Legal issue for employee salary - he has gone to the police station and is asking for settlement

One of the employees worked with us for 25 days (14 days training, 5 days uninformed leave, 6 days on the floor). He was engaging in serious misconduct in the office premises, including misbehaving, demotivating others, coming to work drunk, and refusing to sign warning letters for misconduct. He even requested termination instead of resigning to receive his salary. Upon being informed that he would not be welcomed back if he took another day off, he did so and has not returned to the office since. He contacted us seeking a settlement, to which we responded that any settlement would be determined after legal considerations and taking into account all prior incidents.

However, two days later, he visited our office and caused a disturbance in front of other employees, demanding his salary and refusing to leave. Subsequently, we filed a complaint against him with the police.

Currently, he is at the police station seeking a settlement, and the officer on call is supporting him despite being informed of his actions. We have invested significantly in his certified training, and our offer letter stipulates that in the absence of a notice period, he must pay one month's salary. He claims we terminated him as he did not sign any resignation papers. We have also sent him a legal notice detailing his misconduct and the dates of each incident. The situation at the police station is unclear in terms of our next steps.

We are reluctant to negotiate with him, as this may set a precedent for other employees he is in contact with, potentially leading them to follow similar actions. We seek guidance on how to proceed with the police and our next steps. Can he take any legal actions against us?

You have to make a decision on whether it is worth investing time in him. Resolve the matter amicably, pay whatever little amount would satisfy him, and move forward. There are instances where taking a practical approach and eliminating such individuals, even if it means compromising on company policies and rules, is advisable and can be a one-time exception.

It is apt to refer to the thought attributed to Reinhold Niebuhr, a Lutheran theologian (1892–1971): "God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference."

Thanks for the advice. We tried doing the settlement, but he was insisting on the entire salary to be paid. We have taken the other way around to avoid long legal issues. Please advise on what can be done next from our side if he's going to labor.

Speak to your company's legal advisers and see what they have to say.

Otherwise, take the advice of my colleague above and do what you have to do to make the person go away. Some matters are not worth expending so much effort on. It would be more expedient to pay him off and end the problem now rather than let it drag on.

The police interference and the threat of criminal prosecution are intimidatory tactics to get you to agree to what he wants. The essential element of any such matter is the criminal intent (mens rea, as it is known in legal circles) is absent in this matter and hence it is liable to be rejected ultimately. The opposite party may also be clear on this but the purpose is to blackmail and extract the maximum. Maybe approaching the higher authorities like SP/DIG/IG may help.

If you decide to take the bull by the horn, consult the best criminal lawyer in the area and take advice on the tactics required at the local level.

It is true that a police station is not the platform for carrying out labor dispute settlements, but the police can interfere in such matters as a law and order issue. It may be the station officer who is supporting the individual, but you can reach out to higher police officials and request that the station officer deal with the issue sensibly. It is unreasonable to demand a month's salary after causing all these issues, including coming to the office intoxicated.

If the appointment order includes a clause stating, "you are on probation for a certain period and during probation your service shall be terminated without notice and without assigning any reasons," then utilize that clause to terminate the individual. Avoid specifying any particular 'reason' for termination but simply refer to that clause in the appointment order. Mentioning misconduct could lead to the individual requesting opportunities to be heard, turning the dismissal order into a stigma. Avoid this situation. Therefore, please verify the terms stated in the offer/appointment letter and proceed accordingly.