Forced Relocation Dilemma: How Should Companies Handle Employee Refusals?

The company has issued a directive to transfer employees from a Tier B city to their manufacturing plant in a Tier D/E city within a week's time. An employee has refused to relocate and has asked for immediate relief. The company has ordered the employee to serve the notice period from the new location, while the employee insists on serving it from the current location. What are the options available?

If an employee refuses to report for duty at a transferred location and subsequently requests management to relieve him immediately on personal grounds, how can the management insist on him serving the notice period at the new location? If he has reported for duty at the new place and worked for even one or two days before tendering his resignation, he is required to serve the notice period at the new place of work.

However, in this case, this did not happen. My advice is to allow him to work at the existing place or relieve him from duty by waiving the notice period, which would be beneficial to avoid legal complications. If management forces him to work at the new place until the completion of the notice period, it will amount to unfair labor practices, and the same is liable for action under the ID Act if such an employee makes a complaint to the labor department.

Regards

More than the said part of your post, I would like to write on the unsaid part of the post. It appears that management is more interested in driving the person away, and through his posting at some other place, they wanted to teach him a lesson.

Most companies insert a clause in the appointment letter stating that they are free to transfer employees from one section to another, from one business unit to another, and the employee will not have any say in these matters. However, this clause has reduced its importance because employees started leaving their jobs. Therefore, the transfer of employees became the cause of manpower attrition. To contain this double loss, nowadays many employers do not force employees to relocate.

Your case appears to be different. They are not very interested in this person. Probably, they knew well that the employee has compelling reasons to stay in that particular city. Therefore, rather than following the direct route of taking disciplinary action, they found this to be a better way of removal.

The employee in question, whether he serves the notice period at the old place or the new place, does not matter here because management is not interested in this person. They appear to be quite inclement in his case. Therefore, they may take disciplinary action against this employee for failure to obey the rightful orders. Management wants to see the transfer order and resignation as two separate issues and does not want to link them together. The employee wants the opposite.

Thanks,

Dinesh V Divekar

Employee Resignation and Transfer Issues

The employee has ended the employer-employee relationship by resignation. Declining to accept a transfer is not misconduct. Employees can't be forced to serve a notice period. Bonded labor has been abolished. Apparently, he is being subjected to face a vindictive and zealous manager's actions.

The employee can approach employees'/trade unions for support. The employee has already resigned with immediate effect. Since he has been transferred and relieved from the current location, nothing is pending at his end at the current location. Since he has not joined at the new location, hence nothing is pending at the new location.

Notice Pay and Employment Terms

If notice pay in lieu of the notice period is stated in the appointment letter/contract of employment, and if the employer initiates separation termination or the employee initiates separation by resignation, then the employer can at most adjust notice pay. They must issue and supply acknowledgment of resignation, acceptance, FnF statement, FnF dues, Service Certificate, Relieving letter, Form 16, Salary Slips of all months of employment, PF number & A/c slips, ESIC card, NOC/NDC, etc., on the last day in the office, max by the usual payday.

Notice Period/pay is part of service conditions and is stated and hence governed by various enactments applicable to the establishment/employer/employee, e.g., Standing Orders (Certified/Model), Shops and Commercial Establishment Act. It is NIL during the probation period/30 days after confirmation, a few days as per the length of service period, and max. 30 days. The rate of notice pay is also defined in the enactments.

No private agreement/rules/policy created by the employer and signed with the employee, e.g., appointment letter/contract of employment/HR policy, etc., can overrule and supersede an enactment/statute/instrument of law. Employers personally are held responsible for the faithful observance of the enactments.

Although the employer/line management/HR would want that the employee is not protected by labor laws, the employee should consult an able Labor Law Consultant/Service Matters lawyer with all documents on record. The lawyer may ask a set of structured questions and may opine that he is covered.

It appears that your management wants this particular employee to leave and hence relocate. When the employee has tendered his resignation, it is better for you to accept the same and relieve him immediately than to get into legal complications.

Regards,
Ravi Sampath

As per your post, the management has transferred more than one employee. Apart from this particular employee, what is the status of others? However, until somebody joins at the new place of posting, all rules and regulations of the current location should be applicable. Hence, the management cannot force him to serve the notice period from the new location.