can any one tell me what is the procedure of warning , should we issue them warning letters?? or after how many warning letters we can terminate employee
From Pakistan
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
From Pakistan
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Any termination requires handling with sensitivity and strict adherence to legal procedures. Please consult the clauses and duration as mentioned in the appointment letter. The termination, if identified, requires following a process of offering a complete opportunity to perform. Avoid terminating on the spot unless it involves a committed crime or a serious non-adherence to corporate guidelines.
In case you need to terminate based on performance issues, please establish the Performance Improvement Process where every support to perform and train gets documented. At the beginning of the PIP, please inform the employee in a meeting and issue a letter discussing the reasons for initiating the same. Once you arrive at a conclusion, request the employee to sign and return a copy so that it remains as proof of mutual agreement. If the employee fails to improve performance, by the standards agreed upon in PIP, inform through a letter issued within the next 14 days. If there is no further improvement, on the 21st day, issue a letter of termination.
Other than this, if you need to terminate an employee due to continuous absence from work, please follow the same three-week information process. Here you need to send the first letter to establish the consequences if they do not resume working. On the 14th day, issue a letter declaring it will lead to termination if no action is taken. On the 21st day, the termination letter is issued.
The process of informing the employee throughout the relieving period may remain industry and organization-specific. However, please abide by the most judicial and fair method. The talent will remain your ambassador to the talent market. You will need to cut your losses without making yourself bleed in the long run.
Regards
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
1872In case you need to terminate based on performance issues, please establish the Performance Improvement Process where every support to perform and train gets documented. At the beginning of the PIP, please inform the employee in a meeting and issue a letter discussing the reasons for initiating the same. Once you arrive at a conclusion, request the employee to sign and return a copy so that it remains as proof of mutual agreement. If the employee fails to improve performance, by the standards agreed upon in PIP, inform through a letter issued within the next 14 days. If there is no further improvement, on the 21st day, issue a letter of termination.
Other than this, if you need to terminate an employee due to continuous absence from work, please follow the same three-week information process. Here you need to send the first letter to establish the consequences if they do not resume working. On the 14th day, issue a letter declaring it will lead to termination if no action is taken. On the 21st day, the termination letter is issued.
The process of informing the employee throughout the relieving period may remain industry and organization-specific. However, please abide by the most judicial and fair method. The talent will remain your ambassador to the talent market. You will need to cut your losses without making yourself bleed in the long run.
Regards
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Labour courts have ruled numerous times against termination without conducting a domestic enquiry. Merely issuing a letter of termination after 21 days of absence is not sufficient and will not withstand legal scrutiny. The first thing courts examine is whether an enquiry was conducted and if it was fair, unbiased, and impartial. They also consider whether it was vitiated by any circumstances. If the principles of natural justice were followed, courts typically do not intervene.
A classic example is the case of the Government of India vs. Chief of Army Staff. The Government had to withdraw its order on December 30, 2011, as it did not withstand legal scrutiny. The Supreme Court criticized the central government for not following the correct procedure. Although the verdict later favored the Government, that is another story. Termination without an enquiry is justified only in cases of criminal or disruptive acts or actions of moral turpitude.
Regards,
DVD
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
A classic example is the case of the Government of India vs. Chief of Army Staff. The Government had to withdraw its order on December 30, 2011, as it did not withstand legal scrutiny. The Supreme Court criticized the central government for not following the correct procedure. Although the verdict later favored the Government, that is another story. Termination without an enquiry is justified only in cases of criminal or disruptive acts or actions of moral turpitude.
Regards,
DVD
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.
Performance Improvement Plan.doc