Dear friends,
I'm very thankful to you all for giving your opinions. Neither of them nor I justified their mistake, but our only concern is the way the HR took this matter to their senior HR and whether this severe punishment is really required. I would like to add a few more details which many have asked.
1. Both of their managers never expected that they would be terminated for this behavior. They thought they would be suspended.
2. Only one HR interacted with them and demanded a written letter. They gave the apology letter stating the truth, believing that HR would forgive them. This took place on Thursday. The girl was asked to come on Friday, and the boy was asked to come on Monday to know the decision taken by the panel.
3. On Monday, they were called in and informed that they were terminated and asked to apply for resignation. Please note they were never given a chance to express their views to the panel; the decision was based on how it was explained by the HR.
4. The two associates who complained to HR did not give any written statement, and they were also not involved in the panel discussion.
5. Our manager escalated this to senior management, and it seems senior management instructed the HR (not in a polite manner) to let the associates go. The manager was so confident that he called the boy on Saturday and told him there would only be a suspension, no need to worry.
6. The HR took this to the Director of HR and narrated that many were present in the cafeteria when this happened, and the girl cried and ran away (which never happened).
7. The decision was made without involving the two persons involved and those who witnessed the incident. Is this the proper way to investigate an incident?
8. Whatever the senior HR heard is from the HR perspective, who did not have better knowledge than the persons involved. The senior HR made the decision based on the HR's point of view. Is this right?
9. Both the boys and the girl, senior associates, and manager openly stated that this turned into an ego clash between management and HR since senior management spoke in a harsh tone about letting them go.
10. Leave me; I'm still young and emotional for my friends, but do you think those experienced managers and senior associates are blind to support them against termination?
11. They sent emails to the VC and Director of HR seeking forgiveness, but received no response. Many are saying that in such a large organization, the VC only sees the emails, and there are very few chances for them to be seen.
12. The discussion with the manager was conducted through email threads; there wasn't even a face-to-face discussion.
13. They only have contact with their immediate HR; that's the sad part.
14. In our organization, we have many verticals like banking, media, retail, etc. Each vertical has its own HR.
15. In fact, managers and other associates in other verticals are laughing upon hearing this; they are saying they have seen many worse things than this.
16. Both of them were not involved in any incidents earlier; in fact, if that boy had stayed, he would have been the associate of the month for our vertical. He was the top contender for that, which is why our manager and senior associates gave them full support since he was good in the workplace.
To all, I'm not saying they didn't make a mistake; they did make a mistake. But the way HR presented the matter to the higher officials is the disheartening fact. Is it fair to showcase an incident in such a rude and harsh manner and elaborate it in a way that the hearing people will vote for them?
They are searching for a job, and the problem they are facing includes a lack of interview chances for the following reasons:
1. Experience less than 1 year, so they are not allowed to attend interviews for experienced positions.
2. They graduated in 2009, and since 2010 graduates came out, 2009 graduates are not considered for fresh recruitment.
3. If they get a chance, what will they tell as the reason for resigning in 9 months? No reason will be accepted since all HRs know that no one will quit their job from a TIER-1 company within 1 year.
4. The girl got caught in mainframe technology, where there are fewer openings compared to dot net, Java, etc.
I thank you all for coming forward to help them.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
1I'm very thankful to you all for giving your opinions. Neither of them nor I justified their mistake, but our only concern is the way the HR took this matter to their senior HR and whether this severe punishment is really required. I would like to add a few more details which many have asked.
1. Both of their managers never expected that they would be terminated for this behavior. They thought they would be suspended.
2. Only one HR interacted with them and demanded a written letter. They gave the apology letter stating the truth, believing that HR would forgive them. This took place on Thursday. The girl was asked to come on Friday, and the boy was asked to come on Monday to know the decision taken by the panel.
3. On Monday, they were called in and informed that they were terminated and asked to apply for resignation. Please note they were never given a chance to express their views to the panel; the decision was based on how it was explained by the HR.
4. The two associates who complained to HR did not give any written statement, and they were also not involved in the panel discussion.
5. Our manager escalated this to senior management, and it seems senior management instructed the HR (not in a polite manner) to let the associates go. The manager was so confident that he called the boy on Saturday and told him there would only be a suspension, no need to worry.
6. The HR took this to the Director of HR and narrated that many were present in the cafeteria when this happened, and the girl cried and ran away (which never happened).
7. The decision was made without involving the two persons involved and those who witnessed the incident. Is this the proper way to investigate an incident?
8. Whatever the senior HR heard is from the HR perspective, who did not have better knowledge than the persons involved. The senior HR made the decision based on the HR's point of view. Is this right?
9. Both the boys and the girl, senior associates, and manager openly stated that this turned into an ego clash between management and HR since senior management spoke in a harsh tone about letting them go.
10. Leave me; I'm still young and emotional for my friends, but do you think those experienced managers and senior associates are blind to support them against termination?
11. They sent emails to the VC and Director of HR seeking forgiveness, but received no response. Many are saying that in such a large organization, the VC only sees the emails, and there are very few chances for them to be seen.
12. The discussion with the manager was conducted through email threads; there wasn't even a face-to-face discussion.
13. They only have contact with their immediate HR; that's the sad part.
14. In our organization, we have many verticals like banking, media, retail, etc. Each vertical has its own HR.
15. In fact, managers and other associates in other verticals are laughing upon hearing this; they are saying they have seen many worse things than this.
16. Both of them were not involved in any incidents earlier; in fact, if that boy had stayed, he would have been the associate of the month for our vertical. He was the top contender for that, which is why our manager and senior associates gave them full support since he was good in the workplace.
To all, I'm not saying they didn't make a mistake; they did make a mistake. But the way HR presented the matter to the higher officials is the disheartening fact. Is it fair to showcase an incident in such a rude and harsh manner and elaborate it in a way that the hearing people will vote for them?
They are searching for a job, and the problem they are facing includes a lack of interview chances for the following reasons:
1. Experience less than 1 year, so they are not allowed to attend interviews for experienced positions.
2. They graduated in 2009, and since 2010 graduates came out, 2009 graduates are not considered for fresh recruitment.
3. If they get a chance, what will they tell as the reason for resigning in 9 months? No reason will be accepted since all HRs know that no one will quit their job from a TIER-1 company within 1 year.
4. The girl got caught in mainframe technology, where there are fewer openings compared to dot net, Java, etc.
I thank you all for coming forward to help them.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
I feel the action taken by the HR is not justified. There should be a complainant for any problem to arise and investigation to be conducted. In this case, both the boy and the girl have not complained to the concerned authorities as they might have quarreled for a silly reason and thought it is not of such great consequence, and they might have settled the issue among themselves. Based on somebody's complaint, the HR has acted! I feel HR has only taken the negative aspect of the whole issue (as there was no complaint from the sufferer) and has totally forgotten the good work done by them and issued termination orders. This seems to be very unethical. Instead, the HR would have asked both of them whether they have any complaint to make. But sometimes, the HR people decide the action wrongly and try to justify the act without giving room to humanitarian issues.
-Srinaren
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I feel the action taken by the HR is not justified. There should be a complainant for any problem to arise and investigation to be conducted. In this case, both the boy and the girl have not complained to the concerned authorities as they might have quarreled for a silly reason and thought it is not of such great consequence, and they might have settled the issue among themselves. Based on somebody's complaint, the HR has acted! I feel HR has only taken the negative aspect of the whole issue (as there was no complaint from the sufferer) and has totally forgotten the good work done by them and issued termination orders. This seems to be very unethical. Instead, the HR would have asked both of them whether they have any complaint to make. But sometimes, the HR people decide the action wrongly and try to justify the act without giving room to humanitarian issues.
-Srinaren
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I don't think HR imposed the correct punishment for this violation. Even though companies have the prerogative to determine the kind of punishment to be meted out to erring employees, it should still be within the bounds of existing laws. Termination is a harsher penalty than what is deserved for the act of slapping and pinching, even if it is done in public. The company should have taken into consideration the fact that this is a first violation. I think a reprimand would have been enough to straighten them out.
From India, Calcutta
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Calcutta
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Moni,
There is one serious flaw in the action of HR, as pointed out in your detail now. At point 3 of your detailed story, you have stated that the employees were told that they were terminated and also stated that they were asked to resign. These TWO THINGS cannot happen at a time. Both the concerned boy and girl need not submit resignation but should insist on asking for issue of termination letters if they have really been terminated.
The boy and girl do not seem either to have been terminated, or the consent of the top brass taken for the proposed action. It seems the HR is playing some unethical and dirty game at their own, maybe in order to accommodate their own candidates or the candidates of their own senior boss in the resultant vacancies.
So, once they give their resignation letters, they won't have any claim for their jobs, as the management would have the plea that both of them resigned voluntarily and would be able to save their skin for such a harsh step for such a minor lapse.
PS Dhingra
Management and Vigilance Consultant
Dhingra Group of Consultants
New Delhi
09968076381
dcgroup1962@gmail.com
Dear friends,
I'm very thankful to you all for giving your opinions. Neither them nor I justified their mistake, but our only concern is the way the HR took this matter to their senior HR and whether this severe punishment is really required. I would like to add a few more details which many have asked.
1. Both of their managers never expected that they would be terminated for this behavior. They thought they would be suspended.
2. Only one HR interacted with them and demanded a written letter. They gave an apology letter stating the truth, believing that the HR would forgive them. This took place on Thursday. The girl was asked to come on Friday, and the boy was asked to come on Monday to know the decision taken by the panel.
3. On Monday, they called both and told them that they were terminated and asked them to apply for resignation. Please note they were never given a chance to express their views to the panel. The panel took the decision based on how it was explained by the HR.
4. The two associates who complained to HR didn't give any written statement, and they were also not involved in the panel discussion.
5. Our manager escalated this to the senior management; it seems senior management instructed the HR (not in a polite manner) to leave the associates. The manager was so confident that he called the boy on Saturday and told him there would only be a suspension, no need to worry.
6. The HR took this to the Director of HR and narrated that there were many present in the cafeteria when this happened and the girl cried and ran away (which never happened).
7. The decision was taken without involving the two persons involved and those two persons who saw this. Is this the way to investigate an incident?
8. Whatever the senior HR heard is from the HR perspective, who didn't have better knowledge than the persons seen and involved. The senior HR took the decision based on the HR's point of view. Is this right?
9. Both the boys and the girl's senior associates and manager openly told that this changed into an ego clash between management and HR since our senior management spoke with a higher tone to leave you guys.
10. Leave me; I'm still young and I'm emotional for my friends, but do you think those experienced managers and senior associates are blind to support them against termination?
11. They sent mail to the VC and Director of HR seeking forgiveness, but there was no response from them. Many are saying that in such a big organization, the VC's assistance only sees the mails, and there are very few chances for the mail to be seen by him.
12. The discussion with the manager was done through a mail thread, didn't even have a face-to-face discussion.
13. They have only contact with their immediate HR; that's the sad part.
14. In our organization, we have many verticals like banking, media, retail, etc. Each vertical has its own HR.
15. In fact, managers and other associates in other verticals are laughing on hearing this; they are saying they have seen many worse things than this.
16. Both of them didn't get involved earlier in any incident; in fact, if that boy had stayed, he would have got the associate of the month for our vertical. He was the top contender for that; that's why our manager and senior associates gave them full support since he was good at the workplace.
To all, I'm not saying they didn't make any mistake; they did make a mistake, but the way HR presented the matter to the higher officials is the disheartening fact. Is it fair to showcase an incident in such a rude and harsh manner and elaborate it such that the hearing people will vote for them?
They are searching for a job; the problem they are facing is a lack of interview chances for the following reasons:
1. Experience less than 1 year, so they are not allowed to attend interviews for experienced positions.
2. They are 2009 passouts, and since 2010 passouts came out, 2009 passouts are not considered for fresher recruitment.
3. If they get a chance, what will they tell the reason for resigning in 9 months? No reason will be accepted since all HR very well know that no one will quit their job from a TIER-1 company inside 1 year.
4. The girl got caught in mainframe technology where there are fewer openings compared to dot net, java, etc.
I thank you all for coming forward to help them.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
There is one serious flaw in the action of HR, as pointed out in your detail now. At point 3 of your detailed story, you have stated that the employees were told that they were terminated and also stated that they were asked to resign. These TWO THINGS cannot happen at a time. Both the concerned boy and girl need not submit resignation but should insist on asking for issue of termination letters if they have really been terminated.
The boy and girl do not seem either to have been terminated, or the consent of the top brass taken for the proposed action. It seems the HR is playing some unethical and dirty game at their own, maybe in order to accommodate their own candidates or the candidates of their own senior boss in the resultant vacancies.
So, once they give their resignation letters, they won't have any claim for their jobs, as the management would have the plea that both of them resigned voluntarily and would be able to save their skin for such a harsh step for such a minor lapse.
PS Dhingra
Management and Vigilance Consultant
Dhingra Group of Consultants
New Delhi
09968076381
dcgroup1962@gmail.com
Dear friends,
I'm very thankful to you all for giving your opinions. Neither them nor I justified their mistake, but our only concern is the way the HR took this matter to their senior HR and whether this severe punishment is really required. I would like to add a few more details which many have asked.
1. Both of their managers never expected that they would be terminated for this behavior. They thought they would be suspended.
2. Only one HR interacted with them and demanded a written letter. They gave an apology letter stating the truth, believing that the HR would forgive them. This took place on Thursday. The girl was asked to come on Friday, and the boy was asked to come on Monday to know the decision taken by the panel.
3. On Monday, they called both and told them that they were terminated and asked them to apply for resignation. Please note they were never given a chance to express their views to the panel. The panel took the decision based on how it was explained by the HR.
4. The two associates who complained to HR didn't give any written statement, and they were also not involved in the panel discussion.
5. Our manager escalated this to the senior management; it seems senior management instructed the HR (not in a polite manner) to leave the associates. The manager was so confident that he called the boy on Saturday and told him there would only be a suspension, no need to worry.
6. The HR took this to the Director of HR and narrated that there were many present in the cafeteria when this happened and the girl cried and ran away (which never happened).
7. The decision was taken without involving the two persons involved and those two persons who saw this. Is this the way to investigate an incident?
8. Whatever the senior HR heard is from the HR perspective, who didn't have better knowledge than the persons seen and involved. The senior HR took the decision based on the HR's point of view. Is this right?
9. Both the boys and the girl's senior associates and manager openly told that this changed into an ego clash between management and HR since our senior management spoke with a higher tone to leave you guys.
10. Leave me; I'm still young and I'm emotional for my friends, but do you think those experienced managers and senior associates are blind to support them against termination?
11. They sent mail to the VC and Director of HR seeking forgiveness, but there was no response from them. Many are saying that in such a big organization, the VC's assistance only sees the mails, and there are very few chances for the mail to be seen by him.
12. The discussion with the manager was done through a mail thread, didn't even have a face-to-face discussion.
13. They have only contact with their immediate HR; that's the sad part.
14. In our organization, we have many verticals like banking, media, retail, etc. Each vertical has its own HR.
15. In fact, managers and other associates in other verticals are laughing on hearing this; they are saying they have seen many worse things than this.
16. Both of them didn't get involved earlier in any incident; in fact, if that boy had stayed, he would have got the associate of the month for our vertical. He was the top contender for that; that's why our manager and senior associates gave them full support since he was good at the workplace.
To all, I'm not saying they didn't make any mistake; they did make a mistake, but the way HR presented the matter to the higher officials is the disheartening fact. Is it fair to showcase an incident in such a rude and harsh manner and elaborate it such that the hearing people will vote for them?
They are searching for a job; the problem they are facing is a lack of interview chances for the following reasons:
1. Experience less than 1 year, so they are not allowed to attend interviews for experienced positions.
2. They are 2009 passouts, and since 2010 passouts came out, 2009 passouts are not considered for fresher recruitment.
3. If they get a chance, what will they tell the reason for resigning in 9 months? No reason will be accepted since all HR very well know that no one will quit their job from a TIER-1 company inside 1 year.
4. The girl got caught in mainframe technology where there are fewer openings compared to dot net, java, etc.
I thank you all for coming forward to help them.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Raj Kumar,
Bravo! Indeed yours is a befitting reply to the comments of Mr. Safaya and several others who seem to have commented without properly going through the comments of several others and made their one-sided opinion.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Bravo! Indeed yours is a befitting reply to the comments of Mr. Safaya and several others who seem to have commented without properly going through the comments of several others and made their one-sided opinion.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Is this the right punishment?
It's really refreshing to hear most of the posts coming into this link/thread are indeed borne of positive thinking and constructive convictions, not only for the cause of the women employee but even towards the male employee. Thanks to many posts, whose authors seem to be in a better position to counsel the male employee (for slapping) to rectify his conduct, even as nobody knows really if the women employee who was/is at the receiving end is guilty as such, and if so, to what extent. But, the paradox being what it is, it is sad to realize that quite perhaps even a few of the HR people too need counseling for their 'inside the den surmising'.
The irony is that it is these few who ironically champion the cause of 'out of the box thinking' as a precious most value, which is taught as a lesson in their HR training and orientation. 'Enforcing discipline' is just an alibi/cover for the misguided HR functionaries to come down heavily on helpless/innocent one-time erring employees. The reasons are obvious, they fear the management under the misconceived assumptions that all managements are always autocratic, and that their interest lies in misreporting the truth/blindly supporting the management for reasons best known to them, especially in cases of this nature. It's not far difficult to find instances where value-centered (not discipline-hardened) HR functionaries have even walked out of organizations where managements were very highhandedly dealing against the interests and concerns of employees and managers.
A weak-minded HR can never influence an informed or uninformed management to adopt a correct course of positive action towards the employees, leave alone the alleged erring and wrong ones. He is the one who being in his own shell, more remains a part of the problem but never a part of the solution. The old adage rightly fits into his scheme of things which says, 'in between the God and devotee, there still remains a priest who is the first to dispose of the case of the devotee, no wonder even if it goes against God's wish.
Now, coming to one vital point of dealing with such an employee's alleged misconduct if proved against him is, 'to take an overall view of the employee's case', that is his entire track record of the service, apart from only one alleged/misconduct. In this case, but for this incident, the track records/performance of both the employees are excellent, as according to their superiors/managers. Their apology, together with a suitable reassurance on their part to the organization, is adequate to close this case, which touches upon both the interests of the organization and employee.
The overzealous misapprehensions of a few of the HRs, Managements, and their likes, that any mitigating factors going in favor of the employee but are against the organizational culture, are quite misplaced and even sordidly imaginary. There can seldom be an ideal dealing situation in handling disciplinary cases. It's the prime most duty of the HR, whether he is the single individual or the Department, to create ideal terms, particularly while of this type. He or she, i.e., the HR, should know that he or she can either create a devil or the God of an erring employee.
What if either the boy or the girl, or even both would have had the solid backing of some influential and powerful backing of a heavyweight person in the society? What if such an unfortunate termination of service is given to our own sister and may even be an erring brother under the cover of collecting a confession from them but under disguised duress and captive coercion? Do we then still give short and long sermons on 'Discipline' and 'organizational/culture'? In such a case, the guiding heart of the HR/Management should prompt the application of their mind if serious about generating human resources than just have only a figurehead HR who cannot discern right and wrong under a developing situation in a given context.
Much is spoken about the IT industry and all that in this link/thread by a few friends to drive home that only its working/service conditions are very tough and worthy. Satyam Company still exists in the operative environment despite its scams indulged in by the higher-ups. Its reputation, even the country's IT reputation, did receive a severe beating. But when there has been a course correction for Satyam to rebuild things at the very macro level, why then do the HRs find it so difficult to constructively and positively handle this case, which is devoid of any fraud, misappropriation, malpractices, loss, pecuniary benefit, undue favor, malafide, threats to the staff/managers/company, and all that.
Well, I do not know for certain if a few of the HR friends who have taken a contrary position if introspect. Yet, I definitely consider spending my quality time on this post quite worthy. No wonder then even if the result may go bad, but the prayer is secured, as a great many posts received under this link/thread indicate a trend that people working in the organizations are mostly positive. This, even if a few of the HRs by themselves make their way difficult to adapt to this trend and still remain as exceptions to the generally accepted functional norms.
For, after all, exceptions prove the rule.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
It's really refreshing to hear most of the posts coming into this link/thread are indeed borne of positive thinking and constructive convictions, not only for the cause of the women employee but even towards the male employee. Thanks to many posts, whose authors seem to be in a better position to counsel the male employee (for slapping) to rectify his conduct, even as nobody knows really if the women employee who was/is at the receiving end is guilty as such, and if so, to what extent. But, the paradox being what it is, it is sad to realize that quite perhaps even a few of the HR people too need counseling for their 'inside the den surmising'.
The irony is that it is these few who ironically champion the cause of 'out of the box thinking' as a precious most value, which is taught as a lesson in their HR training and orientation. 'Enforcing discipline' is just an alibi/cover for the misguided HR functionaries to come down heavily on helpless/innocent one-time erring employees. The reasons are obvious, they fear the management under the misconceived assumptions that all managements are always autocratic, and that their interest lies in misreporting the truth/blindly supporting the management for reasons best known to them, especially in cases of this nature. It's not far difficult to find instances where value-centered (not discipline-hardened) HR functionaries have even walked out of organizations where managements were very highhandedly dealing against the interests and concerns of employees and managers.
A weak-minded HR can never influence an informed or uninformed management to adopt a correct course of positive action towards the employees, leave alone the alleged erring and wrong ones. He is the one who being in his own shell, more remains a part of the problem but never a part of the solution. The old adage rightly fits into his scheme of things which says, 'in between the God and devotee, there still remains a priest who is the first to dispose of the case of the devotee, no wonder even if it goes against God's wish.
Now, coming to one vital point of dealing with such an employee's alleged misconduct if proved against him is, 'to take an overall view of the employee's case', that is his entire track record of the service, apart from only one alleged/misconduct. In this case, but for this incident, the track records/performance of both the employees are excellent, as according to their superiors/managers. Their apology, together with a suitable reassurance on their part to the organization, is adequate to close this case, which touches upon both the interests of the organization and employee.
The overzealous misapprehensions of a few of the HRs, Managements, and their likes, that any mitigating factors going in favor of the employee but are against the organizational culture, are quite misplaced and even sordidly imaginary. There can seldom be an ideal dealing situation in handling disciplinary cases. It's the prime most duty of the HR, whether he is the single individual or the Department, to create ideal terms, particularly while of this type. He or she, i.e., the HR, should know that he or she can either create a devil or the God of an erring employee.
What if either the boy or the girl, or even both would have had the solid backing of some influential and powerful backing of a heavyweight person in the society? What if such an unfortunate termination of service is given to our own sister and may even be an erring brother under the cover of collecting a confession from them but under disguised duress and captive coercion? Do we then still give short and long sermons on 'Discipline' and 'organizational/culture'? In such a case, the guiding heart of the HR/Management should prompt the application of their mind if serious about generating human resources than just have only a figurehead HR who cannot discern right and wrong under a developing situation in a given context.
Much is spoken about the IT industry and all that in this link/thread by a few friends to drive home that only its working/service conditions are very tough and worthy. Satyam Company still exists in the operative environment despite its scams indulged in by the higher-ups. Its reputation, even the country's IT reputation, did receive a severe beating. But when there has been a course correction for Satyam to rebuild things at the very macro level, why then do the HRs find it so difficult to constructively and positively handle this case, which is devoid of any fraud, misappropriation, malpractices, loss, pecuniary benefit, undue favor, malafide, threats to the staff/managers/company, and all that.
Well, I do not know for certain if a few of the HR friends who have taken a contrary position if introspect. Yet, I definitely consider spending my quality time on this post quite worthy. No wonder then even if the result may go bad, but the prayer is secured, as a great many posts received under this link/thread indicate a trend that people working in the organizations are mostly positive. This, even if a few of the HRs by themselves make their way difficult to adapt to this trend and still remain as exceptions to the generally accepted functional norms.
For, after all, exceptions prove the rule.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Dhingra,
HR people have informed you about your termination, but we do not wish to ruin your life. Instead, we will make arrangements for you to apply for resignation so that you can obtain an experience certificate. Your experience certificate can be obtained through the resignation process. A friend of mine possesses the email thread of HR communication with the Payroll team, which includes a screenshot stating, "the reason for termination is misconduct, and they should not be considered for rehiring."
Dear Moni,
There is a serious flaw in the HR's actions, as pointed out in your detailed explanation. In point 3 of your account, you mentioned that the employees were informed about their termination but also asked to resign. These two actions cannot occur simultaneously. Both individuals should not submit resignations but should request termination letters if they have indeed been terminated.
It appears that neither the boy nor the girl has been terminated, nor has the approval of top management been sought for the proposed course of action. It seems that HR may be engaging in unethical behavior, possibly to favor their own candidates or those recommended by their senior boss for the resulting vacancies.
If they submit their resignation letters, they will forfeit any claims to their jobs, as management could argue that both resigned voluntarily, thereby absolving itself of responsibility for such a severe action over a minor infraction.
PS Dhingra
Management & Vigilance Consultant
Dhingra Group of Consultants
New Delhi
09968076381
dcgroup1962@gmail.com
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
HR people have informed you about your termination, but we do not wish to ruin your life. Instead, we will make arrangements for you to apply for resignation so that you can obtain an experience certificate. Your experience certificate can be obtained through the resignation process. A friend of mine possesses the email thread of HR communication with the Payroll team, which includes a screenshot stating, "the reason for termination is misconduct, and they should not be considered for rehiring."
Dear Moni,
There is a serious flaw in the HR's actions, as pointed out in your detailed explanation. In point 3 of your account, you mentioned that the employees were informed about their termination but also asked to resign. These two actions cannot occur simultaneously. Both individuals should not submit resignations but should request termination letters if they have indeed been terminated.
It appears that neither the boy nor the girl has been terminated, nor has the approval of top management been sought for the proposed course of action. It seems that HR may be engaging in unethical behavior, possibly to favor their own candidates or those recommended by their senior boss for the resulting vacancies.
If they submit their resignation letters, they will forfeit any claims to their jobs, as management could argue that both resigned voluntarily, thereby absolving itself of responsibility for such a severe action over a minor infraction.
PS Dhingra
Management & Vigilance Consultant
Dhingra Group of Consultants
New Delhi
09968076381
dcgroup1962@gmail.com
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
The punishment given is against human law. The HR needs to give a clear-cut explanation as to why they terminated the boy and the girl. They cannot act on a 3rd party's complaint. My suggestion is that both the boy and girl need to approach the higher-ups in the organization and give a brief about the case.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The punishment given is against human law. The HR needs to give a clear-cut explanation as to why they terminated the boy and the girl. They cannot act on a 3rd party's complaint. My suggestion is that both the boy and girl need to approach the higher-ups in the organization and give a brief about the case.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Friends,
I need a suggestion from all of you. They received their relieving letter last month. Now, we have just found out that besides the manager and HR, we can also contact the Chief Compliance Officer to discuss any questions or concerns about these standards. Is it a good idea to communicate with him regarding what has happened? He is residing in the USA. We obtained this information from a document that contains the code of ethics of our company.
Your suggestions are welcomed.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I need a suggestion from all of you. They received their relieving letter last month. Now, we have just found out that besides the manager and HR, we can also contact the Chief Compliance Officer to discuss any questions or concerns about these standards. Is it a good idea to communicate with him regarding what has happened? He is residing in the USA. We obtained this information from a document that contains the code of ethics of our company.
Your suggestions are welcomed.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Nice thread... thanks CiteHR. My views are here...
Two associates find their co-associates doing something 'unsocial' in a cafeteria. They promptly associate with the HR to disassociate them from the company, and they succeed! Fine, such people are abound, no surprise.
But, what is surprising is the HR. The moment they receive the complaint, they "set up a stage" and force the boy and girl to submit an apology. The hapless youth fall into this trap and soon find themselves out of the door. Wah!
Does not the HR, the so-called guardian of discipline, miss something? There is a larger interest here, which they forgot - that they should retain the best talents so that the company continues to benefit. From the comments littered in this column, it seems they are the best and their managers definitely do not want to lose them. Yet, HR disposes of them.
Well, HR should never tolerate such behavior but needs to punish the offender, no doubt in that. But there are so many ways to discipline this juvenile exuberance. Not termination.
And for what, "pinching"? Come on, women pinching men is a common thing (and men won't return the pinch with a slap, he returns it differently!). Dear Mr./Ms. HR, you should have asked the girl to write something else, maybe "I threw a plate at him or poured hot soup on him, so he slapped". Not pinching, your case is weak here.
Anyway, the boy and girl should feel happy to come out of this company. It does not seem to be a better place to work for. I mean "bad associates" everywhere! Hope they get a good job sooner and in a good company. God bless them.
Regards, Mohandas
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Two associates find their co-associates doing something 'unsocial' in a cafeteria. They promptly associate with the HR to disassociate them from the company, and they succeed! Fine, such people are abound, no surprise.
But, what is surprising is the HR. The moment they receive the complaint, they "set up a stage" and force the boy and girl to submit an apology. The hapless youth fall into this trap and soon find themselves out of the door. Wah!
Does not the HR, the so-called guardian of discipline, miss something? There is a larger interest here, which they forgot - that they should retain the best talents so that the company continues to benefit. From the comments littered in this column, it seems they are the best and their managers definitely do not want to lose them. Yet, HR disposes of them.
Well, HR should never tolerate such behavior but needs to punish the offender, no doubt in that. But there are so many ways to discipline this juvenile exuberance. Not termination.
And for what, "pinching"? Come on, women pinching men is a common thing (and men won't return the pinch with a slap, he returns it differently!). Dear Mr./Ms. HR, you should have asked the girl to write something else, maybe "I threw a plate at him or poured hot soup on him, so he slapped". Not pinching, your case is weak here.
Anyway, the boy and girl should feel happy to come out of this company. It does not seem to be a better place to work for. I mean "bad associates" everywhere! Hope they get a good job sooner and in a good company. God bless them.
Regards, Mohandas
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mani,
My apprehension about the HR people of the company seems to be correct, and I am firmly convinced that the HR people played a dirty trick to get their resignation letters under the pretense of not spoiling their careers and to provide them with experience certificates so that they may not face legal challenges for their unethical actions.
Now, even if the affected employees try to challenge the decision in court, the management clearly has the upper hand, and the court could easily be convinced that, although they were due to be terminated for misconduct, the management took a lenient view and accepted their resignations instead of terminating them.
The employees should have sought advice from knowledgeable individuals before submitting their resignations. Unfortunately, the game is now over.
IT IS A CLEAR FRAUD ON THE POOR EMPLOYEES, BUT TO THEIR MISFORTUNE, IT CANNOT BE PROVEN ON PAPER OR IN A COURT OF LAW, AS ALL THE EVIDENCE ON RECORD CLEARLY FAVORS THE MANAGEMENT.
PS Dhingra
Dear Dhingra,
HR informed that you were being terminated, but we do not wish to ruin your life, so arrangements will be made for you to apply for resignation to secure an experience certificate. To obtain the experience certificate, they applied for resignation. My friend possesses the email thread of HR communication with the Payroll team, including a screenshot stating, "the reason for termination is misconduct, and they should not be considered for rehiring."
Please let me know if you need any further assistance.
Best regards,
Manikandan
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
My apprehension about the HR people of the company seems to be correct, and I am firmly convinced that the HR people played a dirty trick to get their resignation letters under the pretense of not spoiling their careers and to provide them with experience certificates so that they may not face legal challenges for their unethical actions.
Now, even if the affected employees try to challenge the decision in court, the management clearly has the upper hand, and the court could easily be convinced that, although they were due to be terminated for misconduct, the management took a lenient view and accepted their resignations instead of terminating them.
The employees should have sought advice from knowledgeable individuals before submitting their resignations. Unfortunately, the game is now over.
IT IS A CLEAR FRAUD ON THE POOR EMPLOYEES, BUT TO THEIR MISFORTUNE, IT CANNOT BE PROVEN ON PAPER OR IN A COURT OF LAW, AS ALL THE EVIDENCE ON RECORD CLEARLY FAVORS THE MANAGEMENT.
PS Dhingra
Dear Dhingra,
HR informed that you were being terminated, but we do not wish to ruin your life, so arrangements will be made for you to apply for resignation to secure an experience certificate. To obtain the experience certificate, they applied for resignation. My friend possesses the email thread of HR communication with the Payroll team, including a screenshot stating, "the reason for termination is misconduct, and they should not be considered for rehiring."
Please let me know if you need any further assistance.
Best regards,
Manikandan
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
It's okay, I was also harsh with you. Sorry for the same. Actually, I was criticizing HR by giving negative comments ("why to tell truth to HR"), because what they have done is not bearable to us, and they are playing with two lives.
Regards,
Rajasekar. N
From India, Coimbatore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Regards,
Rajasekar. N
From India, Coimbatore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Psdhingra,
Fortunately, my friend has the email thread in which they stated as follows:
"Dear HR name comes here, This is with respect to the misbehavior of our associates at the (office location) facility. Associates (Boy's name comes here) was found physically assaulting (slapping) (girl's name comes here) at the Cafeteria Block 1st Floor late afternoon on Thursday (September 2, 2010). He was brought to us by two associates from the TAG Team who had witnessed this. On enquiry, he admitted to having a quarrel with her and since the argument heated up, he slapped her. Both associates have given a written admission for the incident."
Based on the above email, HR initiated discussions that led to termination.
He also has a screenshot of the clearance form in which it states "terminated due to misconduct."
Will these things be treated as useful evidence?
Dear Mani,
My apprehension about the HR people of the company seems to be correct, and I am firmly convinced that the HR people played a dirty trick to obtain their resignation letters under the pretense of not spoiling their careers and to provide them with experience certificates so that they may not be challenged in the court of law for their wrongful and unethical actions.
Even if the affected employees attempt to challenge the decision in the court of law, the management clearly has the upper hand. The court could easily be convinced that, although the employees were to be terminated for misconduct, the management took a lenient view and accepted their resignations instead of terminating them.
The employees should have sought advice from knowledgeable individuals before submitting their resignations. Unfortunately, the game is now over.
It is a clear fraud on the poor employees, but to their misfortune, it cannot be proven on paper or in a court of law as all the evidence on record clearly favors the management.
PS Dhingra
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Fortunately, my friend has the email thread in which they stated as follows:
"Dear HR name comes here, This is with respect to the misbehavior of our associates at the (office location) facility. Associates (Boy's name comes here) was found physically assaulting (slapping) (girl's name comes here) at the Cafeteria Block 1st Floor late afternoon on Thursday (September 2, 2010). He was brought to us by two associates from the TAG Team who had witnessed this. On enquiry, he admitted to having a quarrel with her and since the argument heated up, he slapped her. Both associates have given a written admission for the incident."
Based on the above email, HR initiated discussions that led to termination.
He also has a screenshot of the clearance form in which it states "terminated due to misconduct."
Will these things be treated as useful evidence?
Dear Mani,
My apprehension about the HR people of the company seems to be correct, and I am firmly convinced that the HR people played a dirty trick to obtain their resignation letters under the pretense of not spoiling their careers and to provide them with experience certificates so that they may not be challenged in the court of law for their wrongful and unethical actions.
Even if the affected employees attempt to challenge the decision in the court of law, the management clearly has the upper hand. The court could easily be convinced that, although the employees were to be terminated for misconduct, the management took a lenient view and accepted their resignations instead of terminating them.
The employees should have sought advice from knowledgeable individuals before submitting their resignations. Unfortunately, the game is now over.
It is a clear fraud on the poor employees, but to their misfortune, it cannot be proven on paper or in a court of law as all the evidence on record clearly favors the management.
PS Dhingra
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Manikandan,
With reference to your latest post, part of which I quote below:
"Associates (Boy's name comes here) was found physically assaulting (slapping) (girl's name comes here) at the Cafeteria Block 1st Floor late afternoon on Thursday (September 2, 2010). He was brought to us by two associates from the TAG Team who had witnessed this. On enquiry, he admitted to having a quarrel with her and since the argument heated up, he slapped her."
Can you explain what TAG is? Is it the name of the security company?
Also, "physically assaulting (slapping)" implies repeated slaps, not just one slap; otherwise, it could have been termed "slapped her" rather than being described as "assaulting (slapping)."
Moreover, can you enlighten us on who sent the mail and to whom?
Irrespective of one's thoughts, since it is clear from the boy's admission of "having a quarrel with her and since the argument heated up, slapped her," it is obvious that the matter was not something official but rather personal.
I personally do not favor slapping a female in public, especially in the office, regardless of the provocation.
I have seen even worse behavior from husbands, who, when quarreling with their wives at parties or social occasions, say, "Ghar Chalo, batata hun" (Come home, and I will tell you).
It is good to know that you are such a gentle, tolerant person!
My sympathies are only with the girl, who seems to be a "victim," albeit a willing or reluctant one (as she risked her job trying to save the boy).
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
With reference to your latest post, part of which I quote below:
"Associates (Boy's name comes here) was found physically assaulting (slapping) (girl's name comes here) at the Cafeteria Block 1st Floor late afternoon on Thursday (September 2, 2010). He was brought to us by two associates from the TAG Team who had witnessed this. On enquiry, he admitted to having a quarrel with her and since the argument heated up, he slapped her."
Can you explain what TAG is? Is it the name of the security company?
Also, "physically assaulting (slapping)" implies repeated slaps, not just one slap; otherwise, it could have been termed "slapped her" rather than being described as "assaulting (slapping)."
Moreover, can you enlighten us on who sent the mail and to whom?
Irrespective of one's thoughts, since it is clear from the boy's admission of "having a quarrel with her and since the argument heated up, slapped her," it is obvious that the matter was not something official but rather personal.
I personally do not favor slapping a female in public, especially in the office, regardless of the provocation.
I have seen even worse behavior from husbands, who, when quarreling with their wives at parties or social occasions, say, "Ghar Chalo, batata hun" (Come home, and I will tell you).
It is good to know that you are such a gentle, tolerant person!
My sympathies are only with the girl, who seems to be a "victim," albeit a willing or reluctant one (as she risked her job trying to save the boy).
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mani,
Raj Kumar's observation is correct. You may need to provide more information on his queries. However, if the boy has such evidence with him, the punishment being quite harsh can certainly help him, and it would help the girl much more. If there is any other evidence about the girl's termination case, that can be helpful in the proper analysis of the case with respect to their mutual interests vis-a-vis the position of the HR department.
Another thing, can the boy and girl get hold of the written statements of the two associates from the TAG Team who witnessed the incident? That can help them defend themselves against the evidence of those persons. Actually, before giving their statements.
Anyway, had you given all the related information at the very first instance, the thread would not have stretched so long, and you would have received clearer opinions of the members, rather than individual positive and negative guess-based responses.
PS Dhingra
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Raj Kumar's observation is correct. You may need to provide more information on his queries. However, if the boy has such evidence with him, the punishment being quite harsh can certainly help him, and it would help the girl much more. If there is any other evidence about the girl's termination case, that can be helpful in the proper analysis of the case with respect to their mutual interests vis-a-vis the position of the HR department.
Another thing, can the boy and girl get hold of the written statements of the two associates from the TAG Team who witnessed the incident? That can help them defend themselves against the evidence of those persons. Actually, before giving their statements.
Anyway, had you given all the related information at the very first instance, the thread would not have stretched so long, and you would have received clearer opinions of the members, rather than individual positive and negative guess-based responses.
PS Dhingra
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
This email was sent from a junior HR to his immediate reporting HR. It's just for record-keeping that he sent it to his immediate HR. First, my friends were investigated by these 2 HR, and they only created the entire story around it. Since our manager spoke to them in a more assertive manner to leave us, seeing our manager's intervention, they took it to the director of HR and panel members and presented the matter in a way that made it look violent. As I stated earlier, they mentioned that the girl went crying after getting slapped, which never happened. My friends didn't have any communication with any other HR apart from these 2 HR. The decision was made solely based on how these 2 HR presented this matter to others.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Brinda Dont mistake me, I am not criticizing all HR’s, I was pointing out only those people who did evil to these young buds. Regards Rajasekar
From India, Coimbatore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Coimbatore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
This is not the correct decision taken by the management. In my opinion, a warning letter should have been issued to prevent the mistake from being repeated. If it happens again, then appropriate action may be taken.
Regards,
V. Murali
From India, Vadodara
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Regards,
V. Murali
From India, Vadodara
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
Sorry for the late response. Whatever happened in the café area is a coincidence. Maybe the HR Department has some policies that are mandatory for every employee, but the punishment given to these two employees is very harsh, which they are not supposed to receive. The HR Department may have policies, but there is something beyond policies known as understanding the situation and maintaining a good relationship because human beings are important resources of any organization.
It's really unfortunate what has happened to these two employees, even though their mistake is not as serious as the punishment they received. It's a request from the HR Department to review the decision and reinstate these two employees with a warning. This action will help the HR Department improve its image in the organization because in today's world, there is no place for dictatorship. So, my HR friends, please review your decision and work on enhancing your image.
Regards,
Suraj
From India
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Sorry for the late response. Whatever happened in the café area is a coincidence. Maybe the HR Department has some policies that are mandatory for every employee, but the punishment given to these two employees is very harsh, which they are not supposed to receive. The HR Department may have policies, but there is something beyond policies known as understanding the situation and maintaining a good relationship because human beings are important resources of any organization.
It's really unfortunate what has happened to these two employees, even though their mistake is not as serious as the punishment they received. It's a request from the HR Department to review the decision and reinstate these two employees with a warning. This action will help the HR Department improve its image in the organization because in today's world, there is no place for dictatorship. So, my HR friends, please review your decision and work on enhancing your image.
Regards,
Suraj
From India
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
girl will get bad name, no boy will get it , think before taking decision, this is india- sita it is still follows.reputation or bad name spread faster then light.
From India, Ludhiana
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Ludhiana
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Disciplinary measures should be graduated. Do you think the issue was a serious offense or a minor one? To me, I think this is wrong. The employee could be given a warning letter instead of terminating them; after all, that issue was their first act.
With best regards,
From Tanzania
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
With best regards,
From Tanzania
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I still strongly believe that a male employee, under whatever the provocation may be, cannot slap a female employee in the workplace, canteen included. Would he have slapped if it was a male coworker? The punishment is correctly given, but I feel the female employee need not have been asked to go. You have to draw a line somewhere in disciplinary matters.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thanks for your opinion. I tend to agree. The female employee is the 'victim' and assuch should not have been subjected to this harsh punishment. Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello,
While I entirely agree that each employee is bound to maintain decency, dignity, and decorum not only in the office but in fact always, I find that in the instant case, the boy and girl have violated this basic requirement. At least they have been honest in admitting what they did and committed in writing to the HR.
If the following statement (excerpted from the original mail) is indeed true, then the HR has CHEATED both the employees. He has misled them and has used authority in a most vindictive manner.
"HR called both of them and asked them to write an apology letter stating the incident to avoid punishment."
In the instant case, even the principle of natural justice has been violated by the HR and the company.
You cannot punish anyone without extending an opportunity to be heard on the charges leveled. In the instant case, no charges have been leveled, and termination is apparently based on an honest admission fraudulently obtained by the HR.
I suggest that the persons in question raise a grievance right to the top level of the organization. In all probability, they will not be heard, but they must make an attempt. They must also realize that this was NOT the right organization, culturally speaking, where the HR CHEATS, the organizational system is blind, callous, and vindictive.
Having said this, I still feel that the couple ought not to have behaved like they did, even in the cafeteria.
Regards to all,
Samvedan
March 19, 2011
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
While I entirely agree that each employee is bound to maintain decency, dignity, and decorum not only in the office but in fact always, I find that in the instant case, the boy and girl have violated this basic requirement. At least they have been honest in admitting what they did and committed in writing to the HR.
If the following statement (excerpted from the original mail) is indeed true, then the HR has CHEATED both the employees. He has misled them and has used authority in a most vindictive manner.
"HR called both of them and asked them to write an apology letter stating the incident to avoid punishment."
In the instant case, even the principle of natural justice has been violated by the HR and the company.
You cannot punish anyone without extending an opportunity to be heard on the charges leveled. In the instant case, no charges have been leveled, and termination is apparently based on an honest admission fraudulently obtained by the HR.
I suggest that the persons in question raise a grievance right to the top level of the organization. In all probability, they will not be heard, but they must make an attempt. They must also realize that this was NOT the right organization, culturally speaking, where the HR CHEATS, the organizational system is blind, callous, and vindictive.
Having said this, I still feel that the couple ought not to have behaved like they did, even in the cafeteria.
Regards to all,
Samvedan
March 19, 2011
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Let us consider a scenario where HR may have acted improperly, possibly by cheating or misusing information. However, the crucial point to ascertain is whether the incident actually occurred - specifically, whether the upset individual, regardless of gender, struck another person. The manner in which the incident was reported holds secondary importance. It prompts the question: if the individual in question were not female, would such an action have taken place? Why is a female employee often seen as an easy target for abuse, assault, or embarrassment? Shouldn't she be afforded the same level of respect as any other employee?
This situation leaves no room for ambiguity - the individual responsible must face consequences, without attempts to conceal the issue by attributing it to the location, such as the cafeteria. Was the incident outside the workplace premises or in a public cafeteria? If it transpired in an exclusive employees' cafeteria, then it warrants disciplinary measures. Let's not delve into the specifics of reporting procedures or other operational details. The female employee could still be considered for reemployment, provided she has no objections. She could receive a warning or a minor punishment.
Thank you.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
This situation leaves no room for ambiguity - the individual responsible must face consequences, without attempts to conceal the issue by attributing it to the location, such as the cafeteria. Was the incident outside the workplace premises or in a public cafeteria? If it transpired in an exclusive employees' cafeteria, then it warrants disciplinary measures. Let's not delve into the specifics of reporting procedures or other operational details. The female employee could still be considered for reemployment, provided she has no objections. She could receive a warning or a minor punishment.
Thank you.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
Communication Skills Self assessment.doc
Interview assessment forms.zip