Hello Everyone, I am an HR Executive in a private limited IT firm. I joined this company 3 months ago; in fact, I joined the Human Resources field just 3 months ago, so I am still in the learning phase about the core of this field. I would like to discuss one of my office's scenarios to clarify my doubt.
Employee Resignation and HR Response
So, it happened that one of our employees resigned last week. She stopped coming to the company all of a sudden and sent a resignation from home to the HR Manager, saying that she has some medical issues (she recently had LASIK eye surgery and was experiencing some complications). Our HR Manager replied to her resignation, stating that we are not accepting her resignation and that she must report back to the office within 24 hours and serve the notice period of 2 months. The employee replied, saying she wouldn’t be able to serve the notice period, to which the HR Manager sent her a termination letter stating that we are rejecting her resignation and, as she failed to serve the notice period, we are terminating her employment. Now, that employee cannot claim her relieving letter or experience letter from this company, even after spending 2 years here.
Being a human, I feel bad for that employee, and I feel that this company is doing wrong with her career. But being an HR, I am in a dilemma about whether this is the right thing to do with the employee in such a scenario. Please help me understand this whole case.
Thanks!
From India, undefined
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
Employee Resignation and HR Response
So, it happened that one of our employees resigned last week. She stopped coming to the company all of a sudden and sent a resignation from home to the HR Manager, saying that she has some medical issues (she recently had LASIK eye surgery and was experiencing some complications). Our HR Manager replied to her resignation, stating that we are not accepting her resignation and that she must report back to the office within 24 hours and serve the notice period of 2 months. The employee replied, saying she wouldn’t be able to serve the notice period, to which the HR Manager sent her a termination letter stating that we are rejecting her resignation and, as she failed to serve the notice period, we are terminating her employment. Now, that employee cannot claim her relieving letter or experience letter from this company, even after spending 2 years here.
Being a human, I feel bad for that employee, and I feel that this company is doing wrong with her career. But being an HR, I am in a dilemma about whether this is the right thing to do with the employee in such a scenario. Please help me understand this whole case.
Thanks!
From India, undefined
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I appreciate that you wanted to empathize with the resigning employee. HR cannot be impersonal, and that's exactly what your HR Manager is doing. Nevertheless, it is the battle of the resigning employee. Let her fight it out. At best, suggest to her to approach this forum to seek advice from seniors on how to handle her case. However, do this surreptitiously!
It is better if you keep yourself out of this! Not just injustice, but we find that atrocities also go on against a section of society. However, to what extent to involve oneself is a matter of personal judgment.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(12)
Amend(0)
8071It is better if you keep yourself out of this! Not just injustice, but we find that atrocities also go on against a section of society. However, to what extent to involve oneself is a matter of personal judgment.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(12)+7 more
Amend(0)
The termination of the lady was sad but not wrong. If anybody working for the company has some expectations from it, then in the same way, the company also has expectations from the employee, which he/she should fulfill. When she signed the appointment letter, there must have been a clause for the termination of the contract, and the same is supposed to be followed. If she cannot come to work due to sickness, then she may apply for some days of leave or leave without pay with proper justification. Also, if she is so sick that she can't serve the notice period as well, then she should provide proper medication, treatment, or a medical certificate from a medical practitioner. Furthermore, if yes, then are they verified through the company doctor? If yes, only then can the company consider humanitarian grounds. However, just sending a resignation from home cannot be considered a correct process. Additionally, the company has to follow some legal procedures, for which they need to make some strict decisions that may not be favorable or popular but are right in their place.
Acknowledge(7)
Amend(0)
Acknowledge(7)+2 more
Amend(0)
Termination of an Absent Employee: A Questionable Approach
Nothing is inherently wrong with terminating an absent employee; however, the method of termination is not only legally questionable but also problematic from an HR management standpoint.
The Need for Empathy and Engagement
What was the need to show overzealousness in terminating the female employee? If she had a medical problem, the HR Manager could have visited her either at the hospital or at her home. This visit would have helped in obtaining the necessary information as well as establishing an emotional connection with the employee. "Employee engagement"—is it not a buzzword among HR professionals? How is engagement developed? Through rushed terminations? What message will be sent to the other employees through this type of termination?
Alternative Solutions to Termination
HR could have discussed with management to explore the option of keeping the absent employee on the roster but without pay. This approach could have allowed the unwell employee to return once medically fit. Why the need to push away an employee who has worked for two years in the company? After working for two years, an employee becomes well accustomed to the company's culture. Is it that simple to find a replacement who is culturally suitable? Furthermore, each employee takes knowledge with them when they leave the company. The resignation of each employee depletes the company's knowledge assets or knowledge wealth.
Legal Obligations in Termination
Lastly, no employee can be terminated without conducting a domestic inquiry. The overly confident HR Manager failed to fulfill this legal obligation as well.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(9)
Amend(0)
Nothing is inherently wrong with terminating an absent employee; however, the method of termination is not only legally questionable but also problematic from an HR management standpoint.
The Need for Empathy and Engagement
What was the need to show overzealousness in terminating the female employee? If she had a medical problem, the HR Manager could have visited her either at the hospital or at her home. This visit would have helped in obtaining the necessary information as well as establishing an emotional connection with the employee. "Employee engagement"—is it not a buzzword among HR professionals? How is engagement developed? Through rushed terminations? What message will be sent to the other employees through this type of termination?
Alternative Solutions to Termination
HR could have discussed with management to explore the option of keeping the absent employee on the roster but without pay. This approach could have allowed the unwell employee to return once medically fit. Why the need to push away an employee who has worked for two years in the company? After working for two years, an employee becomes well accustomed to the company's culture. Is it that simple to find a replacement who is culturally suitable? Furthermore, each employee takes knowledge with them when they leave the company. The resignation of each employee depletes the company's knowledge assets or knowledge wealth.
Legal Obligations in Termination
Lastly, no employee can be terminated without conducting a domestic inquiry. The overly confident HR Manager failed to fulfill this legal obligation as well.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(9)+4 more
Amend(0)
Your feelings for the employee are appreciated, but the employee has to fulfill her part of the obligation. When there is a notice period of two months, either serve the notice period or pay for the notice period. Organizations cannot work with a revolving door policy, with people joining and leaving at will; there has to be some stability in operations. This issue is rather acute in the IT field, and the damage to the organization is incalculable. So if the employee is unable to serve the notice period, then she has to pay for the notice period. You can help by getting the employee to pay for the notice period, and the employee walks off with her relieving order & experience certificate. You can informally sound out the HR Manager; if the proposal is OK, then you can convey the same to her.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(3)Amend(0)
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(3)Amend(0)
Employee Resignation and HR Protocols
With all due respect, the query raised by the person specifically indicates that the employee is not willing or showing any interest to continue, as she had sent her resignation letter directly to the HR department. In the case of absconding, a domestic inquiry is surely considered a legal norm, but is it really required for an employee who is resigning immediately on her own willingness? If she truly wanted to continue, she should have applied for leave or asked for a concession from the management, which she did not do.
Secondly, as part of employee engagement or development, the HR manager is supposed to follow the above-suggested actions, but is it possible if the employee is really looking for a concession or help from the management? Sending a resignation letter in a rude manner does not solve the problem, nor does it create the necessary communication.
Thus, in my view, it is a failure on the employee's side, as she is surely aware of her notice period. She should have met personally or called the management to inform them about her situation and put up a request for help or assistance, which she did not do, choosing instead to submit a resignation. It is not easy for the management to work on a door-to-door policy and surely not possible in cases where employees submit immediate resignations.
These are solely my views, which may or may not be agreed upon by many people in the group/site.
Acknowledge(4)
Amend(0)
With all due respect, the query raised by the person specifically indicates that the employee is not willing or showing any interest to continue, as she had sent her resignation letter directly to the HR department. In the case of absconding, a domestic inquiry is surely considered a legal norm, but is it really required for an employee who is resigning immediately on her own willingness? If she truly wanted to continue, she should have applied for leave or asked for a concession from the management, which she did not do.
Secondly, as part of employee engagement or development, the HR manager is supposed to follow the above-suggested actions, but is it possible if the employee is really looking for a concession or help from the management? Sending a resignation letter in a rude manner does not solve the problem, nor does it create the necessary communication.
Thus, in my view, it is a failure on the employee's side, as she is surely aware of her notice period. She should have met personally or called the management to inform them about her situation and put up a request for help or assistance, which she did not do, choosing instead to submit a resignation. It is not easy for the management to work on a door-to-door policy and surely not possible in cases where employees submit immediate resignations.
These are solely my views, which may or may not be agreed upon by many people in the group/site.
Acknowledge(4)Amend(0)
Dear Friend,
Would you agree that the terminated employee was under an agreement with the employer to serve notice? If yes, why did she not serve the notice to which she is bound? The employee could have saved herself by paying the amount in lieu of notice. If the employee still feels that injustice has happened to her, she can knock on the door of the law, should something emerge out of it.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Would you agree that the terminated employee was under an agreement with the employer to serve notice? If yes, why did she not serve the notice to which she is bound? The employee could have saved herself by paying the amount in lieu of notice. If the employee still feels that injustice has happened to her, she can knock on the door of the law, should something emerge out of it.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
HR's Approach to Employee Resignation
Yes, I agree that there was immaturity on the part of the employee. However, in this case, immature behavior was met with immaturity from HR as well. HR followed a rigid line, stating, "Either follow what I say or leave," a dictum to which HR adhered. This approach might have been effective during the days of Personnel Management, but this authoritarian style is incongruent with HR Management in 2017.
It is possible that the employee is also being deceitful. The medical unfitness reason could be fabricated. Nevertheless, HR neither attempted to verify the truth nor utilized persuasive skills to retain the employee. Is employee retention not crucial for non-branded companies?
Setting aside the employee's medical fitness or the inability to serve the notice period, there are common instances where employees resign by adhering to the notice period. In many companies, HR persuades resigning employees to stay even in such cases. Why do they do this? Why don't they just fulfill their duties perfunctorily and begin the exit process?
HR often uses terms like "employee engagement" but in practice, acts contrary to these ideals. This post is a prime example of this contradiction.
While adherence to rules, regulations, and discipline is vital for any organization, I merely questioned the crude implementation. I did not observe any "humane" aspect of HR. That is my perspective.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(4)Amend(0)
Yes, I agree that there was immaturity on the part of the employee. However, in this case, immature behavior was met with immaturity from HR as well. HR followed a rigid line, stating, "Either follow what I say or leave," a dictum to which HR adhered. This approach might have been effective during the days of Personnel Management, but this authoritarian style is incongruent with HR Management in 2017.
It is possible that the employee is also being deceitful. The medical unfitness reason could be fabricated. Nevertheless, HR neither attempted to verify the truth nor utilized persuasive skills to retain the employee. Is employee retention not crucial for non-branded companies?
Setting aside the employee's medical fitness or the inability to serve the notice period, there are common instances where employees resign by adhering to the notice period. In many companies, HR persuades resigning employees to stay even in such cases. Why do they do this? Why don't they just fulfill their duties perfunctorily and begin the exit process?
HR often uses terms like "employee engagement" but in practice, acts contrary to these ideals. This post is a prime example of this contradiction.
While adherence to rules, regulations, and discipline is vital for any organization, I merely questioned the crude implementation. I did not observe any "humane" aspect of HR. That is my perspective.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(4)Amend(0)
Ideally, in this kind of scenario, HR should first talk to her manager in case he knows something. Normally, before emailing a resignation, the employee would typically speak to the manager and then send an email.
This scenario is a little suspicious. Perhaps she has encountered negative behavior from the manager regarding her situation, prompting her to send the email directly. Alternatively, she may have another job offer in hand, enabling her to join the new position immediately.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(3)Amend(0)
This scenario is a little suspicious. Perhaps she has encountered negative behavior from the manager regarding her situation, prompting her to send the email directly. Alternatively, she may have another job offer in hand, enabling her to join the new position immediately.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(3)Amend(0)
Resignation can't be turned into termination. If this has happened, it is saddening. As far as the notice period is concerned, if the company has some issues, they can send a recovery note to the concerned employee. If this is turned into termination, then it becomes a matter of judiciary.
Thanks & regards,
Sumit Kumar Saxena
From India, Ghaziabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thanks & regards,
Sumit Kumar Saxena
From India, Ghaziabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The Role of HR and Its Misunderstandings
Very relevant and recurring topics for discussion. Having seen the replies fully, I can understand the forum is absolutely divided in their opinion.
I believe HR is a function representing Human Resources to the Management, but often it is misunderstood and considered the other way around (representing Management). Compassion and empathy should be the way someone can win hearts, not by policing, authority, and commanding. In this case, the alter-ego of an HR Manager is clearly visible. It is very common for an employee to behave immaturely, but I am surprised to learn the HR Manager too was at his immature best. He neither showed compassion nor followed the standard process.
The Process of Handling Resignations
Firstly, either he can approve or disapprove the employee's resignation in the first instance itself. If he disapproves, then there is a chance he can terminate the employee. However, to go to that level, firstly, a domestic inquiry along with a proper hearing (with a facility for the employee to call for a second inquiry) should happen. To complete the entire process, 45 days will pass for the HR to terminate the employee. Finally, the HR Manager wins the long-haul battle just to satisfy his ego by wasting so many office resources (time, material, and money).
Resolving Issues Efficiently
An issue that can be closed with just a couple of phone calls or 1 to 2 direct discussions has transformed to this level. Whom to blame here?
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Very relevant and recurring topics for discussion. Having seen the replies fully, I can understand the forum is absolutely divided in their opinion.
I believe HR is a function representing Human Resources to the Management, but often it is misunderstood and considered the other way around (representing Management). Compassion and empathy should be the way someone can win hearts, not by policing, authority, and commanding. In this case, the alter-ego of an HR Manager is clearly visible. It is very common for an employee to behave immaturely, but I am surprised to learn the HR Manager too was at his immature best. He neither showed compassion nor followed the standard process.
The Process of Handling Resignations
Firstly, either he can approve or disapprove the employee's resignation in the first instance itself. If he disapproves, then there is a chance he can terminate the employee. However, to go to that level, firstly, a domestic inquiry along with a proper hearing (with a facility for the employee to call for a second inquiry) should happen. To complete the entire process, 45 days will pass for the HR to terminate the employee. Finally, the HR Manager wins the long-haul battle just to satisfy his ego by wasting so many office resources (time, material, and money).
Resolving Issues Efficiently
An issue that can be closed with just a couple of phone calls or 1 to 2 direct discussions has transformed to this level. Whom to blame here?
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Principle of Natural Justice in Employee Resignation Cases
I have reviewed all the responses and the query at hand, and I see many diverse views. Let's focus on the apex law for this situation, i.e., the Principle of Natural Justice. In the query, the medical issue with the employee is related to her eye, a very sensitive and essential organ. It appears that following surgery, she experienced some complications, leading her to resign.
Now, regarding the various perspectives, I can assume that the employee's job responsibilities likely involve the use of her eye. If HR had doubts about the authenticity of her reason for resignation, they should have requested her medical documents and verified them with a doctor to clarify her medical condition. This approach is the best legal method and aligns with the Principle of Natural Justice. If her condition is genuinely severe and she is forced to serve the notice period, and her vision deteriorates during that time, who would be responsible? It's important to empathize with her situation.
I understand that people sometimes exaggerate their conditions, but HR can always seek a medical opinion based on medical records to determine the true situation.
One must be prudent and rational, considering both perspectives. HR's role is not to blindly follow management orders or prioritize the company over the employee's health but to balance the interests of management and employees. We know that management sometimes asks HR to do things that are ethically wrong, but one should strive to do what is right. Kudos to the person who posted this query for wanting to understand what is right and what is not.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(2)Amend(0)
I have reviewed all the responses and the query at hand, and I see many diverse views. Let's focus on the apex law for this situation, i.e., the Principle of Natural Justice. In the query, the medical issue with the employee is related to her eye, a very sensitive and essential organ. It appears that following surgery, she experienced some complications, leading her to resign.
Now, regarding the various perspectives, I can assume that the employee's job responsibilities likely involve the use of her eye. If HR had doubts about the authenticity of her reason for resignation, they should have requested her medical documents and verified them with a doctor to clarify her medical condition. This approach is the best legal method and aligns with the Principle of Natural Justice. If her condition is genuinely severe and she is forced to serve the notice period, and her vision deteriorates during that time, who would be responsible? It's important to empathize with her situation.
I understand that people sometimes exaggerate their conditions, but HR can always seek a medical opinion based on medical records to determine the true situation.
One must be prudent and rational, considering both perspectives. HR's role is not to blindly follow management orders or prioritize the company over the employee's health but to balance the interests of management and employees. We know that management sometimes asks HR to do things that are ethically wrong, but one should strive to do what is right. Kudos to the person who posted this query for wanting to understand what is right and what is not.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(2)Amend(0)
For Madam Swati, I would suggest that she write a carefully worded letter to the management about her professional performance, which she claims is good and has been appreciated in writing. She needs to bring out that she objected to the statement that her professional performance was not good in the discussion with the HR Manager. One must always remember that what is put in writing has precedence over verbal assurances.
Performance Review and Documentation
Who conducted the performance review, and what was documented about her performance in the professional work as HR? Madam requires to move on to another job but insists upon 2 months' compensation and a favorable relief letter. The actions of the company appear to be incorrect and hurriedly done in the absence of the VP, who is unwell.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Performance Review and Documentation
Who conducted the performance review, and what was documented about her performance in the professional work as HR? Madam requires to move on to another job but insists upon 2 months' compensation and a favorable relief letter. The actions of the company appear to be incorrect and hurriedly done in the absence of the VP, who is unwell.
From India, Pune
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.
How to Handle an Employee Resignation.doc
Employee Termination during covid 19.pdf