One of the employees has filed a case in the consumer court against the Medical Insurance company and has also named the company's MD and HR department as parties. He is still employed, and the company's legal department states that the default was made by the insurance agency and the company has fulfilled all its obligations. Now, the query is, can we suspend the employee in question pending the decision of the consumer court.
Regards,
D K Sharma
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
Regards,
D K Sharma
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
What is the misconduct committed by this employee? I am surprised to see this attitude of suspension even when a person resorts to legal methods. He has taken the matter to the Consumer forum, and the forum will decide whether his claim is correct or whether the Insurance Company has fulfilled its obligation. Where is the question of taking any action against him?
The Company takes a policy and gets a declaration from the employee. Then he becomes a customer, and if he has any dispute on bills settled, he can take it up with the Consumer forum alone, and he has, in fact, done the right thing.
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(3)
Amend(0)
379The Company takes a policy and gets a declaration from the employee. Then he becomes a customer, and if he has any dispute on bills settled, he can take it up with the Consumer forum alone, and he has, in fact, done the right thing.
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(3)Amend(0)
You could have given a little more information. What is the case about? What kind of insurance claim is this? Why has the employee filed a case against the medical insurance company? Who pays the annual premium, the company, or the employee in his personal capacity? Are the MD and the HR department co-petitioners, or are they respondents? Before filing a suit, did he inform the company authorities? What efforts did the company take to avoid litigation?
The legal department of your company says, "the company has fulfilled all its obligations." What obligations has the company fulfilled?
Comments on the Quality of the Post
Are you the Head HR of the company? Whether you are the Head or not, why did you not check the quality of your post? How can you raise a post in a public forum with inadequate information? Why did you not deem it fit to check the grammar or spelling of the post before raising it? Is this your regular business writing style? If you do not give value to the quality of your writing, then do you think that others will give value to you in person or HR in general?
Thanks,
Dinesh V Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(3)
Amend(0)
The legal department of your company says, "the company has fulfilled all its obligations." What obligations has the company fulfilled?
Comments on the Quality of the Post
Are you the Head HR of the company? Whether you are the Head or not, why did you not check the quality of your post? How can you raise a post in a public forum with inadequate information? Why did you not deem it fit to check the grammar or spelling of the post before raising it? Is this your regular business writing style? If you do not give value to the quality of your writing, then do you think that others will give value to you in person or HR in general?
Thanks,
Dinesh V Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(3)Amend(0)
He has filed case against the Ins. Co. The MD & HR are just respondents. Nothing wrong committed by the employee. pon
From India, Lucknow
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Lucknow
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Pon1965,
It appears that you have a little confusion with the term "respondent." When a person files a suit, he/she becomes a "petitioner." The party against whom the suit is filed is the "respondent." The party could be an individual, a company, or even the state/central government.
Now, if the suit is filed against an insurance company, then how come MD and HR are coming into the picture? The real problem is that the originator of the post, DK Sharma, has not written his post clearly, hence the confusion.
Ok...
Dinesh V Divekar
He has filed a case against the Insurance Company. The MD & HR are just respondents. Nothing wrong has been committed by the employee.
Regards,
Pon
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
It appears that you have a little confusion with the term "respondent." When a person files a suit, he/she becomes a "petitioner." The party against whom the suit is filed is the "respondent." The party could be an individual, a company, or even the state/central government.
Now, if the suit is filed against an insurance company, then how come MD and HR are coming into the picture? The real problem is that the originator of the post, DK Sharma, has not written his post clearly, hence the confusion.
Ok...
Dinesh V Divekar
He has filed a case against the Insurance Company. The MD & HR are just respondents. Nothing wrong has been committed by the employee.
Regards,
Pon
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
I do not find anything wrong with the worker who has approached the District Consumer Redressal Forum. Obviously, he must have some grievance against the Insurance Company. If it pertains to your liability for which you have subscribed to the Insurance, then your company is obviously made a formal party to the dispute, which is a normal and prevalent practice.
Just because he made you a party in a case, you cannot put him under suspension. This is neither legal nor proper, nor justifiable from any corner of the law. In case you do any such thing, then you will have to take him back to work as no court will support your action.
I just wonder how your legal department is raising such issues which are per se illegal.
I am in agreement with the views of Mr. T. Sivasankaran, Mr. Pon1965, and Mr. Diveker.
From India, Kolhapur
Acknowledge(2)
Amend(0)
Just because he made you a party in a case, you cannot put him under suspension. This is neither legal nor proper, nor justifiable from any corner of the law. In case you do any such thing, then you will have to take him back to work as no court will support your action.
I just wonder how your legal department is raising such issues which are per se illegal.
I am in agreement with the views of Mr. T. Sivasankaran, Mr. Pon1965, and Mr. Diveker.
From India, Kolhapur
Acknowledge(2)Amend(0)
The person who files a suit is called the petitioner. The insurance company, MD, and HR are respondents. This is because insurance claims are typically processed through the employer to the insurance company. I believe the mediclaim policy is arranged by the employer, possibly at the cost of the employee. Therefore, the petitioner has implicated the MD and HR as respondents.
Kind regards,
Pon
From India, Lucknow
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Kind regards,
Pon
From India, Lucknow
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Irrespective of the tone and tenor of Dinesh V Divekar's remarks about your posting, I think it's in your interest to give as many details as possible. This not only resolves or clarifies your issue faster but also helps to save and better utilize others' time. If you noticed, all the members who responded ended up presuming the details before making suggestions. Do you think this was what you wanted? I think not—since you wouldn't have reached the level you are at now (Head HR) if this had been your standard approach while interacting with people, including employees.
I suggest giving more details so that the members can provide you with more accurate and practical suggestions without spending more time than necessary to understand the issue.
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I suggest giving more details so that the members can provide you with more accurate and practical suggestions without spending more time than necessary to understand the issue.
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Sateesh,
The tone and tenor of my first post were a little critical because of the egregiousness of the post.
Structure and Grammar in Writing
When we write, there are two things to consider: structure and grammar and punctuation. Since this is an informal group, we may not follow the latter to its last detail. However, the importance of the former cannot be diluted. Failure in either would have made this post preposterous. Unfortunately, the poster has failed on both counts, thereby making the post egregious.
If the query had been written by someone in a junior cadre position like an HR Assistant or HR Executive, it would have been understandable, but certainly not by someone of the stature of the Head HR.
The Importance of Precision in Communication
I understand that you are a senior person. Therefore, you must have experienced the good old days of the typewriter. Secretaries or typists used to type drafts multiple times before finalizing them. The signatory of the letter considered it a matter of prestige to sign the letters. In today's virtual world, that prestige has vanished into thin air. However, today there are newer facilities that were not available in the past era. All that is required is to write the post in MS Word. Most of the spell check and grammar check is done by MS Word. Is it that difficult to do? Those who find it difficult deserve criticism, not coddling.
Thanks and regards,
Dinesh V Divekar
Hello D K Sharma, regardless of the tone and tenor of Dinesh V Divekar's remarks about your posting, I believe it's in your interest to provide as many details as possible. This not only resolves and clarifies your issue or problem faster but also helps save and better utilize others' time. If you noticed, all the members who responded ended up presuming the details before offering suggestions. Do you think this was what you wanted?
I think not, as you wouldn't have reached the level you are at now (Head HR) if this had been your standard approach while interacting with people, including employees. I suggest providing more details so that the members can offer more accurate and practical suggestions without spending more time than necessary to understand the issue.
Regards,
TS
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The tone and tenor of my first post were a little critical because of the egregiousness of the post.
Structure and Grammar in Writing
When we write, there are two things to consider: structure and grammar and punctuation. Since this is an informal group, we may not follow the latter to its last detail. However, the importance of the former cannot be diluted. Failure in either would have made this post preposterous. Unfortunately, the poster has failed on both counts, thereby making the post egregious.
If the query had been written by someone in a junior cadre position like an HR Assistant or HR Executive, it would have been understandable, but certainly not by someone of the stature of the Head HR.
The Importance of Precision in Communication
I understand that you are a senior person. Therefore, you must have experienced the good old days of the typewriter. Secretaries or typists used to type drafts multiple times before finalizing them. The signatory of the letter considered it a matter of prestige to sign the letters. In today's virtual world, that prestige has vanished into thin air. However, today there are newer facilities that were not available in the past era. All that is required is to write the post in MS Word. Most of the spell check and grammar check is done by MS Word. Is it that difficult to do? Those who find it difficult deserve criticism, not coddling.
Thanks and regards,
Dinesh V Divekar
Hello D K Sharma, regardless of the tone and tenor of Dinesh V Divekar's remarks about your posting, I believe it's in your interest to provide as many details as possible. This not only resolves and clarifies your issue or problem faster but also helps save and better utilize others' time. If you noticed, all the members who responded ended up presuming the details before offering suggestions. Do you think this was what you wanted?
I think not, as you wouldn't have reached the level you are at now (Head HR) if this had been your standard approach while interacting with people, including employees. I suggest providing more details so that the members can offer more accurate and practical suggestions without spending more time than necessary to understand the issue.
Regards,
TS
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
What is the case about? What kind of insurance claim is this? Why has the employee filed a case against the medical insurance company? Who pays the annual premium, the company, or the employee in his personal capacity? Are the MD and HR department co-petitioners, or are they respondents? Before filing a suit, did he inform the company authorities? What efforts did the company take to avoid litigation?
Attribution: https://www.citehr.com/474394-suspen...#ixzz2j4b4g3kI
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Attribution: https://www.citehr.com/474394-suspen...#ixzz2j4b4g3kI
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I was the first person to respond to this post, and I did not find the post lacking in information for a discussion in this forum. I do not want to get into controversies. But to answer some of the observations made by Mr. Diwekar, I am reproducing his queries with my observations:
What is the case about? What kind of insurance claim is this?
The poster has specifically mentioned that the case is against a Medical Insurance company. For a discussion in a forum like this, this information is more than sufficient.
Why has the employee filed a case against the medical insurance company?
The employee must have filed a case against the company because there must have been a difference between his claim and the settled amount. This is more than sufficient to respond in this forum. If he had come to me to engage me as an Advocate, then I would have asked questions like what is the difference, was he in employment for long, etc. Otherwise, for a general discussion, this was enough.
Who pays the annual premium, the company, or the employee in his personal capacity?
It is immaterial as to who pays the premium. But it is material whether the premium is paid through the company. The issue comes up here as the papers were forwarded through the company. Again, for a normal discussion in a forum like this and for the query he has raised, this information is sufficient.
Is MD and HR department are co-petitioners or are they respondents?
The original poster has clearly mentioned that the employee has filed a case against the Insurance Company and included the HR Dept and the Managing Director. If MD and the HR Department are co-petitioners, he could not have done without their signatures. We can easily deduce some observations without assuming.
Before filing a suit, did he inform the company authorities? What efforts did the company take to avoid litigation?
The question was not about litigation details in the Consumer Forum. The question is whether the Management can take action against an employee who resorts to legal means for resolving any dispute. A workman may approach the Labour Court for dispute resolution. Can the Management take action against him or her?
I do not find anything wrong in terms of content and details in the query raised by the original poster. I have no observations to make on grammar and spelling.
I am not sure how Mr. Diwekar has concluded that the Poster was Head of the Department?
And even assuming that the person posted is Head of Dept or just an assistant, the quality of posting should not be diluted. And I do not find anything wrong in this posting, and I could respond to the query without any difficulty.
Thanks
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
What is the case about? What kind of insurance claim is this?
The poster has specifically mentioned that the case is against a Medical Insurance company. For a discussion in a forum like this, this information is more than sufficient.
Why has the employee filed a case against the medical insurance company?
The employee must have filed a case against the company because there must have been a difference between his claim and the settled amount. This is more than sufficient to respond in this forum. If he had come to me to engage me as an Advocate, then I would have asked questions like what is the difference, was he in employment for long, etc. Otherwise, for a general discussion, this was enough.
Who pays the annual premium, the company, or the employee in his personal capacity?
It is immaterial as to who pays the premium. But it is material whether the premium is paid through the company. The issue comes up here as the papers were forwarded through the company. Again, for a normal discussion in a forum like this and for the query he has raised, this information is sufficient.
Is MD and HR department are co-petitioners or are they respondents?
The original poster has clearly mentioned that the employee has filed a case against the Insurance Company and included the HR Dept and the Managing Director. If MD and the HR Department are co-petitioners, he could not have done without their signatures. We can easily deduce some observations without assuming.
Before filing a suit, did he inform the company authorities? What efforts did the company take to avoid litigation?
The question was not about litigation details in the Consumer Forum. The question is whether the Management can take action against an employee who resorts to legal means for resolving any dispute. A workman may approach the Labour Court for dispute resolution. Can the Management take action against him or her?
I do not find anything wrong in terms of content and details in the query raised by the original poster. I have no observations to make on grammar and spelling.
I am not sure how Mr. Diwekar has concluded that the Poster was Head of the Department?
And even assuming that the person posted is Head of Dept or just an assistant, the quality of posting should not be diluted. And I do not find anything wrong in this posting, and I could respond to the query without any difficulty.
Thanks
From India, Chennai
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.
Kerala HC- employee entitled to higher amt if recd from insurance co 18092017.pdf