observation letters on the below following points,
1- Often ask for rest or sick leave because he has (diabetes), but this has negative effect on business.
2- Sometimes he shows aggressiveness and nervous reactions against his colleagues and management when we give him tasks.
3- He has been warned not to close his mobile because the emergency cases but he continues to do so.
4- He do not like to respond in emergency situations.
5- Always complain about the work in holidays and Fridays.
The management would like to draw your attention that it has been recorded a massive negligence to work your duties during the working hours.
Accordingly, this letter serves as Final Observation Letter Regarding the following points:
1) Often ask for rest or sick leaves (Considering the last Incident of obtaining (2) days off promising to present a sick leave report which never happened).
2) Your aggressiveness and nervous reactions against your colleagues and management.
3) You have been warned not to switch off your mobile due any to any Emergency cases.
However, you continue to do so.
4) You do not respond during Emergency situations.
5) Always complains about the wok during holidays.
6) Frequent traffic violations.
Accordingly, the Management decided to penalize you with (2 days)’ salary deduction and reserves the right for the further Disciplinary Action (including, Transfers to another Department or Termination), in the case of the above notes are not being improved within One Month Notice.
You are hereby warned to develop your performance and failure to do so shall invoke appropriate action.
From United Arab Emirates, Abu Dhabi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
1- Often ask for rest or sick leave because he has (diabetes), but this has negative effect on business.
2- Sometimes he shows aggressiveness and nervous reactions against his colleagues and management when we give him tasks.
3- He has been warned not to close his mobile because the emergency cases but he continues to do so.
4- He do not like to respond in emergency situations.
5- Always complain about the work in holidays and Fridays.
The management would like to draw your attention that it has been recorded a massive negligence to work your duties during the working hours.
Accordingly, this letter serves as Final Observation Letter Regarding the following points:
1) Often ask for rest or sick leaves (Considering the last Incident of obtaining (2) days off promising to present a sick leave report which never happened).
2) Your aggressiveness and nervous reactions against your colleagues and management.
3) You have been warned not to switch off your mobile due any to any Emergency cases.
However, you continue to do so.
4) You do not respond during Emergency situations.
5) Always complains about the wok during holidays.
6) Frequent traffic violations.
Accordingly, the Management decided to penalize you with (2 days)’ salary deduction and reserves the right for the further Disciplinary Action (including, Transfers to another Department or Termination), in the case of the above notes are not being improved within One Month Notice.
You are hereby warned to develop your performance and failure to do so shall invoke appropriate action.
From United Arab Emirates, Abu Dhabi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Aasia,
You have given a list of points on which you would like to issue a warning letter to the employee. Nevertheless, the question arises as to why these points were accumulated? Why was he not given a warning letter earlier?
The second issue concerns feedback to the employee in question. How many times has he been given one-on-one feedback? If feedback has been given, has written feedback been provided as a follow-up?
If one-on-one feedback has not been given, then I recommend doing so. When giving feedback in private, cite specific instances. The points mentioned above are acceptable for inclusion in the written letter.
Our objective is to correct the behavior of the employee. While issuing negative discipline is necessary, we must also maintain the motivation level of the employee. Issuing a warning letter directly could potentially damage the motivation level of the employee. Warning letters do not always effectively correct the behavior of delinquent employees. Instead, they often merely provide satisfaction to the management. Warning letters are a part of progressive discipline and lay the groundwork for employers to take tougher action if necessary.
Previously, I provided guidance on how to give feedback to the employee. You can refer to my earlier response by clicking the following link: https://www.citehr.com/459788-how-intimate-employee.html
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
8211You have given a list of points on which you would like to issue a warning letter to the employee. Nevertheless, the question arises as to why these points were accumulated? Why was he not given a warning letter earlier?
The second issue concerns feedback to the employee in question. How many times has he been given one-on-one feedback? If feedback has been given, has written feedback been provided as a follow-up?
If one-on-one feedback has not been given, then I recommend doing so. When giving feedback in private, cite specific instances. The points mentioned above are acceptable for inclusion in the written letter.
Our objective is to correct the behavior of the employee. While issuing negative discipline is necessary, we must also maintain the motivation level of the employee. Issuing a warning letter directly could potentially damage the motivation level of the employee. Warning letters do not always effectively correct the behavior of delinquent employees. Instead, they often merely provide satisfaction to the management. Warning letters are a part of progressive discipline and lay the groundwork for employers to take tougher action if necessary.
Previously, I provided guidance on how to give feedback to the employee. You can refer to my earlier response by clicking the following link: https://www.citehr.com/459788-how-intimate-employee.html
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Dear sir,
From your narration, it is understood that the person is habitual in adding one or other objectionable activity in his routine matters, and he is a problem creator. Management is not observing any improvement in his behavior, neither in performance.
The letter of punishment awarding salary deduction is not of any significance to such problem shooters. Firstly, your letter is not specifically charging the nature of incidences 1, 2, 3, 4... as, occasionally. Please narrate every incidence very specifically and finally with that what impact noted by HODs/management. Your action should have the aim of correction, a letter of punishing authority to improve or be ready for termination from services making him note that this is the last chance to save his job. He will straightaway refuse the contents of your letter and all charges; all that you wrote is baseless, and he does all his routine assigned jobs as per his boss's instructions, and nothing has been hinted at ever if that is true if at all there were any such things.
The communication language is also not that forceful. The letter awarding punishment/warning should be very precise and skillfully drafted so that the delinquent employee is clear about management's intention.
Last but not least, before any such disciplinary action is taken, counseling is to be done, and that should also be mentioned in any written communication with the employee.
Regards,
RDS Yadav
Director,
Future Instt. of Engineering and Management Technology
and
Labour Law Advisor
email: navtaranghrs@gmail.com
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
0
0
From your narration, it is understood that the person is habitual in adding one or other objectionable activity in his routine matters, and he is a problem creator. Management is not observing any improvement in his behavior, neither in performance.
The letter of punishment awarding salary deduction is not of any significance to such problem shooters. Firstly, your letter is not specifically charging the nature of incidences 1, 2, 3, 4... as, occasionally. Please narrate every incidence very specifically and finally with that what impact noted by HODs/management. Your action should have the aim of correction, a letter of punishing authority to improve or be ready for termination from services making him note that this is the last chance to save his job. He will straightaway refuse the contents of your letter and all charges; all that you wrote is baseless, and he does all his routine assigned jobs as per his boss's instructions, and nothing has been hinted at ever if that is true if at all there were any such things.
The communication language is also not that forceful. The letter awarding punishment/warning should be very precise and skillfully drafted so that the delinquent employee is clear about management's intention.
Last but not least, before any such disciplinary action is taken, counseling is to be done, and that should also be mentioned in any written communication with the employee.
Regards,
RDS Yadav
Director,
Future Instt. of Engineering and Management Technology
and
Labour Law Advisor
email: navtaranghrs@gmail.com
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Check Failed/Partial)-The user reply contains some inaccuracies. It is crucial to clearly state the specific incidents of misconduct and the impact on the organization. The communication should be clear, precise, and emphasize corrective action before termination. Counseling should precede disciplinary actions.
0
0
Let's be legally correct. If a warning letter is issued without conducting a domestic enquiry, the same will be treated as void by the court of law.
Using the phrase "strict disciplinary action will be taken" should be avoided. It implies that you have already decided on the action before the incident has occurred.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
0
0
Using the phrase "strict disciplinary action will be taken" should be avoided. It implies that you have already decided on the action before the incident has occurred.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Check Failed/Partial)-The user reply is incorrect. Domestic enquiry is not a prerequisite for issuing a warning letter. Courts do not consider warnings void without an enquiry.
0
0
Dear Shrikant,
You have specified legal position. However, how far it is correct that I do not know. Legal experts will give their opinion on your post.
Warning letter is defined as a formal warning letter informs an employee of the reasons why his or her behaviour is unacceptable and, if it continues, may lead to the termination of the employee’s employment. Before an employee is given a warning letter, the employer should give the employee an opportunity to respond to the allegations of unacceptable conduct against him or her.
The definition says about giving opportunity to respond to the allegations of the unacceptable behaviour. However, this opportunity need not be Domestic Enquiry. Workers or supervisors make minor or major mistakes at their workplace. It could be intentional or unintentional. However, in such cases Managers call them and give them verbal warning. If there is no change in behaviour, the employee is sent to the HR department and issued with warning letter. In my previous post, I have written about the feedback.
Many misconducts are minor in nature and do not merit conducting domestic enquiry. Warning letters are issued for such misconduct and matter closed. However, for every misconduct how it is possible to conduct domestic enquiry? In that case, we need to have one enquiry department that is adjacent to production department or shop floor.
You have further written that words 'strict disciplinary action will be taken' should be avoided. It means that you have already decided about action before the incident has happened. But then I have seen usage of phrase like "strict disciplinary action" in discipline related correspondence of central and state governments.
As stated earlier, I request other seniors to give their opinions.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
0
0
You have specified legal position. However, how far it is correct that I do not know. Legal experts will give their opinion on your post.
Warning letter is defined as a formal warning letter informs an employee of the reasons why his or her behaviour is unacceptable and, if it continues, may lead to the termination of the employee’s employment. Before an employee is given a warning letter, the employer should give the employee an opportunity to respond to the allegations of unacceptable conduct against him or her.
The definition says about giving opportunity to respond to the allegations of the unacceptable behaviour. However, this opportunity need not be Domestic Enquiry. Workers or supervisors make minor or major mistakes at their workplace. It could be intentional or unintentional. However, in such cases Managers call them and give them verbal warning. If there is no change in behaviour, the employee is sent to the HR department and issued with warning letter. In my previous post, I have written about the feedback.
Many misconducts are minor in nature and do not merit conducting domestic enquiry. Warning letters are issued for such misconduct and matter closed. However, for every misconduct how it is possible to conduct domestic enquiry? In that case, we need to have one enquiry department that is adjacent to production department or shop floor.
You have further written that words 'strict disciplinary action will be taken' should be avoided. It means that you have already decided about action before the incident has happened. But then I have seen usage of phrase like "strict disciplinary action" in discipline related correspondence of central and state governments.
As stated earlier, I request other seniors to give their opinions.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Check Failed/Partial)-The user's reply contains some inaccuracies. A formal warning letter should be issued after giving the employee an opportunity to respond, which doesn't necessarily involve a domestic inquiry for minor misconduct. It is essential to follow due process before taking disciplinary action.
0
0
The normal practice in the Disciplinary Process is that the Head of the concerned Department sends a complaint letter to the HR Head recommending initiating disciplinary action against the department's employee. Based on this, the HR Department first issues a Show Cause Notice to the employee, directing them to submit their written explanation within 48 hours. Upon receiving the explanation, the HR Department refers it to the concerned Head of Department for consideration and recommendation. Based on the Head of Department's recommendation, in the case of a minor infraction, a Warning Memo is issued, cautioning the employee against repeating such misconduct in the future, and the file is closed.
However, in cases where the explanation is unsatisfactory and warrants a more severe punishment such as a salary cut or suspension, an inquiry is conducted. The outcome and the report of the Inquiry Officer determine the punishment to be awarded.
Email: c.neyimkhan@gmail.com
Date: 30.x.16.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(2)
Amend(0)
0
0
However, in cases where the explanation is unsatisfactory and warrants a more severe punishment such as a salary cut or suspension, an inquiry is conducted. The outcome and the report of the Inquiry Officer determine the punishment to be awarded.
Email: c.neyimkhan@gmail.com
Date: 30.x.16.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(2)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Check Failed/Partial)-The user's reply is incorrect as it does not align with the disciplinary process outlined in the original post. There is no mention of the specific steps followed in the company's disciplinary action procedure. Instead, the user describes a generic disciplinary process that does not match the scenario presented.
0
0
The intent and purpose of any disciplinary action is disciplining misconduct in such a manner that such misconduct does not recur in the future. However, it is not necessary that every disciplinary action should end up in punishment of some kind or other so as to warrant all procedural formalities such as calling for an explanation, framing of charges, institution of domestic enquiry, issuance of a second show-cause notice to the delinquent employee, and awarding of proportionate punishment.
One should not forget the fact that at times charges of grave misconduct have to be simply dropped with a mere warning for lack of evidence based on the idiom of no smoke without fire. But, "warning" per se is not a punishment but a firm intimation of the employer's disapproval of the particular action or inaction of the employee for which his explanation was called for and considered.
Therefore, in my opinion, a letter of warning need not be issued after following all the procedures of a full-fledged disciplinary action. Besides, since "warning" is issued only after considering the reply of the delinquent and the mitigating circumstances, there is no harm in using strong phrases of caution and advice to the warned.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(3)
Amend(0)
0
0
One should not forget the fact that at times charges of grave misconduct have to be simply dropped with a mere warning for lack of evidence based on the idiom of no smoke without fire. But, "warning" per se is not a punishment but a firm intimation of the employer's disapproval of the particular action or inaction of the employee for which his explanation was called for and considered.
Therefore, in my opinion, a letter of warning need not be issued after following all the procedures of a full-fledged disciplinary action. Besides, since "warning" is issued only after considering the reply of the delinquent and the mitigating circumstances, there is no harm in using strong phrases of caution and advice to the warned.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(3)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Checked)-The user's reply contains accurate information regarding the purpose and nature of warnings in a disciplinary process. The explanation provided aligns with best practices in HR. (1 Acknowledge point)
0
0
Dear Dinesh Ji,
Thank you very much for inviting my comments in this thread.
What SHRIKANT_PRA said in his post #4 that if a warning letter is issued without conducting a domestic enquiry, the same will be treated as void by a court of law, has no basis and is therefore wrong. If he has any case law on this, he is requested to provide it here.
In fact, certain misconduct of non-conforming behavior in nature can be tackled in many ways such as counseling, warnings, etc. In extreme cases such as criminal breach of trust, theft, fraud, etc., the employer has to initiate action against the delinquent employee by conducting a domestic enquiry. It is totally wrong to say that no warning letter can be issued without a domestic enquiry.
In your post #2, you have rightly said that the issuance of a warning letter lays the groundwork for employers to take further tough action. In your post #4, you once again made it clear that minor misconducts do not merit conducting a domestic enquiry. Warning letters are issued for such misconduct, and the matter is considered closed. You are completely correct in this regard.
If I am not mistaken, and if I remember correctly, the IE(SO) Act states that no enquiry shall be necessary to administer a warning or a fine (I am not sure).
A warning per se is not a punishment but a firm indication of the employer's disapproval of the particular action or inaction of the employee, as stated by Umakanthan Ji. A warning may also result from the outcome of a domestic enquiry. Generally, warning letters are not challenged in a court of law.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
0
0
Thank you very much for inviting my comments in this thread.
What SHRIKANT_PRA said in his post #4 that if a warning letter is issued without conducting a domestic enquiry, the same will be treated as void by a court of law, has no basis and is therefore wrong. If he has any case law on this, he is requested to provide it here.
In fact, certain misconduct of non-conforming behavior in nature can be tackled in many ways such as counseling, warnings, etc. In extreme cases such as criminal breach of trust, theft, fraud, etc., the employer has to initiate action against the delinquent employee by conducting a domestic enquiry. It is totally wrong to say that no warning letter can be issued without a domestic enquiry.
In your post #2, you have rightly said that the issuance of a warning letter lays the groundwork for employers to take further tough action. In your post #4, you once again made it clear that minor misconducts do not merit conducting a domestic enquiry. Warning letters are issued for such misconduct, and the matter is considered closed. You are completely correct in this regard.
If I am not mistaken, and if I remember correctly, the IE(SO) Act states that no enquiry shall be necessary to administer a warning or a fine (I am not sure).
A warning per se is not a punishment but a firm indication of the employer's disapproval of the particular action or inaction of the employee, as stated by Umakanthan Ji. A warning may also result from the outcome of a domestic enquiry. Generally, warning letters are not challenged in a court of law.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Check Failed/Partial)-The user's reply contains some inaccuracies. Warning letters can be issued without a domestic enquiry for minor misconduct, as per Indian labour laws. Domestic enquiries are typically conducted for more serious offenses. No specific reference to the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act was found.
0
0
I agree with the learned senior members, Shri M Umakanthan and Shri Korgaonkar, on the issue of issuing a Warning Memo without first serving a Show Cause Notice. There were instances where HR managers were rebuked when the delinquent refused to receive the Warning Memo before first serving a Show Cause Notice, thereby denying the delinquent an opportunity to know the charges and appropriately submit his explanation.
To avoid such refusals and consequent situations, it is safer to issue a Show Cause Notice first and direct him to submit his explanation. However, it is not a must in all cases, as rightly pointed out by senior members, but on a case-to-case basis depending upon the merit of each case.
Since Industrial Relations (IR) is a sensitive issue, care must be taken to maintain harmonious relations for all disciplinary actions. The HR manager has to tactfully deal with such situations.
Thanks to the senior members for enlightening on the issue.
C. Neyimkhan
31.x.16
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
0
0
To avoid such refusals and consequent situations, it is safer to issue a Show Cause Notice first and direct him to submit his explanation. However, it is not a must in all cases, as rightly pointed out by senior members, but on a case-to-case basis depending upon the merit of each case.
Since Industrial Relations (IR) is a sensitive issue, care must be taken to maintain harmonious relations for all disciplinary actions. The HR manager has to tactfully deal with such situations.
Thanks to the senior members for enlightening on the issue.
C. Neyimkhan
31.x.16
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Check Failed/Partial)-The user's reply does not directly address the content of the original post. It focuses on the process of issuing Warning Memos and Show Cause Notices in disciplinary actions, which is not the main concern raised in the original post. Therefore, the response requires correction.
0
0
While the original poster has not responded, I noticed that the post says the employee protests against working on Friday, which indicates that the employee is in the Gulf region.
Therefore, the ID Act and other laws related to domestic inquiry do not apply to this incident.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
0
0
Therefore, the ID Act and other laws related to domestic inquiry do not apply to this incident.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Check Failed/Partial)-The assertion that the Industrial Disputes Act and laws related to domestic enquiry do not apply based on the employee protesting against working on Friday in the Gulf region is incorrect. The ID Act and related laws are relevant regardless of the location or specific work practices.
0
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.
Draft Factories (Amendment) Bill 2015.pdf
Draft appointment letter.doc
CiteHR.AI
(Fact Check Failed/Partial)-The user's reply is incorrect as it does not align with the standard HR practices of addressing disciplinary issues. It is crucial to address misconduct promptly. Progressive discipline can follow, but warnings are essential.