As per the law, u r not liable to ask your job security, where is not attaining 6 months of service in that organization. In this juncture, there is no provision to fight with them.
Regards,
Tirupathi Reddi
From India, Secunderabad
3Regards,
Tirupathi Reddi
From India, Secunderabad
Politics is everywhere & in every company. I can only suggest you to find job somewhere else but don’t mention anywhere you have been terminated. Shalaka HR - Manager
From India, Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Dear Khushboo
Along with other members' I share your anguish on the unfair treatment meted out to you.
Such instances are aplenty and most often it is the HR who have to do or are asked to do, this sordid task. In fact, most of the times, such terminations are not only unfair, but illegal too. However, as pointed out; its a war between David and Goliath, and the latter invariably wins in such cases.
In your case, however, it seems no legal infractions are involved as you were in probation. However, what is a matter of concern, is the manner in which it was carried out. Apart from it being a swift, ruthless action based on a flimsy reason; it deprived you, most importantly, of the time you could have utilized in searching for a suitable job enabling the continuity of your employment.
Many want to know the exact turn of events that caused it. Do respond back to let us know what exactly happened. It happens that senior people are shy of breaking thee bad news. At times, young inexperienced sub-ordinates are made the scapegoat. Is it what happened in your case? Why were you asked to communicate directly wwith the CEO ? Although. its not an illegal act, but surely highly un-conventional that a probationer has to deal with the CEO. were you set-up as the fall-guy ?
Also, do respond to let us know if you find these suggestions helpful.
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Along with other members' I share your anguish on the unfair treatment meted out to you.
Such instances are aplenty and most often it is the HR who have to do or are asked to do, this sordid task. In fact, most of the times, such terminations are not only unfair, but illegal too. However, as pointed out; its a war between David and Goliath, and the latter invariably wins in such cases.
In your case, however, it seems no legal infractions are involved as you were in probation. However, what is a matter of concern, is the manner in which it was carried out. Apart from it being a swift, ruthless action based on a flimsy reason; it deprived you, most importantly, of the time you could have utilized in searching for a suitable job enabling the continuity of your employment.
Many want to know the exact turn of events that caused it. Do respond back to let us know what exactly happened. It happens that senior people are shy of breaking thee bad news. At times, young inexperienced sub-ordinates are made the scapegoat. Is it what happened in your case? Why were you asked to communicate directly wwith the CEO ? Although. its not an illegal act, but surely highly un-conventional that a probationer has to deal with the CEO. were you set-up as the fall-guy ?
Also, do respond to let us know if you find these suggestions helpful.
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Dear Khushbhu,
Kindly it is really cheated with you but you must take action against this as said Tam HR above reply of your query for Corporate Lawyer to proceed legally and also use your Appointment and approval of Joining Letter must show to the corporate lawyers.
Regards,
JUNED SHAIKH
From India, Mumbai
Kindly it is really cheated with you but you must take action against this as said Tam HR above reply of your query for Corporate Lawyer to proceed legally and also use your Appointment and approval of Joining Letter must show to the corporate lawyers.
Regards,
JUNED SHAIKH
From India, Mumbai
Dear Varun
Please be practical. Assuming the member gets a very good job and files and wins the case against the company, what will the member achieve ? Will the member be willing to join the company in such circumstances. Member will be not only wasting time and energy but also will loose financially.
Dear Khushbu
I am still not clear why would the management take a decision to remove an employee just for meeting the CEO. There must have been some reason for you meeting the CEO directly that would have resulted in the action of the management. Kindly consider the situation at hand before you jump to a conclusion. Many a times we consider only our side of the story and feel sorry for ourselves and do not take a close look at the events that have translated into the current situation.
Regards
Preetam Deshpande
From India, Mumbai
Please be practical. Assuming the member gets a very good job and files and wins the case against the company, what will the member achieve ? Will the member be willing to join the company in such circumstances. Member will be not only wasting time and energy but also will loose financially.
Dear Khushbu
I am still not clear why would the management take a decision to remove an employee just for meeting the CEO. There must have been some reason for you meeting the CEO directly that would have resulted in the action of the management. Kindly consider the situation at hand before you jump to a conclusion. Many a times we consider only our side of the story and feel sorry for ourselves and do not take a close look at the events that have translated into the current situation.
Regards
Preetam Deshpande
From India, Mumbai
Hello,
In my opinion Khushbu, u should see the CEO once again for it and seek assistance from him.If in any case this doesn't work out, then seek legal help, see to it this should not harm your personal interests or your character in the organization. Wishing you a good luck.
From India, Krishna
In my opinion Khushbu, u should see the CEO once again for it and seek assistance from him.If in any case this doesn't work out, then seek legal help, see to it this should not harm your personal interests or your character in the organization. Wishing you a good luck.
From India, Krishna
Dear Khushbu Awasthi,
The only thing trouble s me is that you were employed in the HR
department and yet you did not go through the employment policies of
your company.
Dear Friend your term of employment was only two months, which in
simple words means you were on probation, your service was not yet
confirmed, therefore as your terms of appointment you liable to be
fired without any notice and you have no standing point in the court
of Law.
Secondly, you were running to fast, in any organization, you have to
wait and establish your reputation before you try to manipulate your
seniors.
Hope you under stand what I have said in the above lines
From Pakistan, Lahore
The only thing trouble s me is that you were employed in the HR
department and yet you did not go through the employment policies of
your company.
Dear Friend your term of employment was only two months, which in
simple words means you were on probation, your service was not yet
confirmed, therefore as your terms of appointment you liable to be
fired without any notice and you have no standing point in the court
of Law.
Secondly, you were running to fast, in any organization, you have to
wait and establish your reputation before you try to manipulate your
seniors.
Hope you under stand what I have said in the above lines
From Pakistan, Lahore
Dear Advocate Sandeep,
I saw your post dated 30.10.12 and I regret that it somehow skipped my attention and read it only today morning. You have rightly suggested (the same thing I had also suggested to Khushbu in my post) that prima facie she does not fall under the definition of a workmen, hence she cannot go to Labour Department for redressal of her grievance.
Further, I ditto your suggestion that she can go to Labour Department and file her complaint if she was a workman and fell under the definition of workman as per I D Act, 1947.
However, I disagree with you that she can directly go to Labour Court and file the case against her former employer. You would appreciate that with the latest amendment dated 15.09.2010 in I D Act, direct reference of disputes has become possible by the introduction of Sub Section (2) & (3) in the Act. Accordingly, in case of individual dispute of workman related to discharge, dismissal, retrenchment or termination by any means, now the workman has the right to approach labour court directly without waiting for conciliation proceedings and Govt. reference. But he /she has to wait for three months for this direct action from the date of filing his /her application before conciliation officer if the Govt. is not able to complete the reference process within three months. Earlier there was no such direct option available to workman to approach labour court.
Hence, Khushbu will have to wait for three months for this direct action at Labour Court from the date of filing her application before conciliation officer.
Trust, you will agree with me.
Rgds,
Rakesh Pd Srivastav
From India, Gurgaon
I saw your post dated 30.10.12 and I regret that it somehow skipped my attention and read it only today morning. You have rightly suggested (the same thing I had also suggested to Khushbu in my post) that prima facie she does not fall under the definition of a workmen, hence she cannot go to Labour Department for redressal of her grievance.
Further, I ditto your suggestion that she can go to Labour Department and file her complaint if she was a workman and fell under the definition of workman as per I D Act, 1947.
However, I disagree with you that she can directly go to Labour Court and file the case against her former employer. You would appreciate that with the latest amendment dated 15.09.2010 in I D Act, direct reference of disputes has become possible by the introduction of Sub Section (2) & (3) in the Act. Accordingly, in case of individual dispute of workman related to discharge, dismissal, retrenchment or termination by any means, now the workman has the right to approach labour court directly without waiting for conciliation proceedings and Govt. reference. But he /she has to wait for three months for this direct action from the date of filing his /her application before conciliation officer if the Govt. is not able to complete the reference process within three months. Earlier there was no such direct option available to workman to approach labour court.
Hence, Khushbu will have to wait for three months for this direct action at Labour Court from the date of filing her application before conciliation officer.
Trust, you will agree with me.
Rgds,
Rakesh Pd Srivastav
From India, Gurgaon
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.
Company Profile.ppt
Company Profile Letter - Global Risk Management Services.pdf