Dear sir,
Nowadays, all the private engineering college managements are playing a wicked game with their employees. They issue offer letters in which all the benefits are skewed in favor of the management. The offer letters clearly state that the management reserves the right to terminate an employee instantly without any notice period. However, if an employee wishes to resign, they are required to provide three months' notice or pay three months' salary. This one-sided approach seems to be a significant flaw on their part.
In some colleges, employees are being harassed by the management, yet the management refuses to accept their resignation. For instance, if a person is unwilling to continue working due to the poor environment within the organization, and has signed a completely biased agreement (heavily favoring the management) on a 100rs stamp paper, they might choose to join another college without informing the previous one. Subsequently, the management may send a lawyer's notice demanding payment for the three months' salary.
Please let me know if you need further assistance or clarification on the matter.
From India, Tirupati
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
Nowadays, all the private engineering college managements are playing a wicked game with their employees. They issue offer letters in which all the benefits are skewed in favor of the management. The offer letters clearly state that the management reserves the right to terminate an employee instantly without any notice period. However, if an employee wishes to resign, they are required to provide three months' notice or pay three months' salary. This one-sided approach seems to be a significant flaw on their part.
In some colleges, employees are being harassed by the management, yet the management refuses to accept their resignation. For instance, if a person is unwilling to continue working due to the poor environment within the organization, and has signed a completely biased agreement (heavily favoring the management) on a 100rs stamp paper, they might choose to join another college without informing the previous one. Subsequently, the management may send a lawyer's notice demanding payment for the three months' salary.
Please let me know if you need further assistance or clarification on the matter.
From India, Tirupati
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Ms. Naidu,
While what you write certainly appears to almost entirely favor college managements over their faculty, you seem to overlook one critical factor:
Each of those faculty had a CHOICE which they exercised at the time of accepting employment - albeit under the provisions of an almost lop-sided contract. They had a CHOICE to accept that contract, negotiate better terms, or at worst - reject the contract entirely and work elsewhere.
I am not a lawyer. Thus, I am not sure whether there are statutory or regulatory requirements that protect a person's employment contract or notice period in private engineering colleges.
But, the truth is that we ALWAYS have a CHOICE! The options may not be terribly attractive. But they exist. And, each of us is FREE to EXERCISE those OPTIONS! Either we Agree or we Walk Away!
The situation you describe is very common to management consultants. Each client we take on is a contractually created and protected relationship. And, the severity or obligations of each contract vary. Some are fair, some inane, while some are obnoxiously client-centric with severe penalties, lunatic non-compete clauses, and terrible exclusionary provisions etc.
When I sign up a client, the onus is on me to read the contract thoroughly prior to accepting and signing it. It is not uncommon to find many management consultants walk away from lucrative assignments with marquee brands due to contractual disagreements. But, we do it PRIOR to signing the contract. Yet, there are many who will accept those assignments regardless of those same limitations. Each to their own!
What is not fair is to first sign the dotted line and then complain of its unfairness AFTER having accepted it. Unless of course - an individual was made to commit to that contract under duress, inducement, or threat of harm to self or others.
Also, lack of employment opportunities (at the time of accepting an unfair contract) may be an exigent circumstance, but it isn't either duress or inducement.
A critical fact that over 99% of prospective employees fail to realize while accepting a job (probably due to their enthusiasm on getting a job in the first place) is that any contract will ALWAYS FAVOR THE MAKER. This is a rule the world over for any type of contract - unless the construct, content, and provisions of that particular contract are regulated by legislation. That is why lawyers exist. How many times do prospective employees take a copy of the employment contract to THEIR LAWYER prior to signing it? Almost Never! Why? Because most never realize that what they are signing is a legally enforceable document that will live far longer than their initial exuberance at getting a job.
You will be surprised how many times I've suggested to well-qualified senior professionals to get their employment contract vetted by an independent lawyer. I am yet to have any of them heed my suggestion. And, some have learned the very hard way after paying a substantial financial and/or psychological price! But, such is life I suppose.
Please don't misunderstand me. I realize there are a number of unscrupulous operators who prey upon people's vulnerabilities. And, they can and do cause considerable psychological and/or financial damage to their employees.
But, until statutory or legislative provisions do not mandate and/or regulate employment contracts, it will always be a case of Caveat Emptor.
I wish your friend/s All the Very Best and I am sure better days are just round the corner for them!
Take Care...
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
95While what you write certainly appears to almost entirely favor college managements over their faculty, you seem to overlook one critical factor:
Each of those faculty had a CHOICE which they exercised at the time of accepting employment - albeit under the provisions of an almost lop-sided contract. They had a CHOICE to accept that contract, negotiate better terms, or at worst - reject the contract entirely and work elsewhere.
I am not a lawyer. Thus, I am not sure whether there are statutory or regulatory requirements that protect a person's employment contract or notice period in private engineering colleges.
But, the truth is that we ALWAYS have a CHOICE! The options may not be terribly attractive. But they exist. And, each of us is FREE to EXERCISE those OPTIONS! Either we Agree or we Walk Away!
The situation you describe is very common to management consultants. Each client we take on is a contractually created and protected relationship. And, the severity or obligations of each contract vary. Some are fair, some inane, while some are obnoxiously client-centric with severe penalties, lunatic non-compete clauses, and terrible exclusionary provisions etc.
When I sign up a client, the onus is on me to read the contract thoroughly prior to accepting and signing it. It is not uncommon to find many management consultants walk away from lucrative assignments with marquee brands due to contractual disagreements. But, we do it PRIOR to signing the contract. Yet, there are many who will accept those assignments regardless of those same limitations. Each to their own!
What is not fair is to first sign the dotted line and then complain of its unfairness AFTER having accepted it. Unless of course - an individual was made to commit to that contract under duress, inducement, or threat of harm to self or others.
Also, lack of employment opportunities (at the time of accepting an unfair contract) may be an exigent circumstance, but it isn't either duress or inducement.
A critical fact that over 99% of prospective employees fail to realize while accepting a job (probably due to their enthusiasm on getting a job in the first place) is that any contract will ALWAYS FAVOR THE MAKER. This is a rule the world over for any type of contract - unless the construct, content, and provisions of that particular contract are regulated by legislation. That is why lawyers exist. How many times do prospective employees take a copy of the employment contract to THEIR LAWYER prior to signing it? Almost Never! Why? Because most never realize that what they are signing is a legally enforceable document that will live far longer than their initial exuberance at getting a job.
You will be surprised how many times I've suggested to well-qualified senior professionals to get their employment contract vetted by an independent lawyer. I am yet to have any of them heed my suggestion. And, some have learned the very hard way after paying a substantial financial and/or psychological price! But, such is life I suppose.
Please don't misunderstand me. I realize there are a number of unscrupulous operators who prey upon people's vulnerabilities. And, they can and do cause considerable psychological and/or financial damage to their employees.
But, until statutory or legislative provisions do not mandate and/or regulate employment contracts, it will always be a case of Caveat Emptor.
I wish your friend/s All the Very Best and I am sure better days are just round the corner for them!
Take Care...
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Excellent response, Gaurav Sareen—can't get any better. In a way, this also addresses many postings in CiteHR regarding Employers sending legal notices for breaking bonds, etc.
The whole irony is that many 'think after the act'—while it always has to be the other way round. Your remarks about "CHOICE" are, in general, applicable to almost all situations—not just the one under discussion. This, I think, is another facet of the hesitation to take responsibility for one's actions or, in another way, 'I act, YOU face the consequences'—especially if they aren't to my liking.
Coming to the options open to msnaidu417/his friend, I think he needs to decide which of the THREE options are preferable for him:
1. Whether to ignore the lawyer's notice and be open to further mental/legal tension/situations (one of which COULD be uncomfortable situations in the new job)?
2. Pay up the 3 months' salary and be done with it (with everything in black and white) and learn the lesson of this experience.
3. Fight the issue legally.
Let there be no confusion that this is a 'right' or 'wrong' issue—it's not. It all depends on what priorities he sets for himself in the given set of circumstances. For example, if I had all the time under the sun, knew some lawyer closely, and had lots of expendable money—then MY choice of the course of action would unhesitatingly be the THIRD option mentioned above.
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The whole irony is that many 'think after the act'—while it always has to be the other way round. Your remarks about "CHOICE" are, in general, applicable to almost all situations—not just the one under discussion. This, I think, is another facet of the hesitation to take responsibility for one's actions or, in another way, 'I act, YOU face the consequences'—especially if they aren't to my liking.
Coming to the options open to msnaidu417/his friend, I think he needs to decide which of the THREE options are preferable for him:
1. Whether to ignore the lawyer's notice and be open to further mental/legal tension/situations (one of which COULD be uncomfortable situations in the new job)?
2. Pay up the 3 months' salary and be done with it (with everything in black and white) and learn the lesson of this experience.
3. Fight the issue legally.
Let there be no confusion that this is a 'right' or 'wrong' issue—it's not. It all depends on what priorities he sets for himself in the given set of circumstances. For example, if I had all the time under the sun, knew some lawyer closely, and had lots of expendable money—then MY choice of the course of action would unhesitatingly be the THIRD option mentioned above.
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you TS - Much Appreciated!
I completely agree with your views regarding 'Thinking after the Fact' and 'Hesitation to take Responsibility for one's Actions'.
And, increasingly I am seeing an attitude of 'Entitlement' emerging - both - on this forum as well as in the 'real bricks and mortar' world. And, to make it worse, it's being compounded by a laissez-faire attitude towards one's actions and their possible consequences.
But, these I suppose are topics for another discussion.
Regarding your 3 options to the post-initiator, I totally agree. Especially with your vivid rationale for choosing (or not choosing) option 3.
As a risk consultant, I would like to add to your suggestions for msnaidu417's benefit:
1. Write down the total cost of option 2. This should be equal to 3 months' salary. The invaluable experience and learning for life (as you so accurately point out) is a FREE BONUS!
2. Write down the estimated financial cost of option 3. Always multiply any number provided by a lawyer by at least a multiple of 3.
3. Write down the estimated time cost of option 3. Again, multiply any duration estimate given by a lawyer by at least a multiple of 3.
4. Convert the time estimate of option 3 to a numerical value: (EST. NO. of DAYS x CURRENT SALARY PER DAY)
5. Add the Financial Estimate + Cost of Estimated Time. This is the Estimated Total Cost of Option 3.
6. Compare the Total Cost of Option 2 with the Estimated Total Cost of Option 3.
7. The answer as to which option is a better bet will be self-evident.
I am sure msnaidu417 has a number of thoughts to take to his/her friend for their consideration and making a suitable decision for themselves.
Kind regards,
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I completely agree with your views regarding 'Thinking after the Fact' and 'Hesitation to take Responsibility for one's Actions'.
And, increasingly I am seeing an attitude of 'Entitlement' emerging - both - on this forum as well as in the 'real bricks and mortar' world. And, to make it worse, it's being compounded by a laissez-faire attitude towards one's actions and their possible consequences.
But, these I suppose are topics for another discussion.
Regarding your 3 options to the post-initiator, I totally agree. Especially with your vivid rationale for choosing (or not choosing) option 3.
As a risk consultant, I would like to add to your suggestions for msnaidu417's benefit:
1. Write down the total cost of option 2. This should be equal to 3 months' salary. The invaluable experience and learning for life (as you so accurately point out) is a FREE BONUS!
2. Write down the estimated financial cost of option 3. Always multiply any number provided by a lawyer by at least a multiple of 3.
3. Write down the estimated time cost of option 3. Again, multiply any duration estimate given by a lawyer by at least a multiple of 3.
4. Convert the time estimate of option 3 to a numerical value: (EST. NO. of DAYS x CURRENT SALARY PER DAY)
5. Add the Financial Estimate + Cost of Estimated Time. This is the Estimated Total Cost of Option 3.
6. Compare the Total Cost of Option 2 with the Estimated Total Cost of Option 3.
7. The answer as to which option is a better bet will be self-evident.
I am sure msnaidu417 has a number of thoughts to take to his/her friend for their consideration and making a suitable decision for themselves.
Kind regards,
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Please see the latest discussion regarding the service bond at the following link:
https://www.citehr.com/423676-legali...#ixzz24kAuWayb
From India, Kochi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
https://www.citehr.com/423676-legali...#ixzz24kAuWayb
From India, Kochi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Join Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.
Offer letter.pdf
Sample Internship Offer Letter.doc