Navigating Employee Termination for Attitude Issues: Legal Concerns and Options?

Hi all, I am new to this forum, please correct me if I am wrong and help me out with terminating an employee from our organization. The employee joined us as a fresher, and now there are numerous complaints against her to the PM. He has taken individual feedback from her supervisor and team members, and now he wants me to terminate her. Our offer letter states that after the probation period, either party has to serve 8 weeks of notice.

Since we are terminating her based on attitude, I am planning to give her two options: one, if we terminate her, we will pay her 15 days' salary with the termination letter, and the second option is she can resign, and she will be relieved with a clear relieving letter. Will this lead to any legal issues?

Thanks in advance!

Asha

While you have the right to do what you are planning to do, especially to an employee on probation, I have just a couple of questions.

1. Has the organization investigated what she has to say about complaints against her? If you do not give her an opportunity to defend herself, aside from the law (which may not be applicable in the present case), you would be denying even the "principles of natural justice" to her! Kindly reconsider your approach.

2. Also, if you have gone through the pains of recruiting her and found her qualified to be employed by your organization, why would the organization not spend some time and energy in correcting an erring employee?

The employee is about to lose her job due to some negative traits seen through some complaints, and for that, your organization would not mind sacrificing the positive traits of her candidature.

I hope your organization has, in fact, considered these facets of the problems and has only then come to this conclusion of termination of employment!

If your organization has ignored these two points, then on standards of fairness, ethics, and natural justice, I appeal that some thought is paid to these aspects. Else, what will your HR philosophy be, and what message will you be relaying to the silent majority?

Regards,
Samvedan

Hi Samvedan and Govindsinghnegi, thanks for your inputs. At the same time, I agree with your inputs. Furthermore, the PM and all her team members have spoken to her and provided her with numerous suggestions for change. However, it seems futile as she has not made any changes. The PM has even sent me an email requesting her termination.

Regards,
Asha

Considerations for Termination

If the matter has ended and you are convinced objectively that she had a fair chance of reconstructing herself, then all HR should remember that beyond a point, even HR cannot let emotions override reason, and organizational interests must remain paramount. Good luck.

I had omitted to mention in my last response, and it is primarily of academic interest. If the person whose employment has been terminated conforms to the definition of a "workman" under the Industrial Disputes Act 1947, irrespective of salary/wage, title (designation), or terms and conditions of employment, and she was a confirmed employee, she might be advised to take legal recourse by raising an "industrial dispute." This could prove problematic if due process has not been followed. At this stage, one can hope that these concerns remain academic.

Regards,
samvedan

Termination Considerations

In case you have decided to terminate her, the termination order should only speak of terms of probation without any allegations. If you pose allegations, then her termination will be treated as punitive in the eyes of the law, which is not permissible without a departmental inquiry.

I faced a similar problem with one of the employees. I guess every organization has an HR Manual that states such actions, when noticed, can lead to termination without prior notice. When it comes to salary, I believe we need to resolve the issue and part ways.

Decision-Making in Employee Termination

This matter cannot be decided based on public opinion, as there are many private limited companies that act like dictators and exhibit different characteristics of managers. Some can take advantage, and some can misuse such advice. The situation and circumstances are the criteria.

In a justifiable dealing, politely ask the concerned staff (if he/she is not arrogant to reply—as some are irritated due to bad interpersonal treatment) what is required when he/she is not suitable for the company and the job performance. If he/she is polite (not arrogant) and is willing to work in another position/department, explore the possibility. Since there are middle managers, superiors, supervisors, and juniors with whom some very efficient employees may not agree on policy matters, yet later they may become the company's greatest assets.

Your question itself should be assessed for a proper reply to explain the process and procedure you have to adopt.

While terminating, the strengths and weaknesses of both sides—the employer as well as the employee—should be considered. Failing to do so, the company can suffer from a bad reputation due to interpersonal relationships and inefficient supervisors/managers. So, take care when seeking high profits and turnover.

It is advisable to seek the advice of the local Labor Officer, who is familiar with the circumstances. They are available to promote peace and avoid unrest with justice and genuine intentions, but your question may raise concerns.