[Spitfire]

Originally Posted by Gandhi

But we have zillion companies in India forcing employees to serve notice period of more than 30 days (I have heard some companies have notice period of 3 months).

I think this is part of the factory law? This is not valid for IT firms.

[Rotorhead]

Originally Posted by kutlee

Thanks Ajmat,
1. I was in a batch of 10 people and duration of 20 days. Full flegded training for the same program for a full course of 3 months now costs below 50k.
4. .

Hi kutlee, AFAIK the cost is not the direct training cost but also involves the cost the company had to bear for providing the necessary infrastruture, and also i guess in any project the man hours resolve into cost and any hours spent by your trainer or your mentor in your training will also be considered as a cost spent of ramping up.

[Spitfire]

Originally Posted by Rotorhead

but also involves the cost the company had to bear for providing the necessary infrastruture, and also i guess in any project the man hours resolve into cost and any hours spent by your trainer or your mentor in your training will also be considered as a cost spent of ramping up.

To add the coffee/tea, sugar, dip bags, toilet paper, water drank, water flushed, stattionery used, cool air breathed, table used, chair used, number of pens/markers used also is added.

Guys this is not what it seems. Training costs are incurred by the company to get the person to do their job. If they have to hire without the right training what stops them from hiring experienced people. This is why they give meagre salaries.

The substantially low salary paid works out cheaper to getting the new folks trained and it sort of creates a safety angle to the blokes recruited not jumping ship as soon as they are "trained".

A blame to a large part needs to be put on the folks who jump jobs purely for money and self growth only. Especially the freshers who grow wings within 6 months and start looking for more money. Not all but quite a few.

There is something called ethics that we as employees also need to have. We get trained on software/tools accounting to lakhs of rupees and without a thought walk off without repaying the faith the company put into us when it send us out to be trained.

[aaggoswami]

Originally Posted by Gandhi

Quite a few labor laws are not being followed in India. For example, as per labor law, a company can not have a notice period of more than 30 days. But we have zillion companies in India forcing employees to serve notice period of more than 30 days (I have heard some companies have notice period of 3 months).

My friend in Power Sector working with a company in A'bad is having a notice period of three months. Is this illegal ?

Originally Posted by Spitfire

Guys this is not what it seems. Training costs are incurred by the company to get the person to do their job. If they have to hire without the right training what stops them from hiring experienced people. This is why they give meagre salaries.

The substantially low salary paid works out cheaper to getting the new folks trained and it sort of creates a safety angle to the blokes recruited not jumping ship as soon as they are "trained".

A blame to a large part needs to be put on the folks who jump jobs purely for money and self growth only. Especially the freshers who grow wings within 6 months and start looking for more money. Not all but quite a few.

There is something called ethics that we as employees also need to have. We get trained on software/tools accounting to lakhs of rupees and without a thought walk off without repaying the faith the company put into us when it send us out to be trained.

1) My point is there is competition between companies also to have a better workforce. If my market value is more than what my company is giving me, why should I not change the job ? This is competition between companies and the one who offers higher money get the employee. Training ? Well who is stopping them from getting employees that do not need training, i.e. experienced guys ? Average package for IIM is around 9.2 lakh PA. Pay that and get IIM person, who is stopping them.
Bonds = company not confident on its work culture, ethics and salary. If you are not the best or are not offering best salary, you cannot expect best work force.

2) Your words " jump for money " are a bit confusing. Example : A fresher is getting Rs. 15K per month and after three months he is being offered Rs. 18K per month job. For common Indian middle class Rs. 3K is not a small thing. Its luxury IMO.

Now consider this : An experienced employee is under Rs. 24 lakh Per Annum package. He is offered Rs. 26 lakh Per annum package by another company. Mostly he will not leave. He is already well off, so he can pull on with Rs. 24 lakh package. Only if he is getting rise of more than Rs. 4-5 lakh per annum, he will leave current 24 lakh PA job.

But at the middle class level, it has to be about money. Rs. 3K per month makes a lot of difference.

This is the only way to jump and come up. My friend who is currently working in power sector is offered only reasonable salary. He is not able to sustain in A'bad due to rising expense, so if he changes job, he will at be at ease. Here Rs. 2-3K more per month or even Rs. 1K per month will make a difference.

It all depends on what is salary dished out.

Ethics. We all know speed limits on Express highway, but do we not break the law ? Our arguments range from " Expresshighway was designed keeping in mid 120 kmph " or " non sense low speed limit ". But rule is rule, yet do we break it. I have gone above 160 on Expresshighway where stipulated speed limit is 100kmph. Ethics ?

The negative point is that most of IT companies are now only hiring experienced employees and not freshers.

EDIT : No personal offense meant. These are just my views. I have earned salaries and also faced the phase of employment, which taught me a lot about how money is earned. So these are just my personal views.

[Gandhi]

Originally Posted by Spitfire

I think this is part of the factory law? This is not valid for IT firms.

Originally Posted by aaggoswami

My friend in Power Sector working with a company in A'bad is having a notice period of three months. Is this illegal ?

I remember reading this somewhere. I need to find this out from net.

[SilentEngine]

As far as my understanding goes, no company can forcefully retain an employee through bonds or any other means.
The following is from my college placement experience. During those days, we students were under the impression that most companies would be enforcing bonds while hiring freshers. But one of the companies that visited our college did not have this bond requirement. Their reason was that these bonds cannot stand the test in Indian courts, so thats the reason why they did not enforce bonds.

[Spitfire]

Originally Posted by aaggoswami

1) My point is there is competition between companies also to have a better workforce. If my market value is more than what my company is giving me, why should I not change the job ? This is competition between companies and the one who offers higher money get the employee.

Who decides your market value? The employer/yourslef or the market?

Anyone is free to change jobs but doing it purely for money is well a very shortsighted decision.

Training ? Well who is stopping them from getting employees that do not need training, i.e. experienced guys ? Average package for IIM is around 9.2 lakh PA. Pay that and get IIM person, who is stopping them.

They do that.

The ones who are thought to be gold diggers get a smaller package. If you dont like what you get paid reject the appointment letter itself. No one signs a bond first and then gets the salary amount.

Go to the competition whom you think understands you better. No need to show the finger for that.

Bonds = company not confident on its work culture, ethics and salary. If you are not the best or are not offering best salary, you cannot expect best work force.

Its the other way round the low retention rates due to employee greed is why these bonds have come out.

2) Your words " jump for money " are a bit confusing. Example : A fresher is getting Rs. 15K per month and after three months he is being offered Rs. 18K per month job. For common Indian middle class Rs. 3K is not a small thing. Its luxury IMO.

This is short term thinking. Remember you start from scratch everytime you jump positions.

If a fresher jumps for 3K he surely isnt getting a promotion or a higher level in the other company. He will be at the same junior level.

Now consider this : An experienced employee is under Rs. 24 lakh Per Annum package. He is offered Rs. 26 lakh Per annum package by another company. Mostly he will not leave. He is already well off, so he can pull on with Rs. 24 lakh package. Only if he is getting rise of more than Rs. 4-5 lakh per annum, he will leave current 24 lakh PA job.

You have a long way to go. But I will suffice to say money is not the only criteria to change jobs.

I think you dont see beyond the salary to understand your own worth.

Ethics. We all know speed limits on Express highway, but do we not break the law ? Our arguments range from " Expresshighway was designed keeping in mid 120 kmph " or " non sense low speed limit ". But rule is rule, yet do we break it. I have gone above 160 on Expresshighway where stipulated speed limit is 100kmph. Ethics ?

I lost you there.

The negative point is that most of IT companies are now only hiring experienced employees and not freshers.

That is because better and more critical projects are coming in.

No time to sit down and discuss 1k-2k hike with a fresher with no value.

which taught me a lot about how money is earned.

To tell you frankly you have learned nothing. Dont take it personally but you have a long way to go before you understand even 1% of what is required.

One creates his own worth it is not judged by the salary you get.

[given2fly]

@ spitfire.

Excellent post.

While a fresher may not get all that money as an experienced person, they jump way too often to spoil the market for the genuine ones. So the bond. I don't like them either, but I can see that it is rather the selfish type of freshers that have brought on this demand.

As for Ethics, Bond don't necessary enforce ethics. But it is also upto an employee to understand a job and deliver his/her best than just look for more money every 12 months. Entry level salaries aren't great these days, but you don't build a career through yearly switches. Build skills, network & faith in your employers and serve your best to the present.

If you don't like the job, have the courage to stand up to the fact and do something actually worthwhile than just keep switching for more money.

[bblost]

Originally Posted by aaggoswami

2) Your words " jump for money " are a bit confusing. Example : A fresher is getting Rs. 15K per month and after three months he is being offered Rs. 18K per month job. For common Indian middle class Rs. 3K is not a small thing. Its luxury IMO.

Now consider this : An experienced employee is under Rs. 24 lakh Per Annum package. He is offered Rs. 26 lakh Per annum package by another company. Mostly he will not leave. He is already well off, so he can pull on with Rs. 24 lakh package. Only if he is getting rise of more than Rs. 4-5 lakh per annum, he will leave current 24 lakh PA job.

15,000 + 20% = 18,000
24L pa + 8.3% = 26 L pa
24L + 20% = 30.48 L pa

@Aggoswami think about it.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by aaggoswami

EDIT : No personal offense meant. These are just my views. I have earned salaries and also faced the phase of employment, which taught me a lot about how money is earned. So these are just my personal views.

aaggoswami, I don't think anybody will be offended by what you have written. It is plainly visible that it is written from a fresher's point of view, without any understanding of how industry works. But then you do that all the time. Why....?

[amitk26]

@Spitfire : I somehow don't agree to you and I can fully understand aagowswamis view.

I am working for 12+ years , In current organization for last 9.5 years with no bond. When I joined this organization leaving another reputed MNC ( my 2nd Job) they asked me reason for leaving in interview and I said only one word money and no usual roundabout answers which people throw in interview such as " better work ? " , "more responsibility ? " , "Carrier" etc.

Let's except the fact we all do a "naukri' for money else we would be perusing our own interests such as travel , photography , stock trade , contribution to open source , working for NGO , offroading or whatever full time.

We employed person do provide our time money and service and expect money in return , Trying to retain us with any fetters apart from incentives such as work content , responsibility,power,freedom or money will be counterproductive for any organization.

Let me ask the managers / employers or non-freshers ( including myself)

If while running a company I have a choice of entering another business line, contract or product which can push my company in next league ,but forces me to abandon my current focus area what would me my choice ?

Would I keep the next lucrative product line away stating my commitment is for the current product stating my hands are full or will I scrap my existing product /project and move on to better business ?

Choice is difficult but in case as a manager I see that current business/product/client means a dead end to future of my company it is my duty to abandon it and move on, in best interest of stakeholders in business. In world of business this is called transformation or reinvention and reams are wasted in business magazines about industry captains who take such decisions.

A fresher makes same choice in different context.

[aaggoswami]

Originally Posted by Spitfire

Who decides your market value? The employer/yourslef or the market?

Anyone is free to change jobs but doing it purely for money is well a very shortsighted decision.

The ones who are thought to be gold diggers get a smaller package. If you dont like what you get paid reject the appointment letter itself. No one signs a bond first and then gets the salary amount.

Go to the competition whom you think understands you better. No need to show the finger for that.

Its the other way round the low retention rates due to employee greed is why these bonds have come out.

This is short term thinking. Remember you start from scratch everytime you jump positions.

If a fresher jumps for 3K he surely isnt getting a promotion or a higher level in the other company. He will be at the same junior level.

You have a long way to go. But I will suffice to say money is not the only criteria to change jobs.

I think you dont see beyond the salary to understand your own worth.

That is because better and more critical projects are coming in.


To tell you frankly you have learned nothing. Dont take it personally but you have a long way to go before you understand even 1% of what is required.

One creates his own worth it is not judged by the salary you get.

1) Problem arises when one enters company is not returned adequately and market offers more. Why do employees or Freshers jump ? They are paid to jump ? NO. Because they get better salary ( in plain words ). If a company increases salary of a so called fresher after lets say an year, then most of so-called Freshers will not jump for Rs. 1-2K.

Bonds prevent this from happening. And why bond before watching performance ? Check performance for 6 months and then ask the person to decide whether he wants to sign a bond or not.
If salary rise is dependent on performance, then bond signing also should be dependent of performance.

2) What if one is getting promotion and hike. From general trainee to Junior executive with some salary rise. Why not to change then ? Again in case of bonds, these promotions and rise dont come in early.

3) I wanted to type that I have faced a spell of unemployment and also worked. IMHO, the unemployment period taught me more on money that any thing else till date.

4) It looks like you are loyal to your company and have not changed any job till now. Nice. My father is also with one company from the day he completed his BE.

5) Changing job is not a game, its not easy to get accommodated in new environment and new poeple every 6 months or 1 year. But the change comes out of necessity not luxury.

Originally Posted by bblost

15,000 + 20% = 18,000
24L pa + 8.3% = 26 L pa
24L + 20% = 30.48 L pa

@Aggoswami think about it.

My father is not ready to jump for even a 20% rise due to age. But in general a person will.

Originally Posted by Samurai

aaggoswami, I don't think anybody will be offended by what you have written. It is plainly visible that it is written from a fresher's point of view, without any understanding of how industry works. But then you do that all the time.

Sir,
Its just my view of what I have faced. If people want me to sign a three year or two year bond for less than Rs. 1 lakh per annum, IMHO, its wrong, so I oppose it.
As an employee ( or rather fresher ) my job is to do assigned work, even sit more at office to get the job done. I expect to get salary. If I am not satisfied with it, I will look for better opportunity.

What employer gives is money to get job done.

A bond is equal to singing a bond while buying a car that one will get it serviced from one specific service center only for a stipulated amount of time. And owner of the car cannot sell the car. Go to that same service center each and every time. How does it sound ? For a fresher, a bond is similar to this concept.

Originally Posted by given2fly

While a fresher may not get all that money as an experienced person, they jump way too often to spoil the market for the genuine ones. So the bond. I don't like them either, but I can see that it is rather the selfish type of freshers that have brought on this demand.

Are you sure that companies never have selfish motive and are that good ?

Originally Posted by amitk26

@Spitfire : I somehow don't agree to you and I can fully understand aagowswamis view.


A fresher makes same choice in different context.

Agree with you.

[StarVegabond]

There are different types of employees viz. Freshers, First time job changers, 3-5 years experienced, 7-8 years experienced, 10+ / 15+ / 20+/ 25+ / 30+ years experienced or one company wonders. The way each of this category of employees look at their current occupation Vs the new job offer or "potential opportunity" is different. Their decision making criteria is also different.

There are different types of Employers viz. the one who treat their employees as valuable assets or talents or resources or billable/non billable headcount or overheads or burden on the balance sheet etc etc. The way these employers treat their employees reflects in the way of their thinking.

When you pitch Employees Vs Employers, then there could be several permutations and combination. So the retention strategies (of the employers) and way of employees treating their employers change based on which permutation is pitched against which combination.

In a market where demand out number the supply, the employees rule and dictate his/her terms to the employer.

Where the supply outnumber the demand, then employer rules and always dictates the employees.

so no one should think they are better than others.

The balance or equilibrium is achieved when demand is just above / below the supply, and organization is doing well w.r.t business outcomes. When business is doing well, employees are contributing, employers share the goodies with employees and both achieve win-win, then no bonds are needed. Trust and engagement are good enough.

But, Business situations are not ideal, and most often challenging.
Still in India situation is better, we are a growing economy. Consider the case of Europe, last decade plus, the economy and business have grown near zero % points. So employees can not be promoted or given extra ordinary rises, most of the countries have given zero rises, there have been job migration and job losses. Still Employees and Employers try to find a win-win situation. May be in 5-10 years time, our country also will go through this phase, most of us would be in a position to watch and learn.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by amitk26

Let's except the fact we all do a "naukri' for money else we would be perusing our own interests such as travel , photography , stock trade , contribution to open source , working for NGO , offroading or whatever full time.

That is where I differ. We all don't do it just for money, for many money is one of the criteria, not the only criteria. I have had situations I could have jumped and earned twice as much. But the strings that came with such jobs stopped me from even considering it.

Originally Posted by amitk26

If while running a company I have a choice of entering another business line, contract or product which can push my company in next league ,but forces me to abandon my current focus area what would me my choice ?

Would I keep the next lucrative product line away stating my commitment is for the current product stating my hands are full or will I scrap my existing product /project and move on to better business ?

Obviously you should consider it, but not from short terms gains point of view. You should look at how it fits into your career strategy, your life plans, your life priorities, etc. If somebody doubles your salary, would you go for it no matter what?

Originally Posted by aaggoswami

Its just my view of what I have faced. If people want me to sign a three year or two year bond for less than Rs. 1 lakh per annum, IMHO, its wrong, so I oppose it.
As an employee ( or rather fresher ) my job is to do assigned work, even sit more at office to get the job done. I expect to get salary. If I am not satisfied with it, I will look for better opportunity.

A bond is equal to singing a bond while buying a car that one will get it serviced from one specific service center only for a stipulated amount of time. And owner of the car cannot sell the car. Go to that same service center each and every time. How does it sound ? For a fresher, a bond is similar to this concept.

I was part of TCS for 6 years, I underwent the domestic bond, oversees bond (thrice) and I got out after serving my bond period. Do you think I need to be told what bond means to an employee? I can talk for days about the ill-will bonds creates. But it is enough to say that none of my employees need to sign bonds.

Originally Posted by StarVegabond

There are different types of employees viz. Freshers, First time job changers, 3-5 years experienced, 7-8 years experienced, 10+ / 15+ / 20+/ 25+ / 30+ years experienced or one company wonders. The way each of this category of employees look at their current occupation Vs the new job offer or "potential opportunity" is different. Their decision making criteria is also different.

There are different types of Employers viz. the one who treat their employees as valuable assets or talents or resources or billable/non billable headcount or overheads or burden on the balance sheet etc etc. The way these employers treat their employees reflects in the way of their thinking.

Ah! Now we are getting closer to reality. I should also add that there are different kinds of employees within a given experience level. The employer should do every effort to classify them for their own good. Some broad classifications (I just made up the names):

1) The eternal looker: This person is always looking for the better deal. The day he joins the new job, he will update his Naukri.com profile to add the new company/salary to his resume, and hope for something better. His real value to the employer is actual negative.

2) The one straw jack: This person is a perfectionist, if he doesn't like any one aspect of the job, he will start looking for a new one. So there is only one straw before he breaks and bolts. I have heard of people who quit because of the quality of the cafeteria. He can be valuable to the employer, but can't be relied upon.

3) The perfect employee: His priority is to stay and grow in the company. He won't quit unless many things go wrong on a long term basis. If the money is good, but work/role stinks, he will stick around. If the money is bad, but he is happy with role/work, he will stick around. If both money/work goes bad and he doesn't see any light at the end of the tunnel, he will start looking for a new job. This employee is a real MVP, the employer should identify and treasure such people. These are the guys who will see the company through bad times.

4) The deadbeat: These are people with least competence. Once they manage to get in, they will never leave. Mainly because they can't get anything better. The employers always look for ways to get rid of these employees. There was this funny incident in the early 90s, where H.A.L offered golden glove voluntary retirement scheme in the hope of getting rid of excess deadbeat employees. They achieved the exact reverse effect. All the folks who were competent enough to get jobs in private sector, took the offer in droves. But none of the deadbeat employees took the offer. By the time H.A.L came to their senses and stopped the scheme, they had lost hundreds of competent engineers while losing none of the deadbeat engineers.

Originally Posted by StarVegabond

There are different types of Employers viz. the one who treat their employees as valuable assets or talents or resources or billable/non billable headcount or overheads or burden on the balance sheet etc etc. The way these employers treat their employees reflects in the way of their thinking.

Similarly, employees should pick their future employers to match their needs. If you are a perfect employee, you have to be most careful and pick only such employers who are known for their pro employee schemes. You should be careful because, once you get in, you are not known to get out unless hell breaks loose. Just make sure your future company matches your own work culture. Freshies or even people with less than 5 years of experience hardly have this choice. But more experienced employees always have a choice.

The moral of the story: Work for a company whose work ethics/culture matches your personal work ethics/culture. Then bond won't cause you any harm.

[Spitfire]

Originally Posted by amitk26

I said only one word money

Somehow when you think long term it does not make sense to have such a thought process.

Did you tell the new firm you joined that I am joining you folks only for "money" and nothing else?

Let's except the fact we all do a "naukri' for money

No, not me atleast. I look for growth and growth comes with expereince and learning. Money follows growth automatically. How to grow is in my hands, how much money I get depends upon a lot of factors not all of which are governed by me.

If while running a company I have a choice of entering another business line, contract or product which can push my company in next league ,but forces me to abandon my current focus area what would me my choice ?

That has an obvious answer doesnt it? But your question is confusing regarding whether its an individual decision or a group one.

A fresher makes same choice in different context.

80% of freshers today look only at money.

Remember we were all freshers too.

Originally Posted by aaggoswami

Because they get better salary

I will quote Captain John H Miller:

"EARN IT"

If salary rise is dependent on performance, then bond signing also should be dependent of performance.

Firstly the "bond" is not a pure bond the way it is being talked about there is no law for that.

Bond is signed before the appointment it is not depend upon performance.

The company can terminate you within the bond period without asking for any money if you are a dead boat.

2) What if one is getting promotion and hike. From general trainee to Junior executive with some salary rise. Why not to change then ? Again in case of bonds, these promotions and rise dont come in early.

Bonds are typically tied to the probation period or for a project period. But serioulsy if you are good no one can stop you from growing.

3) I wanted to type that I have faced a spell of unemployment and also worked. IMHO, the unemployment period taught me more on money that any thing else till date.

We all have. I got laid off 3 months after I got my first job in 2002.

4) It looks like you are loyal to your company and have not changed any job till now. Nice. My father is also with one company from the day he completed his BE.

I have 3 jobs over 6 years. I grew from a IT admin fixing laptops and desktops for a Call Center to Higher management till my third job.

5) Changing job is not a game, its not easy to get accommodated in new environment and new poeple every 6 months or 1 year. But the change comes out of necessity not luxury.

Duh? Thats obvious isnt it.

My father is not ready to jump for even a 20% rise due to age. But in general a person will.

My father rejected a VP position in a big private bank in India. That generation is different.

Are you sure that companies never have selfish motive and are that good ?

Thats for you to find out which companies those are. Like I said earlier. If you have to be taken for a ride you will be.

Good posts from Starvegabond and Samurai.

To all the freshers out there, if you need to separate yourself from the ordinary. First thing dont look at the money. Look at the oppurtunity and the company.