$6 billion -- The hidden cost of 90-day notice period to companies

[swatkats]

There is no rationale as to why Indian companies need to have a 90-day notice period. The same organisations that have 90 days as their notice period expect candidates to join within a few weeks which doesn't really add up.

$6 billion - the hidden cost of 90-day notice period to companies, economy

There is no rationale as to why Indian companies need to have a 90-day notice period. The same organisations that have 90 days as their notice period expect candidates to join within a few weeks which doesn't really add up

www.businesstoday.in

 

[Emrebel]

I find that the employment in India is extremely exploitive and without any major returns for most jobs.
This is specifically true for non-IT sectors

 

[kalph09]

Double standards at its best. IT service companies milk this concept of the 90-day notice. It is essentially done to deter employees from leaving the organisation I believe.

Besides that, employees at a lower level (say less than 2-4 yrs of exp) have a hard time jumping across as the skill pool is large and easy to hire someone with smaller notice or immediate joiners.

Longer notice (45-60 days) makes sense for niche skills considering they are harder to find and takes longer to retrain the new hire.

While your contract does mention buying out your notice period, companies largely deny it.

 

[i_rock098]

The reason is that cost of hire is much more than the cost of paying an employee for that 90 day period. Plus almost all companies make you actually work till the last day so they are technically getting their monies worth. So it’s a double win for them.

 

[booo]

you know that companies cant do anything if employee doesnt serve notice period...

 

[rdst_1]

The reason is that cost of hire is much more than the cost of paying an employee for that 90 day period. Plus almost all companies make you actually work till the last day so they are technically getting their monies worth. So it’s a double win for them.

From what I know, nobody works properly during their notice period and neither are they given any important tasks. Some guys I know, used to just come to office and chill and do literally nothing. So don't know what benefit the company is getting from holding on to such guys.

 

[belictony]

you know that companies cant do anything if employee doesnt serve notice period...

That’s not true. Companies can deny issuing service letter, withhold full and final payment, etc. Lot of companies stop paying your salary or other components the moment you resign and pay it together at the end of notice period.

 

[ibose]

you know that companies cant do anything if employee doesnt serve notice period...

Really ? I thought you sign up for that in the employment terms when you join. Does anyone know what the laws say ? I would not be surprised if it says nothing which is why they get away with it.
At least some of them have a buyout option but its very rare.

 

[asingh]

There is no rationale as to why Indian companies need to have a 90-day notice period. The same organisations that have 90 days as their notice period expect candidates to join within a few weeks which doesn't really add up.

$6 billion - the hidden cost of 90-day notice period to companies, economy

There is no rationale as to why Indian companies need to have a 90-day notice period. The same organisations that have 90 days as their notice period expect candidates to join within a few weeks which doesn't really add up

www.businesstoday.in

I actually remember, around when this clause started to come in affect.

I think it was early 2000's (or 2003-04) and job markets were booming. People would jump-ship via SMS or just not turn up next morning. It used to cause quite a churn in companies. Slowly this system was put in place to stop maverick resignations. Then it migrated to be a deterrent for attrition-for many managers, staff resignation is a KPI. And now it is just an exploitative tool in the hands of HR and managers. The first company I left created quite a harrowing experience when I wanted to give 30 days vs. 90 days. They even took my address (both home and local) on official mail, where they said "we will send a court notice". Is that a way to disengage someone post 7y of work. God knows ? Fear mongering and creation of a toxic work environment.

In my industry (since we have "n" direct competitors) at times employees have been asked to just sit at home and "cool of", so they are not exposed to live work and/or leak out proprietary information.

 

[ibose]

I remember when I resigned on my first job which was in sales in Kolkata. I dropped in to check if the manager was in. Luckily he wasn't so I left my resignation in a sealed envelope with his PA telling him its for his eyes only. Went for lunch, then home to pick up my luggage and caught the train back to Delhi. I did not serve notice even for a sec. There was no such concept in sales and folks were regularly leaving A and joining competitor B while taking all the accounts with them. Mind you, I prepped and handed over stuff to a wide eyed junior while introducing him to the folks whose accounts I was handling. I was moving to a different industry. Back home I sent a copy of my resignation to the head office just to ensure that the folks in Kol would not be sitting on my resignation. Thankfully the company sent everything within the next couple of weeks.

 

[booo]

They even took my address (both home and local) on official mail, where they said "we will send a court notice".

its all threat tactics, even they know that they never stand a chance in court. btw, relieving letter is BS. no one cares about relieving letters. even for visa stuff, all you need is reference letters from your colleagues and more importantly tax documents (Form 26AS) to prove that you worked for a company.

 

[belictony]

its all threat tactics, even they know that they never stand a chance in court. btw, relieving letter is BS. no one cares about relieving letters.

You would still need service record to show that you worked for that many years that you claim to be,

 

[booo]

You would still need service record to show that you worked for that many years that you claim to be,

Form 26AS.

 

[ibose]

Form 26AS.

So all companies "accept" that as a service record ?

 

[booo]

So all companies "accept" that as a service record ?

you could literally make a relieving letter in photoshop. so whats the argument here?
btw, in companies like oracle, the letterheads are usually available in stationary area near printers and letterhead templates are available in intranet site.

 

[ibose]

you could literally make a relieving letter in photoshop. so whats the argument here?

No offence but not everyone is like you faking documents. That was a simple question. A yes or no answer would suffice if you know, of course.

 

[CA50]

From what I know, nobody works properly during their notice period and neither are they given any important tasks. Some guys I know, used to just come to office and chill and do literally nothing. So don't know what benefit the company is getting from holding on to such guys.

This depends from team to team and manager to manager.
Because I have seen instances like you have mentioned and others where they push code on their last working day that too after working hours

 

[kalph09]

OT: Not related to notice period but works as a deterrence. Few organizations make you sign some sort of commitment letter under the pretext of free training or short-term onsite?

I was offered a 5-day training worth 30k but came with a clause of me staying with them for 18 months or repay the training fee lol.

 

[booo]

No offence but not everyone is like you faking documents. That was a simple question. A yes or no answer would suffice if you know, of course.

you just offended me by calling me a fake. the point here is that too much value is attached to a piece of paper. you are trying to argue for the sake of argument.
to add to this, no one gives a **** about how many years of experience one has. thats why there is a interview process to validate things. only if people were offered jobs based on how many years of experience they have these so called "service records" would make sense.

 

[ibose]

you just offended me by calling me a fake. the point here is that too much value is attached to a piece of paper. you are trying to argue for the sake of argument.

Well my apologies but then its something you only thought of and suggested. My point is if I just claim that document as a service record, is that acceptable to a new employer. How sure are you ? Have you seen it being accepted everywhere ? Is that required by law ? Its not an argument for argument sake if you state something for the sake of stating something without evidence.