Hi All, I want to know, do we need to reissue the appointment letter if mentioned 3 year bond has exceed. Kindly guide me.
From India, Kolkata
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)

You have to check the other terms and conditions of the AO. The bond is one among various other terms. I don't think you engaged them for a specific period of 3 years, which as you mentioned is 3 years. Does the tenure close by the end of 3 years? You have to post the extract of your AO issued to this employee to give appropriate suggestions.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your reply. In the appointment letter, we clearly mention that "this appointment is valid for 3 years and subject to renewal on mutual consent."

So, do we need to reissue the letter after 3 years? Many of our employees are raising this point, stating that they need a new appointment letter. Kindly suggest to me what I should do in this case.

Swati

From India, Kolkata
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)

Unfair Labor Practices and Employment Bonds

First, if you keep renewing appointment letters every 3 years to avoid continuity of service and deprive employees of their statutory benefits, you will soon fall under "unfair labor practice," for which the tenure of service of the employee will be treated as continuous, and you may be penalized.

Legality of Employment Bonds

What kind of bond have you signed? Bonds related to retaining employees for a particular period of time are also illegal.

Maybe you should present clear facts of the case to receive better advice.

From India, Kolkata
Acknowledge(4)
KK
NK
Amend(0)

Both options are available:

1) Either issue a fresh letter, which will be fixed for the next few years.
2) Issue a fresh AO letter combining both past and future tenures as continuous service. This would be a fair option considering the future of this employee.

The onus will be on you to prove not guilty. It is important to note that if you choose the first option and this type of action is repeated, you may be charged with 'unfair labor practices,' as pointed out by others.

From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(1)
KK
Amend(0)

You do not need to reissue the appointment letter. Just a simple letter stating that the validity of the original appointment letter is extended by -- years will suffice. This way, the problem of continuity remains, and there is no "gap."
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)

Understanding Employment Bonds and Contracts

The bond being discussed appears to be a contract outlining the terms and conditions of employment, including remuneration. A bond is entirely different from a contract. A contract is like a settlement in the case of workers. Normally, an appointment letter is issued briefly stating that employment commences from a particular date. The other terms and conditions of employment are outlined in a separate document, which is a contract that you may be referring to as a bond. For example, in the case of workers, the three-year wage agreement is renegotiated and renewed, similar to how this contract is also renewed. The appointment letter remains valid until the employee separates from the company in any manner.

Training Bonds and Obligations

When an employee is offered training in a foreign country or any similar opportunity, the employer may request a bond stipulating that after the training, the employee will serve for at least 2-3-5 years. This period is one-time only and is not subject to renewal. This bond, violation of which is penalized, ensures compliance with the agreed terms.

Regards

From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)

Hi, our permanent staff had worked for more than 8 years. We would like to reissue the appointment letter but combine with the previous AO. Do you have the format/template.
From Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)

KK!HR
1593

Understanding the Need for Reissuing Appointment Orders

The need to reissue the appointment order is not clear from the post. Once it is stated that they are permanent employees, it implies regular employment, not a fixed tenure appointment. Additionally, Malaysian labor laws should be consulted. Here in India, this could be termed as 'Unfair Labor Practice' to keep employees with 8 years of service without a regular appointment, which has its legal consequences. Please provide all the facts to offer a meaningful opinion.

From India, Mumbai
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.







Contact Us Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service

All rights reserved @ 2025 CiteHR ®

All Copyright And Trademarks in Posts Held By Respective Owners.