Can a Company Legally Enforce a 3-Month Notice Period if Employees Want to Pay Instead?

In our organization, employees resign within one month of joining if they have not received an appointment letter from the company. As per the offer letter, the company mentions serving a notice period of three months during the probation period. If an employee is willing to pay back the notice period instead of serving it, can the company enforce the employee to serve the notice of three months as per the terms of the offer letter? What legal actions can the company take against the employee? Please suggest.

I think you are 'barking up the wrong tree'—so to say. Your MAIN problem/issue right now is actually: 'why are the new employees leaving WITHIN a month of joining?'

Frankly, you seem to be having some serious problems which seem to be leading to such a repeated situation. One-off cases of such early leaving are normal, but repeated situations SHOULD definitely be a cause for worry. Please identify AND correct the reason(s) for this situation, and the 'perceived' problem of leaving without fulfilling the 3-month notice period should reduce, if not altogether vanish.

Looking at it in another way, the problem is being shifted to the employees due to the inability/failure to put things in order by the Management/HR.

Regards, TS

Enforcing Policy and Legal Implications

Enforcing the policy in a manner where the crucial substance of it is ousted and going legal for the same raises a serious question about the company's integrity.

If the employee is ready to pay the notice amount against the notice period, the company has no stand to go legal. As an HR professional, you can very well make them understand the importance and need for them to stay for some time, for whatever reasons (doubtful within a month what exactly you want them to hand over and stay for???).

I hope the reason for going legal is what you've mentioned and not some veiled intentions!!

I would like to inform you that after his resignation, we asked him to come and meet with us to discuss the issue and reach a conclusion regarding rejoining the organization. Since there was no fruitful discussion with him, we provided him with a timeline to rejoin the organization, with the instruction that if he still wished to resign, he had to serve the notice period, as the company does not offer the option to pay back the notice period. However, he did not agree and is only willing to pay back a notice period of 3 months, which goes against company policy. Can we legally enforce him to serve the notice period rather than allowing him to escape by making a payment?

Dear Experts,

Please provide your suggestions on this matter.

You seem to be missing the whole point. Let's look at the situation you mentioned differently. Had you been in this employee's position, would you want to get relieved within one month of joining even by paying three months' salary in lieu of the notice period? Most likely no—even if you had lots of money to blow. Why? At least, I wouldn't.

I repeat what I mentioned/suggested earlier: "Why are the new employees leaving within a month of joining?" Hope you get the point. What you are trying to focus on is the aftermath of the resignation, while what I am suggesting is to focus on preempting the situation itself—which would be more important to the organization in the long run.

Regards,
TS

I am still unable to understand! Okay, what if you go legal (which you can if you want to)? Is it going to serve your purpose? I am sure it will not. First, the time involved in such legal fights will take you nowhere but just waste your energy and money. Second, you cannot force an employee to work with your organization against their wish. Third, you do not have a reasonable reason to justify why you want the employee to serve the notice of 3 months just because it is mentioned in the offer letter! Do not forget you have not issued the appointment letter. Further, if the employee is ready to pay the penalty for leaving your organization within a month, what do you expect the law to do? Give a decision in your favor that the employee should serve you for 3 months. Surprising, isn't it!

Purpose and Logic Behind Notice Period Policies

Can you please make it clear the purpose, intention, and logic behind not having the clause of "pay against notice" for probationary employees? How many such instances have happened where the employee leaves within 1 month of joining? Ideally, you need to restructure your policy and also identify the root cause of employees leaving within a month.

Ok, I now understand why the original post was anonymous. This is so funny, actually. Someone leaves the organization within a month of joining. Obviously, he feels it's a complete mismatch or that the organization is pathetic, and he does not want to work there. His not being given an appointment letter probably added to the problem. He would have walked off, with or without even bothering to resign officially (my guess).

Now, the HR department is asking him to come and discuss his joining back. Obviously, they didn't get the message  Then they want to enforce a 3-month notice period and force him to work there. I do not know why someone will pay a person a salary of 3 months when it is very clear that no work is going to get done by that person.

I have serious doubts that any employee who left within a month (and therefore most probably didn't get a salary) will offer to PAY the company another 3 months' salary to get relieved. He will laugh it off and say, "I will not bother to list this in my experience."

I think the company needs new management, probably a new HR department.

Regards.