Female worker threatening HR Executive with false sexual harassment case

Our company is a manufacturing company, and we are currently facing an issue with one of our former female employees. This lady initially worked as an outsourced employee with our company for 3.5 years before transitioning to a full-time role within our company for an additional 2.5 years, totaling 6 years of employment. A few months ago, she resigned and submitted her PF claim form to the HR Department. During the review of her claim, our HR executive noticed discrepancies in her date of birth between her Aadhar card, PAN card, and the records available in the PF system.

A couple of days ago, when she visited the office with her son, our executive requested her to provide the correct date of birth to process the claim. However, instead of providing the accurate details, she began arguing with our executive, stating that it was the company's responsibility to rectify the error. Our executive explained that it was the individual's responsibility to update their information and advised her to visit the PF office for clarification.

Despite this explanation, she continued to argue with our executive, and her son even attempted to physically assault him, an incident captured on the office CCTV cameras. She then threatened our executive, stating she would file a sexual harassment case against him. Later, when our HR executive and other staff members were leaving the office, the woman and her son blocked their path, threatening to harm our executive. Our staff members intervened, questioning her actions and advising her to cooperate in correcting the information.

Upon reviewing the CCTV footage, it was evident that the son had attempted to obtain a stick/rod from the security gate, indicating a potential threat to our executive. Management was promptly informed of this alarming situation, and security measures were heightened to protect our HR executive and prevent the woman and her son from entering the premises in the future.

The conflicting date of birth details provided are as follows:
- Date of Birth on Resume: 25/12/1980 (matches PF records)
- SSC Certificate: 25/12/1976
- Aadhar Card: 10/02/1977
- PAN Card: 14/02/1979
(Remarks: Discrepancies in dates and years have led to the rejection of the PF claim)

Given the circumstances outlined above, we seek your guidance on how to address this situation effectively.

Dear Shakthi.Power@Gmail.Com,

You have approached this forum when the situation has spun out of control. The perception of the woman employee is that it is the HR Executive who is obstructing their PF withdrawal. She perceives that anything related to PF is HR's responsibility. When the HR Executive brought to the forefront the mismatch in the records related to the date of birth, she turned hostile.

Nevertheless, the matter needs to be seen from the psychological bearing of the woman employee. If the woman employee enters into arguments unnecessarily, if her son threatens or intimidates right in the HR Department itself, then members of this forum need to know what her behavior was when she worked for the last six years. How was she allowed to work for such a long time? What was her behavior with colleagues or superiors? Were there complaints against her contrary disposition?

Why was her status of employment converted from an outsourced employee to a permanent employee? Who did it? Were the behavioral aspects considered when such conversion took place?

When did the HR Executive join your company? Did anyone give him feedback about the woman employee's cantankerousness?

Now you have two options. One is to give a competitive response and lodge a police complaint. However, this option would be an invitation to further headaches. The second option is to show accommodation and help her in changing the DOB in PF records. Discuss with the senior authorities and weigh both options. Finally, the choice is yours!

Thanks,

Dinesh Divekar

Sir, thank you for your reply.

We would like to address a few points regarding this woman. She joined our factory in the production department. Initially, she performed satisfactorily. However, when the HR department received complaints about her behavior from the department head, they warned her to improve. Despite the warnings, she began to behave inappropriately towards her colleagues and senior staff. The Production Incharge and HR Department warned her orally and in writing multiple times.

When the HR executive received more complaints about her activities, he attempted to escalate the issue to management due to its impact on other employees. However, a DGM-level individual intervened and advised the HR executive to focus on his own responsibilities and not get involved in the matter, suggesting it would not be in his best interest. Nevertheless, the HR executive brought the matter to management, who, upon investigation, confirmed the validity of his concerns. It became evident that the woman was intentionally engaging in such behavior, yet the DGM did not take any action.

Upon receiving another complaint that her son had physically assaulted a senior employee outside the company premises for urging the woman to complete her work promptly, management decided to terminate her employment. Subsequently, when the affected employee filed a police report, the DGM intervened again. Despite the serious nature of the incident, the woman was transferred from an outsourced position to a direct role within the company, with the DGM persuading management to grant her another opportunity to rectify her behavior, which she failed to do.

What is the interest of the DGM in this matter? When high officials interfere in this manner, lower-level employees get a boost and act more rowdy with other officials. The conduct of the DGM needs to be brought to the notice of the highest authority in the company. Probably the company needs to assist in clearing her PF so that she stops coming to the firm.