[libranof1987]

Originally Posted by Samurai

So you are saying all employees are spied upon in other top IT services companies too.

You'll be surprised to note; one of the top Swiss banks does that too. Of course, this is for the Indian captive unit.

Very regressive but clearly, there must have been a strong business case for such a move. Non-IT services companies tend to have very employee-friendly policies (laptops given to most employees, work from home at will); policies that a lot of Indians love to exploit.

I know several companies where laptops are now being issued only to senior management, and work from home is being asked to be justified.

[asingh1977]

Originally Posted by neil.jericho

But it was concerning to know that every little move of yours on your office computer was being tracked. I heard that the tool had since been rolled out across the organization in all accounts.

My office had that around as early as 2004-5. It could not be killed from the task manager or suppressed in the OS start-up policies. It would basically capture the Windows frame title and how long focus remained on it. Also how long a system was locked (auto locked or manually locked). The reports were extremely granular and and logged data real-time. My manager asked me:- Why I opened an Outlook mail with the title as "Katrina Kaif" 10 times in one hour. Insult to injury: She was downloading the team data dump for the first time, and wanted me to help her out analyze it, and decided to check my details first. As a sample.

[Hayek]

Lots of folks have spoken, and I agree with the majority view. Your manager is nobody to waive a notice period - you need to get that in writing from HR.

I also agree with GTO and others who say life is long, and never burn bridges while leaving a company. You are attempting something different - but may want to get back into your industry in the future. And the contacts you made in your existing organisation would be very useful at that time. People remember those who did the “wrong thing” while quitting.

So, pay up the one month’s pay - or offer to work for an extra month of that would be an economic hit for you.

[hondafanboy]

Assuming that you have not responded negatively to their valid demand , I would do the following if you I were you;

I would thank both the manager and the HR for accomodating your request for early release from your duties. Politely remind them that as you discussed , you are leaving to persue your passion and not joining any new organization. Request them to see if the reduced notice period can be honored without any penalty as financially you are not in a position to comply with that. Offer that if its not possible , you would be happily serve the remaining notice period. See what happens, if they ask you to continue serving the notice period then you do that. As lannister said, the debt must be paid. Also you are taking a risk by exploring different and extreme options to not to pay them. Taking risk is very bad if it can be avoided. This is that kind of a risk.

Hope this helps and good luck for the next chapter.

[F150]

I have released several people ahead of notice period, but I have always explicitly told them, that notice period recovery will be applicable. Most of them were OK with it, as the hiring company would buyout the notice period sometimes.

Waiver of recovery can only be approved by center head under exceptional circumstances. Your manager irrespective of his position/level cannot waive the recovery, only centre head can.

If you have leave balance, request for adjustment of leave balance against the notice period. Else serve the notice period and move out on a positive note.

[dextor]

In this case I see a clear lag at multiple sides.

Your manager tried to help you by accepting your request of early relieving and he did what best he could do but he might not be aware that in doing so you will have to pay the penalty.
This do happen. Managers are sometime not aware of changes to policies as there are so frequent and it becomes almost impossible to keep track.

Bigger lag is from HR, as they should have noticed this shortfall and should have already communicated this to manager & employee before last date. Every company or department is liable to give a warning before charging a penalty.

I believe here the issue is due to too much of improper automation. The HR guys themselves would not have noticed about shortfall. Only at the time of relieving the system would have shown this in red & HR would go ahead with charging penalty.

As many people suggested either you can talk nicely to the company, explain your situation & see if they can waive off this penalty.
Another this is ask your manager what he can do for you. He should be talking more to HR rather than you doing it.
3rd is extreme one (if you are ready). Get in touch with a lawyer and send a legal notice to company. In this case companies don;t want to get into hassles of court case & will agree to waive off the penalty. The reason of penalty is to discourage early relieving which can hamper the business. But in this case no loss to company is there.

[sdp1975]

Several years ago, my notice period was bought out by the company I joined. The only downside was that it was treated as "income" in the company I had joined, and was subject to tax.

Go through the exact wording of your contract, and try to find out if what the HR is saying is correct or not. I can understand that it isn't fair to you , but I would agree with what GTO has said, don't spoil your relationship with your company, not for a month's salary.

You can post an anonymous review on employee review websites like Glassdoor if you're forced to pay. Social media review does matter these days for employers.

[vnabhi]

90 days notice period is standard in Central Public Sector Undertakings. And no manager, however senior, has the authority to waive shortfall. Only the CMD can waive it, provided it is recommended by the Director (Personnel).

HR is less authoritative comparatively in private sector, more so in IT. In this case, assuming the company has a practice of waiving off shortfall in notice period, the resignation letter ought to have sought waiver of 30 days notice period, as this was what the Manager had agreed upon. The Manager then ought to have accepted the resignation and recommended waiver of notice period as requested in the resignation letter/email.

In my case, i worked in the HR management of a Central PSU for 21 years. I too had to pay notice period of 76 days as I had requested for early release, but as I had a large leave balance, they agreed to adjust that from my leave balance, and paid me the rest of the leave balance with my final settlement. This was stated clearly in the Office Order issued by my HR colleague accepting my resignation and indicating the date of release.
Note: I did not even request for waiver as I knew the fate of whatever requests were made during my 2 decades with that company.

Below is a true copy:

[Guna]

I have not gone though all the response and what I suggest here may have been already pointed by others:
If there is no documented communication which indicates that you demanded a early reliving and if the date was proposed by manager, there are 3 options:

1. Options 1: Insist that you want to serve full period and any shortfall, company needs to compensate (but this option is not available now)
2. Option 2: Insist you wanted to serve full notice period but since the manager proposed a earlier date, you were OK with it but are not liable to pay anything to them
3. Option 3: During your conversation while you were putting in the papers, if you had shown inclination for an early reliving and manager merely put that date in the mail. In this case, if they insist on compensating for the shortfall, you may need to.

[Lobogris]

I will go against the tide here and suggest you fight for your rights.

The notice period is based on a contract negotiated between you and the employer. This contract is not absolute and can be modified from time to time. When your salary is raised, you get a promotion, you get assigned to another location and so on, that original contract is modified. In this case, you requested the manager to set the earliest possible relieving date. The manager is the representative of the company and his email authorization is binding on the company. They can take action against him if they like but they can't renege on an official commitment given by him in the course of his duties. At no point were you informed by the manager or HR that this earlier date would mean incurring a penalty.

You should discuss this with the country head and if you don't get a favourable resolution, don't be afraid to take the legal route. Yes it might take 2 to 5 years but we have to fight for our rights. It is quite possible a simple legal notice from your lawyer can quickly change their mind. Despite what people assume, no company likes litigation and no corporate lawyer will usually advise to litigate when an easy compromise is possible. The company may litigate if they fear this would set a precedent but your case is a little different as you have written permission from your manger. They might just waive the damages for you and change their corporate polices by educating their mangers to not agree to an early termination date without explaining the applicable penalty. In addition, as Samurai wisely pointed out, they would be hard pressed to show any loss to them due to your early departure and thus their claim might be weak in a court of law. If I were in your shoes, I would fight it out, no matter how long it takes.

[amit73]

I am not an expert but you should have explicitly mentioned in your resignation letter that you were willing to serve the full 90 days of notice period but would prefer to be relieved earlier, if possible. By asking for earliest release date, you gave an impression that you were NOT willing to serve the full notice period and preferred to leave early "at all costs" i.e. were willing to buy out the notice period.

You had a legal contract, were aware of the 90 days period and there is no (legal) justification for asking for an earlier release date.

In short, I do not think that you have any legal rights and it would be in your best interest to resolve this amicably.

[nishsingh]

Originally Posted by driverace

TLDR/ I quit my desk job, since I want to pursue adventure sport of paragliding as a living.

Admire your courage, and envy you, for I (and most of us) will never have the courage to do what you did - give it all to follow your dreams.

If you however get caught in litigations, you will be dragged back to this life that you want to leave - everytime there is a date with the courts.

As others have suggested, try and talk your way out for a waiver. You will be amazed at what a little bit of talking can do.

(On a lighter note) If you remain involved in litigations, you might endup making errors such as these

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLBJA8SlH2w

[AirbusCapt]

I'll put out a different perspective here. Since you have quit to follow your dream i.e. a self made career in adventure sports, I assume it can wait for 30 days more. Whenever you exit always leave on a clean note, no reason to break policies or antagonize those in power. Forget about joining back to the same company/industry, even for say VC funding, an investor or even a loan, a simple background check may fail when your current company bad-mouths you. Why take up headaches when you can simply avoid. Just offer the HR, that you are ready to serve the remaining notice period, it's likely that seeing the cost benefit of it, they may just let you go.

[LoneRidder]

Originally Posted by driverace

-----------------------

The sequence of events in summary:
1. I resigned (official email date 1st January 2019), requested the soonest possible relieving date from my Manager.

Sir, when you resigned you have requested for the soonest possible relieving date. That's the end!

Let me give you different scenarios how resignations work. Being a HR I have seen it all. Before that;

1. Company (be it MNC or Indian) are not charitable trust.
2. Policies are made for the company and employees, there is no differential treatment.
3. In a company 'All are employees' (except for individual owner companies) it may be you, your manager or HR.
4. Policy and rules apply to all equally as defined in the rule book. Senior may have different privileges (as per policy).

Now coming back to resignation. An employee can decide to quit through 3 ways.

1. I resign and want to get relieved by end of this date (after completion of notice period).
Out come:
a. Company accepts, the employee gets relieved on the last working day of the notice period - employee gets paid till that date.
b. Company will NOT accept, the employee gets relieved earlier (for whatever reasons) the employee will get paid for the balance of notice period.
c. Company will NOT accept, the employee gets relieved few days after the notice period (may be due to project closure or any other reasons) the employee gets paid till the actual last working day.

2. I quit and I want to get relieved on this day (before completion of notice period).
Out come:
a. Company accepts the resignation, the employee gets relieved on the requested last working day. Employee gets paid till last working day and for shortfall employee pays back.
b. Company accepts the resignation, the employee gets relieved on the requested last working day. However, company may waive off the shortfall (for reasons like: employee has given more than the best during notice periods or before, was a key contributor, was a top performer, etc mainly due to positive reasons).
b. Company will NOT accept, (due to varies reasons - it could be simply due to the policy even if there is no work. The employee gets relieved after the completion of notice period - employee gets paid till last working day.

3. I quit and I want to get relieved as soon as possible (before completion of notice period).

Out come:
a. Company accepts the resignation, the employee gets relieved on the discussed and decided date. Employee gets paid till last working day and for shortfall employee pays back.
b. Company accepts the resignation, the employee gets relieved on the requested last working day. However, company may waive off the shortfall (for reasons like: employee has given more than the best during notice periods or before, was a key contributor, was a top performer, etc mainly due to positive reasons).
b. Company will ask the employee to complete the notice period and employee gets paid till the last working day.

When the employee say 'as soon as' or the 'soonest possible date', it is an indication to the company that the employee will not be able to give his or her best beyond the point requested. Hence in most of the cases, when there is no dependability or even if it is there, if easy transition is possible the employees are relieved early.

Now the question of wavier or recover. If you go my simple rule book, the employee has to payback. Because the employee had asked for early relieving. Legally this is maintainable.

There are many personal suggestions and views above. They are all good to read and have your adrenaline rushing. End of the day, all companies are flexible, however if an employee tries to arm twist the rule book come to play.

You may quit the company, company is made of individual people like you and me. It is always good to have a good handshake and move on. We all live in a small world. Cheers!

[lalgudi]

I empathise with you.

Typically, what your reporting manager has to say is only about the work that is pending/due / transition from you. It has got nothing to do with the contract.

Waiving away the contract or enforcing it is strictly a HR matter and your reporting manager has no say in it.

This is why typically, it helps to keep HR person involved kept in cc in all communications and discuss the notice period waiver / subject to leave balance and all that with HR and have it written after finalising the relieving date with your reporting manager.

In the present scenario, i would recommend that you get away without burning too many bridges unless you feel that there is strong reason supported by evidence to take them to court.