR personnel, and they will definitely not refuse to interfere; they should never try to avoid this.

I have seen many resignations in my company/department but have never seen employees questioning this practice. I always expect that an employee must complete their notice period, which is mandatory according to the agreed terms of their employment.

I hope others understand my statements and motives this time.

I have worked with a few organizations in my career, spent a long time, have numerous HR and other contacts, and know many HR personnel personally from different companies/industries. I have communicated with them many times about the atmosphere and culture of a company/organization. Often, I found that superiors do harass their employees during their notice period, and HR personnel have denied helping employees who have experienced such harassment.

Let me ask you all, how many of you have witnessed this kind of harassment by your superiors/employers? How many of you have raised this issue with HR personnel? Has anyone consulted their HR team about their situation and informed them about the actions of their superiors during the notice period? Has anyone tried to find this out?

I am not talking about one or two people but all of you. I am sure that if you sincerely ask yourselves and your connections, you will find that the results are in favor of employers. We often talk about corporate culture, the advancement of human resource management, and their functions/work style. We have numerous laws and committees to help employees with any problems in the organization. However, unless an employee shares their problem, how can HR personnel know about it?

Can anyone provide a single name of someone who has tried to talk to their HR team to intervene or solve a problem similar to what Rajat and others are facing or have experienced, and the HR personnel have denied their request? Can anyone answer me? Stop criticizing HR personnel, guys.

There are numerous HR managers/personnel. Can anyone say that an employee has approached them with a problem and they have not tried to solve it? There are two sides to every coin, and we must consider the employer's side before making judgments about HR personnel.

Think about it...

Dear Anil, I know at least three other people who informed HR about such situations. However, HR took a sadistic posture... It's sad, but true. I raised this earlier in a conflict resolution question, but most HR professionals have to stick to the chain of command. In short, in case of conflict, they take the side of the bosses.

In fact, it's a pity that most companies do not conduct proper exit interviews. What's worse is that they don't know how to initiate change based on such feedback. We see a lot of posts on this forum about attrition, which only substantiates the claim that we lack HR professionals in this country. We lack other professionals too, but this forum is restricted to HR people.

I wouldn't like to get personal, but you yourself tried to 'push the ball back to Rajat' without adequately probing the case in your earlier posts. It came as a shock because one could extrapolate that to your response to a problem in your own company. Don't you agree? Or did we misread you?

Your stand has always been that it is mandatory to serve a notice period. Let me clarify that it is NOT MANDATORY. It is CONTRACTUALLY AGREED to serve a notice period OR PAY FOR THE SAME. That doesn't make notice periods mandatory. I have seen in several countries (especially Europe and the US) that when an employer terminates an employee, it is usually done with IMMEDIATE EFFECT, regardless of how critical their work was (even Chairmen were fired by supervisory board members with immediate effect in Germany). So, you might want to reconsider before making tall claims about the significance of that for the employer.

Before we go into what one feels and some qualitative assessment and reasons, let me help by asking you the same again in another objective way: What financial loss did it cost the company? How did you arrive at the figure? How did you arrive at the duration of your notice period? What would have been the financial loss at the end of the notice period? I hope you have an answer with strong logic and concrete numbers.

In my company, we have partners and employees, and we deal with a lot of confidential information as we are management consultants. So, our exit requirements are more stringent. However, we don't believe in a notice period due to our business conditions, and we don't have one as a policy. So, it is always a 'sudden' thing for us.

Discussion on Notice Period Harassment

Dear Mates, we are discussing the problems that occur during the notice period. If one experiences harassment during this time, they must inform their HR people to find a solution. I've mentioned this many times, yet the question remains: Why are people not getting this?

Mates, I beg your pardon, but I have seen numerous responses where people still do not understand the actual motive of what I have conveyed here. I'm not criticizing the employees who face harassment by their supervisors, nor anyone else. I just want to raise this issue: Why don't employees ask HR to intervene if they face harassment/problems, and why do they still support their boss when HR personnel get involved?

In my replies, I have tried to convey why such harassment issues occur and become serious. Employees who face and experience these issues often do not inform their HR during their notice period, so how can they get solutions to their problems? This is not the right way to raise problems and question HR and their function. This problem can be seen worldwide, yet we often say that our Indian HR systems are not good, running too slow, and lacking HR professionals because we are not doing our job as HR professionals in other countries are.

There is no question about completing a notice period if one has never agreed on terms or can be relieved by compensating the organization. Regarding attrition, I want to ask people why we have discovered this attrition in HR. We know many people leave jobs due to the attraction of a new job offering higher pay elsewhere within a short period, and it becomes usual. It's important to know that the reasons people give for their resignations are frequently untrue or only partially true. Exit interviews are undesirable, yet they are notoriously unreliable, especially when conducted by someone who may later be asked to write a reference for the departing employee. They are reluctant to voice criticism of their managers, colleagues, or organization generally, preferring to give some less contentious reason for their departure. To control such resignations, we create rules, terms, and conditions of mutual employment terms, and I don't think there is any harm in it; otherwise, we don't need these.

Mandatory Notice Period Enforcement

Whether the notice period is mandatory or not, I want to share that many companies are looking to enforce the clause of a mandatory notice period as mentioned in "Appointment Letters" or "Contract of Employment." In many companies, the notice period is 1-3 months based on the position you occupy. Companies consider this enforcement tool because they want to retain their people.

However, I am of the opinion that the moment an employee resigns, psychologically, they are out of the company. Once an existing employee puts down their papers, it doesn't matter what work the company assigns; they will not give their 100%. They will just hang around to complete the mandatory notice period. Also, there is a possibility they may indulge in spreading rumors or negative thoughts about the company, their bosses, etc., thereby distracting other employees. Serving a mandatory notice period and completing your work in hand is a matter of personal values and ethics, and none of these can be forced.

So, what do you think? Should companies enforce the notice period, or should they just let the person go on the same day or as soon as possible? Can companies enforce dedication and ethics? Dedication, values, and ethics are part of team spirit, and once a person decides to detach themselves from the team, they are no longer bound by the team values.

Coming back to the point, I just want to say that there are two sides to a coin, and we must remember both sides.

Regards

Hey, Nikhil and Anil, very interesting discussion and thought-provoking too.

Endorsing points 5 and 6 - notice period, as perceived by many companies and employers, is not a retention technique. In fact, it serves two main business objectives: ensuring a proper handover to the new employee taking the position and finding a replacement.

Giving more work to an employee during the notice period can be handled effectively with HR intervention. It entirely depends on how strong the HR department stands within the company.

Here is an excerpt from an article on the same issue:

"Sometimes I wonder, when will our HR Managers learn to be strictly professional while handling such matters and accept resignations without viewing it as rejection. How can we educate the parties on the significance of the notice period? We seem to take it for granted. Why rush to hire someone in need, only to pressure them with legal threats when they later seek an early release? Manipulation is not the job of HR, yet we often encounter it in our daily operations."

The practice of notice periods in companies was introduced to provide relief to both the employee and the employer, allowing them to adjust to their respective roles. For the employer, it is crucial as they can hire a replacement and ensure a smooth handover. Employees benefit from bidding farewell on a positive note, creating a favorable reference for their future endeavors.

Is there any data available showing how many employees leave a company without serving the notice period despite HR threats of legal action? How many employers actually pursue legal action against such employees (beyond sending a legal notice)? There likely aren't many unless the situation warrants such drastic measures.

Considering this, why insist on extended notice periods when employees often do not adhere to them, leading to counterproductive outcomes? Policies should be designed to benefit both employers and employees; failing to enforce notice periods only undermines this balance.

Reflect, evaluate, and adapt policies for the mutual benefit of all.

Regards,

Discussion on Notice Period Practices

Endorsing points 5 and 6, the notice period, as perceived by many companies and employers, is not a retention technique. In fact, it serves two main business objectives: ensuring a proper handover to the new employee taking the position and finding a replacement. Assigning more work to an employee during the notice period can be effectively managed with the intervention of HR. This depends on how strong the HR department stands within the company.

Here is an excerpt from an article written on the same issue. Sometimes I wonder when our HR Managers will learn to be strictly professional while handling such matters and accept resignations without taking them as rejections. How do we educate both parties on the significance of the notice period? We have all started taking it for granted. Why is there such a rush to hire a person when in need, and then, when the same person desires to be relieved early, why bully them with the threat of legal action? Manipulation is not HR's job, but we all experience it in our day-to-day lives.

The practice of notice periods in companies was introduced to provide a respite for both the employee and the employer, allowing them to reconcile their respective roles. For the employer, it is vital as they can hire a replacement and ensure a proper handover. The employee benefits by leaving on a positive note, which creates a constructive reference for them in the future.

Is there any record available that shows how many employees leave a company without serving the notice period, even after being threatened by the HR department with legal action? Also, how many employers actually go to the extent of filing a legal suit against such employees, apart from sending a legal notice? I seriously doubt there are many unless something of a severe nature absolutely demands such action from the employer.

So, the practice is very common. Then why are we adamant about having such a long notice period when we cannot enforce it? In fact, we only encourage employees to avoid it in the first place. Policies are drafted considering the suitability of both the employer and the employee. With such practices of not serving the notice period, who is benefiting?

Settle on, consider, and then transform policies for the benefit of all!

Regards,

Still, I would say that HR people are doing their best, but until employees support them, they cannot fulfill their roles as per the demands of the modern age.