I am a Director with a startup IT company overseeing the HR function. We have a 2-year bond policy for all the freshers joining the company. One of our employees in the probation period (less than 6 months), during an increment discussion, raised salary hike concerns. During the course of the discussion, we offered a performance-based hike for which he clearly stated that for the current salary, he will work time-bound, will not put any additional efforts.
He clearly started demanding terms that were not acceptable, and in the heat of the moment during the discussion, we gave him an option to either accept the increment or resign. He chose to resign, with a formal mail stating that the company has given this option. Under this scenario, will it be possible for us to enforce the bond policy? Do we give him a resignation letter? How do we handle the situation?
From Fiji, Suva
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
He clearly started demanding terms that were not acceptable, and in the heat of the moment during the discussion, we gave him an option to either accept the increment or resign. He chose to resign, with a formal mail stating that the company has given this option. Under this scenario, will it be possible for us to enforce the bond policy? Do we give him a resignation letter? How do we handle the situation?
From Fiji, Suva
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Firstly, please understand that bonds are illegal. Bonded labor has been abolished long back in India. Bonds are not enforceable in the given scenario. Then, when are bonds enforceable is the question. Bonds are enforceable only when the organization has invested heavily in training the employee, which warrants a time frame to transfer the skill or complete a project. For example, if your company has sent a person for training abroad, which is not easily available in India, then the employee is duty-bound to stay in the organization and transfer the training to others. The time frame has to be reasonable enough and cannot be arbitrarily decided as two years. The compensation has to be equivalent to the cost incurred for such training plus a reasonable penalty and not an arbitrary amount common to all.
Most PSUs invest heavily in initial training. When engineers from HMT left and joined Titan without relieving orders, the Supreme Court declared the bonds of HMT as illegal since their training did not warrant a bond.
Similarly, when NTTF tried to enforce the bond of their engineers, the employee was able to prove that the work he put in during the training period was encashed commercially by NTTF. The Supreme Court declared it as illegal. In fact, they termed NTTF's attempt to encash the bond as extortion.
Many IT companies make their employees sign bonds despite the SC judgments. Employees have not approached the court and pay up, not knowing that the bond is illegal. IT companies know it's illegal and still sign bonds to keep it as a psychological barrier because the thought of going to court in India is fearsome. But those who have gone to court have always won or the company makes an out-of-court settlement.
It depends on the ethics of your organization as to whether you want to enforce the bond. If you want to enforce the bond and the employee goes to court, you will be embarrassed in front of the current employees when the judgment comes. Those who consider it as a psychological barrier and were staying back on account of it will be emboldened to leave. If I were you, I would let go of the bond to ensure the existing employees stay back without knowing that the bond is illegal and not enforceable.
From United+States, San+Francisco
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
13Most PSUs invest heavily in initial training. When engineers from HMT left and joined Titan without relieving orders, the Supreme Court declared the bonds of HMT as illegal since their training did not warrant a bond.
Similarly, when NTTF tried to enforce the bond of their engineers, the employee was able to prove that the work he put in during the training period was encashed commercially by NTTF. The Supreme Court declared it as illegal. In fact, they termed NTTF's attempt to encash the bond as extortion.
Many IT companies make their employees sign bonds despite the SC judgments. Employees have not approached the court and pay up, not knowing that the bond is illegal. IT companies know it's illegal and still sign bonds to keep it as a psychological barrier because the thought of going to court in India is fearsome. But those who have gone to court have always won or the company makes an out-of-court settlement.
It depends on the ethics of your organization as to whether you want to enforce the bond. If you want to enforce the bond and the employee goes to court, you will be embarrassed in front of the current employees when the judgment comes. Those who consider it as a psychological barrier and were staying back on account of it will be emboldened to leave. If I were you, I would let go of the bond to ensure the existing employees stay back without knowing that the bond is illegal and not enforceable.
From United+States, San+Francisco
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If you have asked him to resign, it is better not to ask for any recovery related to the bond. If the employee refuses to pay back and agrees to rejoin, he may create problems related to industrial relations in your organization. It is better to let him go without asking for the bond amount to be paid back.
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Employment bond is an instrument of a primitive age. Please do away with the bond. You were aware that your company has a bond policy, so how come you offered such an option? Now you cannot make any recovery except for the usual notice period.
From India, Thane
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Thane
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Employee has an attitudinal problem. We should relieve such an employee immediately as it can create unnecessary negativity within the system.
Referring to the details, it seems he has a feeling of indispensability. He is just trying to create importance by opting to resign. He should be given informal feedback that Management is ready to accept the resignation and relieve him immediately. There are chances he may withdraw the resignation as things are not moving as per his plan.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Referring to the details, it seems he has a feeling of indispensability. He is just trying to create importance by opting to resign. He should be given informal feedback that Management is ready to accept the resignation and relieve him immediately. There are chances he may withdraw the resignation as things are not moving as per his plan.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Firstly, please understand that bonds are illegal. Bonded labor has been abolished long back in India. Bonds are not enforceable in the given scenario. Then, when are bonds enforceable is the question. Bonds are enforceable only when the organization has invested heavily in training the employee, which warrants a time frame to transfer the skill or complete a project. For example, if your company has sent a person for training abroad, which is not easily available in India, then the employee is duty-bound to stay in the organization and transfer the training to others. The time frame has to be reasonable enough and cannot be arbitrarily decided as two years. The compensation has to be equivalent to the cost incurred for such training plus a reasonable penalty and not an arbitrary amount common to all.
Most PSUs invest heavily in initial training. When engineers from HMT left and joined Titan without relieving orders, the Supreme Court declared the bonds of HMT as illegal since their training did not warrant a bond.
Similarly, when NTTF tried to enforce the bond of their engineers, the employee was able to prove that the work put in during the training period was encashed commercially by NTTF. The Supreme Court declared it as illegal. In fact, they termed NTTF's attempt to encash the bond as extortion.
Many IT companies make their employees sign bonds despite the SC judgments. Employees have not approached the court and pay up, not knowing that the bond is illegal. IT companies know it's illegal and despite that sign bonds to keep it as a psychological barrier because the thought of going to court in India is fearsome. But those who have gone to court have always won, or the company makes an out-of-court settlement.
It depends on the ethics of your organization as to whether you want to enforce the bond. If you want to enforce the bond and the employee goes to court, you will be embarrassed in front of the current employees when the judgment comes. Those who consider it a psychological barrier and were staying back on account of it will be emboldened to leave. If I were you, I would let go of the bond to ensure the existing employees stay back without knowing that the bond is illegal and not enforceable.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Most PSUs invest heavily in initial training. When engineers from HMT left and joined Titan without relieving orders, the Supreme Court declared the bonds of HMT as illegal since their training did not warrant a bond.
Similarly, when NTTF tried to enforce the bond of their engineers, the employee was able to prove that the work put in during the training period was encashed commercially by NTTF. The Supreme Court declared it as illegal. In fact, they termed NTTF's attempt to encash the bond as extortion.
Many IT companies make their employees sign bonds despite the SC judgments. Employees have not approached the court and pay up, not knowing that the bond is illegal. IT companies know it's illegal and despite that sign bonds to keep it as a psychological barrier because the thought of going to court in India is fearsome. But those who have gone to court have always won, or the company makes an out-of-court settlement.
It depends on the ethics of your organization as to whether you want to enforce the bond. If you want to enforce the bond and the employee goes to court, you will be embarrassed in front of the current employees when the judgment comes. Those who consider it a psychological barrier and were staying back on account of it will be emboldened to leave. If I were you, I would let go of the bond to ensure the existing employees stay back without knowing that the bond is illegal and not enforceable.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Register and Log In.
BOND BY AN EMPLOYEE FOR NOT ENGAGING HIMSELF.doc