Hi
I joined a company in Nov 2011 at the time of joining I offered a joining bonus.
The bonus clause mentioned " Rs X (recoverable in case the employee decides to leave before completing one year).
I have 2 month notice period. I'm planning to resign in mid Oct 2012 and last date of working will be Dec 15 2012. Technically speaking I would have completed 1 year during my notice period. Do I still need to pay the joining bonus.
Regards
Ajay
From India, Mumbai
I joined a company in Nov 2011 at the time of joining I offered a joining bonus.
The bonus clause mentioned " Rs X (recoverable in case the employee decides to leave before completing one year).
I have 2 month notice period. I'm planning to resign in mid Oct 2012 and last date of working will be Dec 15 2012. Technically speaking I would have completed 1 year during my notice period. Do I still need to pay the joining bonus.
Regards
Ajay
From India, Mumbai
Ah! the nuances of the language are very deceptive and can be used to suit both the parties. I have read somewhere that he is no lawyer who can't fight the case from both sides!
You believe that you are in the clear because you would have served for more than one year in the company and hence you should not be made to pay back the joining bonus.
But the argument from the company will be, and here I am going by the language you have used - "recoverable in case the employee decides to leave before completing one year".
Now the KEY word here is "decides".
Q. When did you "decide" to leave the company?
A. When you gave you resignation. Why? because you first decided to leave the company and then gave your resignation.
So you gotta pay the joining bonus if your resign before completing one year
That is why one must always take decisions taking into account all the possibilities and leave absolutely no room for any personal interpretations.
I'd advice that you quit after Nov 12, then you would be completely in the clear.
Otherwise it can be anybody's game!
From India, Delhi
25You believe that you are in the clear because you would have served for more than one year in the company and hence you should not be made to pay back the joining bonus.
But the argument from the company will be, and here I am going by the language you have used - "recoverable in case the employee decides to leave before completing one year".
Now the KEY word here is "decides".
Q. When did you "decide" to leave the company?
A. When you gave you resignation. Why? because you first decided to leave the company and then gave your resignation.
So you gotta pay the joining bonus if your resign before completing one year
That is why one must always take decisions taking into account all the possibilities and leave absolutely no room for any personal interpretations.
I'd advice that you quit after Nov 12, then you would be completely in the clear.
Otherwise it can be anybody's game!
From India, Delhi
Dear Sanjeev
Wow.You made an innocuous looking topic more intriguing by your subtle ability to read the fine print which in fact is a fine skill. I admire it.You have very aptly said that he is no lawyer who does not fight the case from both the sides.Now, my interpretaion is that the word"decides" cannot be read in isolation but shall be read in conjunction with the other words that follwed it so as to give full meaning to the clause. Thus the word "decides" has to be read in conjunction with the words " to leave before completing one year" so as to make the clause compatible with the clause on joining bonus.The word "decides" thus needs to be related to the point of time at which Mr.Ajay leaves the company's servcie.The caluse says that joining bonus is recoverable if an employee "decides to leave before competing one year". Though, Mr.Ajay decided on 15 th October 12, he never decided to leave the company before completing one year. He dicided to leave the company after completing one year.Therefore Mr.Ajay does not attrcat the debar contained in the clause and is entitled to joining bonus since he is leaving on 15th December after completing one year.These are my humble submissions on behaldf of Ajay.
B.Saikumar
Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Wow.You made an innocuous looking topic more intriguing by your subtle ability to read the fine print which in fact is a fine skill. I admire it.You have very aptly said that he is no lawyer who does not fight the case from both the sides.Now, my interpretaion is that the word"decides" cannot be read in isolation but shall be read in conjunction with the other words that follwed it so as to give full meaning to the clause. Thus the word "decides" has to be read in conjunction with the words " to leave before completing one year" so as to make the clause compatible with the clause on joining bonus.The word "decides" thus needs to be related to the point of time at which Mr.Ajay leaves the company's servcie.The caluse says that joining bonus is recoverable if an employee "decides to leave before competing one year". Though, Mr.Ajay decided on 15 th October 12, he never decided to leave the company before completing one year. He dicided to leave the company after completing one year.Therefore Mr.Ajay does not attrcat the debar contained in the clause and is entitled to joining bonus since he is leaving on 15th December after completing one year.These are my humble submissions on behaldf of Ajay.
B.Saikumar
Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Dear Saikumar,
I think that you have made an equally compelling argument in favor of someone who resigns before completing one year of service and actually leaves the company after completing one year because of the notice period. The argument you have given is very strong when one reads "decides" in conjunction with the words "to leave before completing one year".
However, I'd still say that the resignation should be given after completing one year. The reason is that both your and my interpretation are from two opposing sides - mine would suit the employer and yours would suit the employee.
In any final settlement, the employer has the upper hand because of the salary which is paid after the month is over, plus other accumulated benefits which may be given on final settlement.
Now if the employer takes the interpretation given by me, the the employee stands to lose. The employee will have no way to recover the money except taking a legal recourse which we all know is both time consuming and costly with no guarantee that the decision will be favorable.
So why take that chance?
From India, Delhi
I think that you have made an equally compelling argument in favor of someone who resigns before completing one year of service and actually leaves the company after completing one year because of the notice period. The argument you have given is very strong when one reads "decides" in conjunction with the words "to leave before completing one year".
However, I'd still say that the resignation should be given after completing one year. The reason is that both your and my interpretation are from two opposing sides - mine would suit the employer and yours would suit the employee.
In any final settlement, the employer has the upper hand because of the salary which is paid after the month is over, plus other accumulated benefits which may be given on final settlement.
Now if the employer takes the interpretation given by me, the the employee stands to lose. The employee will have no way to recover the money except taking a legal recourse which we all know is both time consuming and costly with no guarantee that the decision will be favorable.
So why take that chance?
From India, Delhi
Both of u gave me lots of ammunition for future discussion with the poor candidates who do not have access to this thread :)
From India, Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Dear
I have gone through various comments. My perspective is the word decide "does not take effect on the day of resignation", this is because in other cases the employee will not get relieved on the same day he submits resignation as he has to comply with notice period, hence the date of calculating one year service has to include notice period. However as shared by others it is worthwhile to complete a year and then submit resignation to avoid the wrath of the employer
From India, Chennai
I have gone through various comments. My perspective is the word decide "does not take effect on the day of resignation", this is because in other cases the employee will not get relieved on the same day he submits resignation as he has to comply with notice period, hence the date of calculating one year service has to include notice period. However as shared by others it is worthwhile to complete a year and then submit resignation to avoid the wrath of the employer
From India, Chennai
Hello Everyone,
A really 'fine' way of interpretation with a subtle play of the English language.
This reminds me of a saying in Telugu, which translates into: 'He is capable of plucking feathers from an egg's shell" :-)
No wonder, so many advocates thrive & flourish :-)---no pun intended pl.
Coming to the issue mentioned by Ajay, there WILL HAVE TO BE a few MORE aspects that HE needs to consider APART FROM THE LEGAL ONES, while the company may be able afford to focus on just the legal aspects of the issue. And that's the aspect of 'time' & 'effort'.
In a nutshell, I would suggest he keep the worst-case-scenario in mind while taking such decisions--sort of 'What if' conditions. If the company DOES indeed want to insist on the refund of the Joining Bonus or adopt the legal path, then does Ajay have that kind of time to focus on the case--in addition to the lawyer fees & the effort it takes to see the case thru till the end? Would he be able to keep his focus on his new job, wherever he joins--with such issues in his mind?
I don't think this is a question of 'right' or 'wrong' at all--it's more a question of 'priorities' and 'possibilities/probabilities'.
Given that we are talking of just about a month's period before Ajay can resign without hassles, it MAY be worth waiting until Nov, 2012.
And saswatabanerjee--I guess, you need to thank CiteHR for giving you such a learning experience :-)
Rgds,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
A really 'fine' way of interpretation with a subtle play of the English language.
This reminds me of a saying in Telugu, which translates into: 'He is capable of plucking feathers from an egg's shell" :-)
No wonder, so many advocates thrive & flourish :-)---no pun intended pl.
Coming to the issue mentioned by Ajay, there WILL HAVE TO BE a few MORE aspects that HE needs to consider APART FROM THE LEGAL ONES, while the company may be able afford to focus on just the legal aspects of the issue. And that's the aspect of 'time' & 'effort'.
In a nutshell, I would suggest he keep the worst-case-scenario in mind while taking such decisions--sort of 'What if' conditions. If the company DOES indeed want to insist on the refund of the Joining Bonus or adopt the legal path, then does Ajay have that kind of time to focus on the case--in addition to the lawyer fees & the effort it takes to see the case thru till the end? Would he be able to keep his focus on his new job, wherever he joins--with such issues in his mind?
I don't think this is a question of 'right' or 'wrong' at all--it's more a question of 'priorities' and 'possibilities/probabilities'.
Given that we are talking of just about a month's period before Ajay can resign without hassles, it MAY be worth waiting until Nov, 2012.
And saswatabanerjee--I guess, you need to thank CiteHR for giving you such a learning experience :-)
Rgds,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Dear Sanjeev
I just want to try to see a different perspective of the caluse after seeing you so skillfully and logically interpret the word " decides". I have in fact been encouraged by your reamrk about the ability of a lawyer to see both sides, which is very true, to come out with another perspective, if the language admits it. I admire your skill.Thanks for acknowledging the merits in the other perspective also. The purpuse is only to provide a different side of the caluse but not to prove any point. I do not wnat to stretch it beyond this point.As you rightly said, the employee needs to wiegh the balance of convenience and do the cost-benefit analysis and be prudent in taking a decision. However an advocate is also necessary as a last resort, to rescue a weak party from the hands of a dominating one.
B.Saikumar
HR & Labour Law Advsior
Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
I just want to try to see a different perspective of the caluse after seeing you so skillfully and logically interpret the word " decides". I have in fact been encouraged by your reamrk about the ability of a lawyer to see both sides, which is very true, to come out with another perspective, if the language admits it. I admire your skill.Thanks for acknowledging the merits in the other perspective also. The purpuse is only to provide a different side of the caluse but not to prove any point. I do not wnat to stretch it beyond this point.As you rightly said, the employee needs to wiegh the balance of convenience and do the cost-benefit analysis and be prudent in taking a decision. However an advocate is also necessary as a last resort, to rescue a weak party from the hands of a dominating one.
B.Saikumar
HR & Labour Law Advsior
Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
If we read interpretation as stated by sai Kumar , which I\'m sure many would agree with me is the correct reply to the query posted & refre Sanjeev\'s wording that Employee have upper Hnad \" my dear friend we are in a country which governs by Rule Book ,we have court to address harassment by Employer & my wiev point is as the person has completed One year from the date of Joining , he will not be charge back for Joining Bonus
From United States, Manchester
From United States, Manchester
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
Amendment to Payment of Bonus Act 2015.jpg
Company Profile.ppt