Fed Up Indian IT Professionals Want To Be Able To Leave Their Jobs Sooner (mashable.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: India's major IT firms have long required their employees to give a three-month, "non-negotiable" notice before leaving the company, but they could be soon forced to change that. Fed-up IT professionals from across India have reached out to the government, complaining that it is "unrealistic" for anyone to plan that far ahead. Over 28,000 professionals have signed a petition, addressed to the ministry of labor, to take immediate action on the matter. Part of the problem is that many companies are unwilling to wait for three months to have a person join them, many cited in the report say. Some of India's top IT firms including Tata Consultancy Services, Infosys, Tech Mahindra, HCL, Accenture and IBM impose the three-month notice period policy on their employees.

Comments

So what else is new?

[Neuronwelder]

Typical Corporations. Always stretching the boundaries on abuse. Doesn't matter what field you are in. You can be a janitor. You will.. be abused. As long as there is a surplus of people. This event will continue to grow.

Re:So what else is new?

[Neuronwelder]

You kind of got the first one partially right: The 'government' you are angry at, is the "puppet" of corporate puppeteers. They falsely have the appearance of a governing body. . (We don't have a government anymore - we have a corporation.). The 2nd one is true: They cater to police unions only because they can use the police as a wrecking ball.. Their police minions will get ordinary folks to comply with the insanity of, oh, let's say a governor's whims... And 'politicians' don't want the police on the side of the people. That would give unions a chance to recover from the damage, and a clear path for the people to protest against governmental wrong doing.

That explains a lot..

[johanw]

Indian ITers: "unrealistic" for anyone to plan that far ahead."

No wonder their software is even worse than what we in the west call spaghetti code, without any detectable design.

Re:That explains a lot..

[ElizabethGreene]

This is worse for many H1-B workers here in the US from major consultancies.

They sign on to 12 or 18 month commitments with penalties of thousands of dollars per month for early termination. They also can't begin work until they've provided a bond to cover this penalty. Their contracts also include provisions for binding arbitration, no class action lawsuits, a requirement to notify the employer before any legal action, and a gag clause so they can't talk about it.

Combine this with consultancy blacklisting and "Indentured Servitude" is absolutely correct.

Re:That explains a lot..

[torkus]

I mean...except for the bonded termination clause that sounds pretty much like the job I have today in corporate america.

Re: That explains a lot..

[Jack54 Gordon49]

Any of those H1B workers forced to come to the US?

Re:That explains a lot..

[Cederic]

Yeah, I gave one company five months. Another had four months.

The last one my contract said three months and I negotiated with them and left in six weeks, but that's because the hiring company was impatient.

Re:That explains a lot..

[Cederic]

Three month notice periods are common for experienced staff in the UK, and senior managers frequently get six or twelve month notice periods - although the latter is often in the form of a twelve month rolling contract.

That means anybody hiring knows they will have to wait 1-3 months from offer to start date, and I've never seen it be an issue. If you need someone faster than that just get a contractor in to cover.

28k in a country of 1.25 billion

[Kjella]

So in my country of 5 million this would be... ~112 signatories. Three months is standard here in Norway, sure sometime you'd like to jump ship straight away. But on the flip side it's three months instead of two weeks if they want to get rid of you too and that means a lot when it comes to unexpectedly applying for a new job. My opinion? If your company doesn't know if they need your skills three months from now they're running a cowboy shop where you can just as easily find yourself out the door as you got in the door. It won't be that much fun when you're on the short end of that stick.

Re:28k in a country of 1.25 billion

[ghoul]

Good part of this is when companies want to do RIF they will give the person 3 months notice and then ask them not to come to office. They still get their salary while they are totally free to job search. Many get a job within a month , take 2 months vacation and join the new place. If the company wants to reduce headcount immediately they give 3 months salary in cash. (While this does not save money directly sometimes companies need to hire in a certain skill but hiring is on freeze till the bench of folks in other skills is cleared)

Re:28k in a country of 1.25 billion

[Manoj]

Wha happens if an employee just stops showing up for work on their own? I assume they will be fired. Does this still need a three month cooling off period?

Re:28k in a country of 1.25 billion

[houghi]

Same here in Belgium. I have been in a situation where they told me I needed to come in earlier. I was fired from my old company (together with 50% of the rest of the company) and was getting a pay-out of 7 months if I stayed till a specific day.

I told the new company that if they where willing to give me a payment of those 7 months, I would gladly come in earlier. Suddenly the need was not that urgent. Yes I still got the job.

I have been on the other side as well and had no issues if people said they can come in 3 months, I even had an employee who wanted to start at an other company a week before new years, because they needed her. I told het that if she left, she would miss the 3 month bonus and if that company could not wait 1 week, they where not serious.

She took the job, missed the 3 months bonus she would have gotten from us and was fired after the new-years rush was over. So that was 3 months pay down the drain.

Re:28k in a country of 1.25 billion

[houghi]

No. That would be grave negligence and will result in being fired immediately and no rights on unemployment money. It will also influence later jobs if they want references.

Re:28k in a country of 1.25 billion

[tietokone-olmi]

A mandatory three-month notice will lead to a standard unwillingness to contract three months out, because by negotiating shorter lead times than this the company will be at a strong advantage in salary negotiation: they know that the applicant is currently on their notice period, or already unemployed, and have no option of staying with their current employer.

This works on those who naïvely apply to only one company at a time, which is most of the "goody two-shoes starts at the bottom level" crowd.

Re:28k in a country of 1.25 billion

[Kjella]

Wha happens if an employee just stops showing up for work on their own? I assume they will be fired. Does this still need a three month cooling off period?

There's still "avskjedigelse" which would be instant termination for cause, but most of that would be criminal conduct like embezzlement, information theft, violence or threats. Gross disloyal conduct, showing up drunk or high or not showing up at all could also be reasons, but general tardiness or poor work performance will generally not be enough. You can still get laid off, but that's a much longer process with warnings where you'll be on notice that termination may follow if you don't improve. And you can get laid off for business reasons, but all terminations need a valid cause. If the company doesn't have one like it's been a personal vendetta or the boss' nephew took your job it can be declared invalid. Employers are aware of this though and rarely do something until they have the documentation to back it up.

Re:28k in a country of 1.25 billion

[jarkus4]

In Poland in such case you would get disciplinary firing - it goes on an employment certificate which you are expected to show your next employer (you can avoid it, but it would be very suspicious). This is only true for standard work contracts. Other types of contracts are often used to limit costs and avoid regulations related to work contracts.

Regardless of employment type your former employer can also sue you for losses and lost income caused by your sudden departure

Re:28k in a country of 1.25 billion

[tattood]

So if you have already got a job offer from a new employer, does this matter? Give them your "3 month notice" and just stop coming in to work. They fire you, and you get to start the new job right away. Problem solved!

Re: 28k in a country of 1.25 billion

[zarr]

Norway is a small country. In the business, everyone knows somebody that knows your ex-boss. Reputation matters.

Re:28k in a country of 1.25 billion

[TheGratefulNet]

it goes on an employment certificate which you are expected to show your next employer

damn! they have you by the short hairs, don't they?

sounds quite the nanny state.

as bad as the US has been getting, we're not that bad yet. no friggin way I'd give power to any previous employer to control my working life and really, my destiny, like that.

that's fucked up! how did that happen? do you need a dr's note if you call in sick, too? (I know, some countries do require that, which is also very non-trusting and fucked up)

Re:28k in a country of 1.25 billion

[houghi]

This would mean you need to lie about having a job. Otherwise it will look very suspicious that you can just walk out.

The adult thing to do is own up. I had an employee who asked me if there was a way to not do his time and there was. We just agreed upon cancelation of the contract at that moment. Both parties signed of on it, just like both parties signed to start the contract.

Re:28k in a country of 1.25 billion

[david_thornley]

sounds quite the nanny state.

GP didn't say it was legally required, only that it would be very suspicious not to show an employment certificate. I'd expect something like this to be more of an industry standard than a law.

Re:send them back

[hij]

Send them back? Wow, are you going to be shocked when you read the article. Maybe slashdot should adopt those crazy titles like "You cannot believe how long IT professionals have to wait in India" and then put on some unrelated, suggestive picture for the link. Of course, then, folks at slashdot would start wondering why nobody takes them seriously. Oh wait...

indentured servitude

[Khashishi]

Wait, so they cannot leave? Sounds like indentured servitude to me.

Re:indentured servitude

[DigiShaman]

US companies have lobbied the Indian Government would be my guess. Can't have interruptions in outsourced services; the three months is to enforce transition of knowledge from one Indian IT worker to another.

Re:indentured servitude

[kvishalk]

No, nothing like that. It was always possible, and Indian companies do it to discourage finding a job. And in general, you will find yourself doing either nothing or some sh***y work during those 3 months instead of transferring technology to someone else. In a rare case, yes you would be using the 3 month period to ramup up someone else, but which company gives 3 months for someone to rampup really?

Re:indentured servitude

[ghoul]

There is nothing enforcing it in India as well other than the fact that the employee will not get references. He/she will forfeit bonds (these are generally on fresh graduates whom the companies train for 6 months in classrooms in return for 2 year bonds as many Indian colleges dont produce work ready engineers). Also as a hiring manager if I see people with less than 1 year at a company I want a good explanation and if I dont get one we move on. Hiring takes up too much time and effort to hire someone who jumps every 6 months. But legally? Even 1 day notice is not required from either side. Its just that companies know they need to hire from the market and if they fire on a 1 day notice few people will join them when they want to hire. And people know pissing off an ex boss is not good as people do move around and the ex boss you screwed by leaving in the middle of a project with no notice may be a hiring manager at some future opportunity.

Re: indentured servitude

[Jack54 Gordon49]

Ha. Knowledge transfer. Maybe they need some foreign workers in to train their replacements.

Re:Philippines is 30 days...still annoying.

[avandesande]

I'd be curious to know if it works both ways, where companies are mandated to give equal amounts of severance pay.

A weak argument for American Employment-At-Will

[hwstar]

You or your employer can part ways at any time for any reason. The rest of employment-at-will tilts the playing field to the employer. IMHO, the employment-at-will laws are in need of serious reform to restore a level playing field in the US.

Re:send them back

[ruir]

Yeah, bring a cow dung seller, or a tailor to do IT job....idiot.

Rule enforced in USA also by these companies

[Anonymous Coward]

Am in USA working for one of these companies. I have 3 months notice back in India and in USA also. If I quit and join another company in US without giving 3 months notice, I have to pay $10000. If I dont, its deducted from my gratuity in India.

Added to that, they give my name to a debt collection agency with some non enforceable contract details. It might not affect my credit history, but is a major hazzle to deal with the debt collection agency.

That $10000 is a major decision point in switching job and is the reason why am a slave to this company.

BTW, its an Indian subsidiary of an American international company. Not even a proper Indian corporation.

Re:Rule enforced in USA also by these companies

[Anonymous Coward]

This is why Americans are generally negative towards foreign tech workers. Not only are you a slave, you raise expectations for everyone else.

"Why won't you work 100 hours a week for spare change like our slave? I think we'll just replace you with a slave, and you have to train them to get any severance."

Re:Rule enforced in USA also by these companies

[TheGratefulNet]

you guys are very clearly abused. its sad that its that way.

perhaps you need to consider a revolution in your country. fix your own society, first, THEN come here once your own problems are sorted out.

good luck.

Re:Rule enforced in USA also by these companies

[networkBoy]

Because they were trained *wrongly* on purpose?
I've seen that several times.

Re:Rule enforced in USA also by these companies

[cthulhu11]

What do you mean by "gratuity"?

Re:Rule enforced in USA also by these companies

[ebvwfbw]

So what's the big deal? Bail out and get a much higher paying job. I was stiffed about 20K years ago. The company refused to pay. Goods, services, housing, food, etc, all of that was supposed to be covered. I don't see 10K as much of a problem at all.

Re:People still give notice?

[Salgak1]

Don't give them ideas.

What is their time when they are fired?

[houghi]

In Belgium the time the company gives you is twice of what you have to do. This wil also depend on how long you work somewhere.

So a standard will be that if you have to do 6 weeks when you leave, the company will have to give you 3 months notice If you have to give 6 months, the company will have to give you a year. That would mean that you probably work there for 15 years or so.

Most companies will just let you go and pay out, but by law they can require you to come that period.

As this is something that is all over Belgium, it also means that if you get a new job, nobody will be surprised if you say you will be available in 3 months. When they start looking, they will be aware that this will happen and fire you before they fire the old guy,

e.g. You do the last job interview in December. You sign the contract to start 1st of April. You give your letter of resignation and you do your three months.
From the side of the new company, they start looking for somebody in November, they find you in December. They sign the contract you start the first of April. They can fire the guy you are replacing any time they want, but say they want somebody there till you come without overlapping. They call him into the HR office and tell him he is fired. He gets his box and leaves. He will get a payout of 6 months.

What they can do is do this in January and ask to stay 3 months and get the three months. Stay 6 months or do it at the end of March and stay 6 months.

"But this is of disadvantage of the company" people will say. "Yes it is, so?" I will say.

Re:What is their time when they are fired?

[Frederic54]

I'm in Canada, and I have seen people being escorted out of work in less than 30 minutes.
Some guy is called in a meeting, he goes there nonchalantly not knowing what is going to happen, then he has to give back his badge/key and is escorted by security outside the building. Some people were not even allowed to say "bye" to their coworker.
It works like this in North America.

Re:What is their time when they are fired?

[j2.718ff]

I'm in Canada, and I have seen people being escorted out of work in less than 30 minutes.

Some guy is called in a meeting, he goes there nonchalantly not knowing what is going to happen, then he has to give back his badge/key and is escorted by security outside the building. Some people were not even allowed to say "bye" to their coworker.

It works like this in North America.

When I've seen this happen in the US, although the employee is kicked out, he still gets paid for some length of time. (Usually at least 2 weeks, often a bit more, depending on the circumstances.) I have no idea what the law states. I suspect pay could be stopped immediately, but the company is trying to be nice, figuring that the employee would be less likely to start a legal battle. (Even if an employee is terminated for valid reasons, a legal fight could hurt the company.)

Re:What is their time when they are fired?

[Quince alPillan]

The reason they gets paid after they've been let go is because checks are typically withheld for a period of time when they start work. You don't get paid until you've been on the job for some amount of time (typically two weeks, but can be as much as a month).

They are getting the money back for the time that they already worked before they were fired. Severance packages exist, but aren't typical or required for non-managerial positions.

Money that the company DOES have to pay is unemployment insurance. If the company lays you off without cause, they're required to pay unemployment insurance at a fraction of your wages. If you're fired with cause, they aren't required to pay it.

Re:What is their time when they are fired?

[Terwin]

I'm in Canada, and I have seen people being escorted out of work in less than 30 minutes.

Some guy is called in a meeting, he goes there nonchalantly not knowing what is going to happen, then he has to give back his badge/key and is escorted by security outside the building. Some people were not even allowed to say "bye" to their coworker.

It works like this in North America.

Last time that happened to me(laid off, not fired), I got 2 weeks severance and 6 weeks accumulated PTO paid out.
Found a new job in about a month and got 13 months of income that year.

Re: What is their time when they are fired?

[dunkelfalke]

This is completely unrelated to severance time and happens in Europe just as well because trendy managers love to copy American bad habits.

garden leave

[bugs2squash]

My last company required a 3 month notice period. When I found a new job I negotiated a start date 90 days in the future and gave my notice. Then the company I gave notice to felt that they no longer wanted me working on any "sensitive" projects so that put me on "garden leave".

Then they realized they were wasting money and couldn't hire a replacement until I left, that's when they asked me if I would consider leaving earlier...

If it is a commonplace requirement in India then hiring companies will understand and make offers that factor in the notice period, and if that happens often enough employers will start to see it as a burden on them and drop the practice.

I dont beleive it.

[JustNiz]

I'm sure that if you really wanted to go quickly, you could easily find a way.
For example if you gave in your notice then just started turning up way late or not at all etc, or worse, became anti-productive, they would let you go or fire you ASAP just to get you out the way.

Re:Easy solution.

[Anonymous Coward]

Fire and blacklist you so that new job you got will not hire you when they are told you didn't stay the 3 months.

Feed Up?

[LifesABeach]

So What. I'm feed up with 3 million H1B's damaging American's chance at employment. If these H1B Zombies are so fucking smart, why can't they make a difference back home?

Re:Feed Up?

[TheGratefulNet]

their country is fucked and everyone knows it.

they jump ship, come here, becomes virtual slaves and while they still have it better than being back home, this abandonment of their home country is NOT HELPING the home country improve.

all they are doing is bringing their problems here.

Re:Easy solution.

[ShanghaiBill]

Fire and blacklist you so that new job you got will not hire you

Except there is no "blacklist", nor is there some back channel of communications between hiring managers at different companies. That is a myth.

Re:Easier solution.

[sodul]

Surprisingly not always, at my most recent job we got 2 months notices, but our last day int he office was a week later. We still got several weeks severance on top of that. Legally they had to give us notice since several hundred employees were laid off, but it was more generous than legally required. The exact team actually leaked a memo that our group was being shut down 2 month earlier, I guess that would count as 4 months notice.

But in general, yes, most companies will not give you notice and ask you to leave right away. I usually give 2 weeks notice and up to 4 weeks once because of consideration for the team working for me: the people, I hired.

Re: send them back

[Anonymous Coward]

Its amazing that a cow dung seller from India could do the job of an American IT consultant!!!

Re: Wait what?

[Corbets]

In your world, maybe. Here in Switzerland, 3 months notice is the norm, and six or twelve is not unheard of for more senior roles.

Sure, you could just not show up. But it's breach of contract, makes you inelligble for unemployment benefits, and would result in a bad reference letter, making it harder to get future jobs as well. Oh, and the company would likely take you to court and claim damages.

That said, it is viewed primarily as being in the employee's favor, as the company must respect the same notice period when firing you for anything other than gross misconduct. It often enough results in an employee being given 3 months garden leave (getting paid while at home) after termination. Even if not, the employer is legally obligated to give you a reasonable amount of time (e.g. 1/2 or perhaps 1 day per week) to interview for new roles.

All in all, it's a nice system, at least as implemented out here.

Re:Easy solution.

[sodul]

There definitely is a blacklist, it is even in plain sight on the WorkDay system as a checkbox "eligible for re-hire" and many companies actually abide by the blacklist they have. As for back channels, I have witnessed more than one candidate being turned down because the back channel feedback was negative, even if it was feedback from years old interaction with the candidate. Your reputation is important for your career in the long term, especially when you move up the ladder.

Re: Easy solution.

[thundercattt]

Agreed. Give notice, stop coming in. Not like they give you 3 month notice they're firing you.

H1B Visa

[Jack54 Gordon49]

Does India have a H1B visa program like the US? There may be some skilled foreign workers willing to come in and meet the local employers requirements.

What keeps people from just leaving?

[jdavidb]

Some of India's top IT firms ... impose the three-month notice period policy on their employees.

When I don't want to work for a company any more, I don't continue to follow its policies for three months just because they tell me to. What are the consequences for not complying, and what is enabling these companies to impose those consequences?

What happens if you don't give notice?

[Pinky]

What happens if you don't give notice?

Do they fire you?
Do they sue you for the money they would have given you?
Do they sue you for the value you would have added and they didn't pay you for yet?
Do they write an angry letter to your mother?

In all seriousness, what is the "or else" in these case?

Re:What happens if you don't give notice?

[mhkohne]

If I understand correctly, in India it's more or less illegal to have more than one job at a time. So, they have this thing called a 'relieving letter', which your old company gives you on the way out the door. You need this in order to become legally employed at your next company. (My understanding is that this law is intended to make as many people as possible employed by preventing one person from taking up two jobs. I've no idea if it's really working or not, and as in every culture, there's surely lots of under-the-table stuff going on).

So, they can basically prevent you becoming employed.

Yes, this sounds VERY strange to those of us outside of India, And from the little bit of reading I've done, it seems like some less-than-honest employers play games with these letters on a regular basis.

So, it's a totally suck-tastic situation for the employees, and I think that the guys petitioning the government are probably on the best track they can be.

Re:Easy solution.

[networkBoy]

I can confirm this on both points.
My former employer maintains a blacklist and a very dark grey list. I am on the latter, which means an executive VP or high can still auth my hire (very unlikely), while on the former list you are *never* working there again, all the way to the point of if a company you work for gets bought by them, you're fired on the spot.
I have witnessed said terminations.

There is also a clear back channel communication as it is possible to as a referrals rehire status from some former employers, if they say anything but "yes" or "we don't release that information" then it's a negative and you will not be hired. My former employer may or may not release said information depending on who and how you ask.

Re:Easier solution.

[eneville]

I doubt the large outsourcing firms would want to keep someone on after they give three months of notice. It would be far too embarrassing for them to have you accidentally make a "mistake" during that period (if you don't want to be there, the chance of you not paying attention to what you're doing goes up). Better to let them leave without (accidentally) destroying the contract.

Re:Easy solution.

[eneville]

Wouldn't that just lead to some enterprising company hiring "blacklisted" candidates at reduced salaries? Knowing a candidate will not get hired at companies X Y and Z, then company A can make an offer for 75% of the actual salary.

I think you're right, it's a market after all. Worst case, the employee will just wait it out a little longer and keep looking, for perhaps four months until someone really wants the skills he has and offers the standard market rate.

Re:Easy solution.

[eneville]

I can confirm this on both points.
My former employer maintains a blacklist and a very dark grey list. I am on the latter, which means an executive VP or high can still auth my hire (very unlikely), while on the former list you are *never* working there again, all the way to the point of if a company you work for gets bought by them, you're fired on the spot.
I have witnessed said terminations.

There is also a clear back channel communication as it is possible to as a referrals rehire status from some former employers, if they say anything but "yes" or "we don't release that information" then it's a negative and you will not be hired. My former employer may or may not release said information depending on who and how you ask.

Isn't this getting rather close to a cartel?

Re:Easy solution.

[Cederic]

Well, you'd be in breach of contract so there are remedies available.

At a minimum they can demand that you don't work anywhere else during that period.

Re: Wait what?

[shallot]

In Croatia, the law determines the minimum amount of notice, which applies when the employer terminates the employment. When the worker quits, there is no such requirement. This is likely because the labor law always assumes that the worker is the weaker party, so it serves mostly to give the workers more leverage in their dealings with companies. Even so, workers almost never want to leave on bad terms, so they simply use this leverage to negotiate a reasonable compromise.