Hi Neeraj, Thanks for appreciation and understanding my point of view on the point in issue. reagrds,Yours truly, Satish Kumar Dhanwal, Head (HR), NTPC Foundation, Noida
From India, Delhi
27From India, Delhi
Dear All,
I am in all agreement with Mr.Satish Kumar Dhanwal because he is right!!!
Firstly, what is going on in the mind of the CEO, assuming that he is sound? What's the purpose of issuing the letter of intent....what meaning is it to serve? All relationships as per a valid contract have reciprocating responsibilities towards one another (parties to the contract). This responsibility can in other word referred to as the consideration that is an important element of any contract which is good in the eyes of law and without which no contractual relationship is valid. Does the CEO in such a case look for an invalid and illegal relationship (grrrrrrr....???) or giving him some credit, may be he means that instead of making an offer that would be (situationally or circumstantially) disadvantageous to the party making an offer, the CEO wants to make what is otherwise known as "an invitation to offer". Say for example, an invitation to sell is different from the offer to sell (Refer "Law of Contracts") .If so, then an appropriately drafted and tilted document needs to be done and according to me it should not be a letter of intent. May be the CEO was using this term not technically but in the normal spoken English parlance!!! Any more comments?? Views???
M.A.Ganju
From United Arab Emirates, Sharjah
I am in all agreement with Mr.Satish Kumar Dhanwal because he is right!!!
Firstly, what is going on in the mind of the CEO, assuming that he is sound? What's the purpose of issuing the letter of intent....what meaning is it to serve? All relationships as per a valid contract have reciprocating responsibilities towards one another (parties to the contract). This responsibility can in other word referred to as the consideration that is an important element of any contract which is good in the eyes of law and without which no contractual relationship is valid. Does the CEO in such a case look for an invalid and illegal relationship (grrrrrrr....???) or giving him some credit, may be he means that instead of making an offer that would be (situationally or circumstantially) disadvantageous to the party making an offer, the CEO wants to make what is otherwise known as "an invitation to offer". Say for example, an invitation to sell is different from the offer to sell (Refer "Law of Contracts") .If so, then an appropriately drafted and tilted document needs to be done and according to me it should not be a letter of intent. May be the CEO was using this term not technically but in the normal spoken English parlance!!! Any more comments?? Views???
M.A.Ganju
From United Arab Emirates, Sharjah
Dear Mr.Sathish & other friends,
Thanks for your valued opinion. Ethically issuing 'Letter of Intent' is wrong, but I waanted a legal perspective, whether issuing "Offer Letter" will legally bind organisations to recruit him. If os, then is it safe to issue 'Letter of Intent'. What does legality & law of the land says.
Bibek Banerjee
From India, Calcutta
Thanks for your valued opinion. Ethically issuing 'Letter of Intent' is wrong, but I waanted a legal perspective, whether issuing "Offer Letter" will legally bind organisations to recruit him. If os, then is it safe to issue 'Letter of Intent'. What does legality & law of the land says.
Bibek Banerjee
From India, Calcutta
Hi banerji,
There are so many slips between the cups and lips. When an offer has been made it does not automatically legall bind both the parties till is accepted by the other party. You seem to have an unsderstanding that once an offer has been issued it becomes binding on the employer.The approach from both the parties should be humane and legal i.e. the employer and the candidate whom offer has been made. I know young educated & qualified lads misusing the offer of appointemnet for getting better offer from another employer or from the employer with whom they are presently working. These are pressure tactics which better works in politics and international relations. One will lose his credibilty in the job market once he is exposed with his pressure tactics and may be nobody who now knows the candidate will offer him job. Otherwise also fron his CV it can be gauged. I hope i have been able to satisfy your urge for clarification on this point is issue raised by you. :) :idea:
regards,
Yours,
Satish Kumar
Head (HR),
NTPC Foundation,
Noida
From India, Delhi
There are so many slips between the cups and lips. When an offer has been made it does not automatically legall bind both the parties till is accepted by the other party. You seem to have an unsderstanding that once an offer has been issued it becomes binding on the employer.The approach from both the parties should be humane and legal i.e. the employer and the candidate whom offer has been made. I know young educated & qualified lads misusing the offer of appointemnet for getting better offer from another employer or from the employer with whom they are presently working. These are pressure tactics which better works in politics and international relations. One will lose his credibilty in the job market once he is exposed with his pressure tactics and may be nobody who now knows the candidate will offer him job. Otherwise also fron his CV it can be gauged. I hope i have been able to satisfy your urge for clarification on this point is issue raised by you. :) :idea:
regards,
Yours,
Satish Kumar
Head (HR),
NTPC Foundation,
Noida
From India, Delhi