Salary Of A Non-performer

Dear All,
Few member are just spoiling the time of the member and space of forum by posted some idiotic posting
Regards

Dear Team,
the members are free to express their thoughts and experiences when a discussion has come up or otherwise it will not be called forum. If Iam wrong pl correct me.

Dear All,

Let us stop commenting other contributors. Shall we restrict ourselves only giving our views and suggestions?

Dear Seekers,

Pl.Pl. be aware, in my opinion, the views expressed herein in the Forum are not / cannot be conclusive. As they are expressed against inadequate details/information. So, I request all of you to do your own home work to make sure that U don't err on the wrong side. A "Disclaimer" is always active.

Coming to the present query:

For termination, under whatsoever could be the circumstances, a proper procedure should be followed. These procedure would much depend on the Terms & conditions of appointt., applicable laws, type of Estt. &c.

Still nobody could guarantee that incidence of suitable compensation package wouldn't arise/accrue.

Nevertheless the terminated employee would have his/her won right to seek remedy under applicable laws which may include, if he/she wins, instatement itself, with back wages in arrears, if your case is not going to be strong enough and procedure adopted won't suffice.

kumar.s.

bg.

Poonam

While I do not agree that salary can be refused for period already worked, your statement is totally unacceptable. It is only in governement companies and psu companies that people get paid simply to come to the office. In all private companies you get paid to work and performance is the basic and primary measure of it. That is why we have KRAs specified.

We have 40 people working for us. We pay no incentive or bonus, but they still work efficiently and sincerely.

However, the original point made, salary has to be given to the person who has worked. Not because he gave his time (time given and nothing achieved is counterproductive) but probably because you will find it difficult to identify how much of salary must be deducted for less performance

(note, he has achieved less than 50%, but it means he did work. If he had achieved zero, perhaps you could refuse salary. Again, it would be difficult to support in court, so better to pay it off to avoid hassle)

Another reason you can't refuse salary is that there's nothing in your appointment letter that states salary will not be given unless targets are met. I know some domestic DSA and BPO that do it. They have a very very small fixed salary and rest linked to targets. Even there, they pay the fixed salary.

[QUOTE=arup.chatterjee;1711237]Dear All,
Dear Pon,
I mean to say that being an hr of a company should know our country's rules & regulation. If anyone ask such a basic thing which look unprofessionalism. If any on e hart in my view I am apologise.
Regards