Is It Legal for My Company to Impose a 3-Month Notice Period After 2 Years?

I have been working with a company for the last 2 years. When I joined this company, my hire agreement stated that the notice period was 1 month. Recently, a few senior people left the company, and now the company is imposing a 3-month notice period to prevent employees from leaving. I believe that every individual has their own personal desire to grow in their lives, and after signing a 3-month notice period policy, will they be able to switch to a better option? So, my question to all of you is, is it legal to impose a 3-month notice period with agreement from the employee?

My question to all of you is, is it legal to impose a 3-month notice period without agreement from the employee? Also, please suggest what an employee should do to avert these imposed policies.

Policy Communication and Employee Agreement

Any new policies introduced by the management must be brought to the notice of the employees through official circulars or memos, etc. However, when employees sign the employment contract, there is a clause that mentions that the employee abides by and agrees to all the policies regarding his/her employment with the company.

Any policy introduced by the management has to conform to local labor laws. As members of the firm, every employee is bound to follow the policies set or introduced by the management within the purview of the law.

So in your case, if your management has changed the notice period policy from 1 month to 3 months and this change is communicated to all employees through official channels, then it becomes valid and binding on employees to follow this policy.

However, if an employee has already resigned, their resignation has been accepted, and the notice period is in progress, and then the management amends the notice period policy and imposes an extension, then it is not valid and binding on the resigned employee.

These are my opinions. However, let's hear from readers and seniors in this context.

Hussain is right when he says: "Management has changed the notice period policy from 1 month to 3 months, and this is conveyed to all the employees through official channels, then it becomes valid" — the key words being 'this is conveyed to all the employees'.

Also, you need to notice that there is usually no provision for any 'concurrence/acceptance' by the employees of any changes. It is usually more of a 'For Your Info pl' situation than 'For Your OK pl'. It's usually presumed that HR makes policy changes in the larger interest of the company than any individual.

Regards,
TS

I understand that a 3-month notice period is justified for senior managers because they carry a lot of responsibilities. When someone replaces them, it takes time to transition things to the new senior manager, and the other company also waits for them for 3 months. But for others, who will wait for 3 months?

I am an account manager. I handle sales, and I will go to another company in a sales profile only. Will anybody wait for me for 3 months? I feel cheated and locked in a cage like a RAT.

Regards

Policy Changes and Compliance

What is wrong with that? When a company changes its policy and communicates it to employees, everyone has to abide by it.

I ask you something. It is not a question of a "key" position or a "lock" position. If there is a rule, everyone has to obey it. If the rule is to wear a helmet, and someone is not wearing a helmet and is fined for that, will you claim that you are a sitting MLA and should not be fined? And do you expect to be shown leniency on this?

Think of it the other way around. When there is a rule of a three-month period, and management asks you to leave within a one-month period, will you accept? Will you not ask for the balance of the two months' notice period amount to be paid to you? In the worst case, will you not approach the conciliation machinery?

The notice period is like "breathing time" for both the employee and employer so that both can comfortably take time to look for a job or a suitable candidate.

If any of them is in a hurry to wind up early, then a "conceptual clash" creeps in. Consequently, disputes, ill feelings, etc. Why should we give room for that?

There are always two ends to any issue: 1) the solution end and 2) the problem end. I ALWAYS PREFER TO BE IN THE SOLUTION END. You choose where you want to be.

Regards,
Balaji

I don't understand why HR carries double standards. Let me give an example:

Interview Scenario

Virat appeared for an interview and, after qualifying through all the rounds, during the negotiation stage he was asked:

- **Interviewer:** When can you join the company?
- **Virat:** I have to serve a two months' notice period.
- **Interviewer:** Mr. Virat, we cannot linger this position for two months.
- **Virat:** After a hiatus, okay, Sir, I will try to talk to the HR department for early relieving.
- **Interviewer:** We would like you to join in 20 days.
- **Virat:** That would be complicated, but I will try to cope as I have some leave balance.
- **Interviewer:** Alright then, here is your offer letter.
- **Virat:** Thank you. (He signs the letter.)

This is what happens with many of us, isn't it? Now let's see another scenario where Virat resigned from this company:

Resignation Scenario

- **Same Interviewer (HR Person):** You have to serve the notice period of three months.
- **Virat:** But Sir, I cannot do that, I have some leave balance which can be adjusted.

HRs don't practice double standards. HR is compelled to perform their duties as per the requirements and interests of the company. The kind of examples you are giving here can be related to our everyday life, where each one of us practices double standards. For example, if you are a seller, you want to sell at a higher rate; if you are a buyer, you want to buy at lower rates. It's all about negotiation.

In any organization, there is a decent notice period ranging from 15 days to 3 months, as per the business requirement. HR follows what is in the best interest of the company to replace the resource.

Usually, there is a conflict between the new and previous employer for the employee in between. There is always some middle ground for negotiation. If the new employer really wants you, they will wait no matter what and work out an acceptable timeframe for you to join them. Otherwise, there are laws to navigate such situations, such as using your leave balance or buying out your notice period to be relieved. "There is no free lunch."

When you join an organization and sign the employment contract, you give your consent to all the clauses mentioned in the contract.

Hi Lucsum, I totally agree with all HR experts' comments. I am also in a sales job. I would suggest that you inform your new company about the three-month notice issue with your previous company and request compensation. Nowadays, companies are compensating new employees for such situations. Give it a try.

Regards,
Nitish

I am also facing the same problem. I have been serving this company for the last 2 years. Recently, the policy has changed to a notice period of 3 months. However, in my offer letter, a notice period of 1 month was mentioned, and in case of failing to comply, the employee has to pay one month's salary to the company (referred to as a buyout).

Current Challenges with Notice Period

Now, my new employer wants me to join in 1 month, and I am encountering the following problems:

1. The 3-month notice period is being forcefully applied without any paperwork done from the employee's end; it was only introduced in the annual meeting.
2. My employer is not allowing me to use the buyout option, although employees from other departments are being permitted to do so.

In this situation, I am compelled to serve the full 3-month notice period. Is there any option I can utilize, or what should I do?

Let's change this. Let's make companies stop the exploitation through notice periods. We have to stand united.

Please sign and share this petition at the link below: https://www.change.org/p/ministry-of...-working-class