[jkrishnakj]

I remember my first company, Thermax limited, Pune, compute and pay my bonus 5 months after I was gone. That company was always admired for its culture and I’m sure they still live those values.

Two years back, when I quit an IT firm, my boss who decides the Bonus made sure that I was rewarded basis my performance, since Bonus is always about the past performance for that year. It could have been very easy for him to tag me into the min payout and use the balance money for other employees in his them, but he chose to not do so.

It always pays to leave on good terms. Always pays to not burn the bridge. Who knows, they may end up in the same place we move to.

[Latheesh]

Originally Posted by jkrishnakj

I remember my first company, Thermax limited, Pune, compute and pay my bonus 5 months after I was gone. That company was always admired for its culture and I’m sure they still live those values.

I remember my ex-colleague telling about getting some payment years after leaving (company BPL). My last company also paid some market adjustment to the employees who left.

[m8002?]

What I have observed is that many companies are liberal with these kind of payments ( to ex-employees ) when the going is good. When the profitably is hit, they will really think about giving out money to someone who quit the company. It makes a lot of sense to keep that money in bank or invest it in existing employees.

The same scenario happened at my previous company. They used to give out the bonus in Mar to someone who even left the company in previous Q1. Then in 2020 due to Covid, they changed the conditions that one needs to be on the payroll on the date of issuing bonus.

[am1m]

Originally Posted by m8002?

Then in 2020 due to Covid, they changed the conditions that one needs to be on the payroll on the date of issuing bonus.

I've seen a few changes in policies too across orgs. But aren't the agreed upon conditions at employment legally binding? While I understand that policies need to be updated when required and to meet changing business needs, just wondering about the legal applicability of these changes. Let's say an employee joins a company that has specified 1 month as the notice period. So once the company representative (usually the head of HR) and the employee sign the contract, that is legally binding on both parties, correct? (It's a different matter whether either side will bother to go the legal route to enforce it or not.) After the employee joins, can the company decide to change the notice period to 3 months? What about employees who have already signed up? Legally, do they have a leg to stand on while refusing the new conditions, or is it just- if you don't like it, leave?

[IndieGooner]

Originally Posted by am1m

Let's say an employee joins a company that has specified 1 month as the notice period. So once the company representative (usually the head of HR) and the employee sign the contract, that is legally binding on both parties, correct? (It's a different matter whether either side will bother to go the legal route to enforce it or not.) After the employee joins, can the company decide to change the notice period to 3 months? What about employees who have already signed up? Legally, do they have a leg to stand on while refusing the new conditions, or is it just- if you don't like it, leave?

TCS did exactly that. Notice period was bumped up to 90 days sometime during 2016. As far as I know the change was made binding to even those who joined well before that time. I have not heard of any ex-employee legally challenging it.

[m8002?]

Originally Posted by am1m

I've seen a few changes in policies too across orgs. But aren't the agreed upon conditions at employment legally binding? While I understand that policies need to be updated when required and to meet changing business needs, just wondering about the legal applicability of these changes. Let's say an employee joins a company that has specified 1 month as the notice period. So once the company representative (usually the head of HR) and the employee sign the contract, that is legally binding on both parties, correct? (It's a different matter whether either side will bother to go the legal route to enforce it or not.) After the employee joins, can the company decide to change the notice period to 3 months? What about employees who have already signed up? Legally, do they have a leg to stand on while refusing the new conditions, or is it just- if you don't like it, leave?

My post was only about the bonus part. Also, our offer letters always mentioned that the bonus will be paid out only for those on payroll and not on notice period. It mentioned nothing about ex-employees. But we were paying bonus to ex employess and those on notice period too more out of goodwill. When covid struck, we started to "enforce" it. Of course, there were a couple of folks who resigned in Nov/Dec ( thinking they will still get the bonus in Mar) and made some fuss about it, but they could do nothing.

On the notice period, i feel it shouldnt be over 1 month. Keeping it 3 months and extending it for every leave the employee took during that 3 months is just pandering to the sadistic HR and Managers.

Now, what about existing employees if the company changes notice period from 1 or 2 months to 3 months? I dont have an answer to that. The IT folks are not going to go on strike against it. The company will just make everyone sign to accept the new change. It might result in a loss of goodwill but when you have 1000s of freshers ready to accept even 6 months notice for a job, most companies wouldnt bother.

[TorqueyTechie]

Just adding my few paise on the discussion about employees using the offer letter to shop around. I feel that it is alright as in the end everyone wants to get the largest pie. It is similar to how we all shop around for deals in cars/insurance etc. pitting dealerships against each other. Who are we to determine which person is worth what? Only change I would want is to move away from oral technical interviews which is followed still. I have had many a bitter experience when candidates crack those but are not able to perform a simple work on the job.

On notice period, in my previous company it was 2 months when I had joined (and even before me it was same). It was changed to 3 months somewhere in 2017/18 as ours was the only company (of the top 5 Indian MNC's) to have had 60 days. This did not impact the older employees who were already part of the org and it was made clear in the communication as well.

In my current org, there is a policy that the bonus component will not be paid if the employee is not part of the payroll at end of March.

[m8002?]

Originally Posted by TorqueyTechie

Just adding my few paise on the discussion about employees using the offer letter to shop around. I feel that it is alright as in the end everyone wants to get the largest pie. It is similar to how we all shop around for deals in cars/insurance etc. pitting dealerships against each other. Who are we to determine which person is worth what? Only change I would want is to move away from oral technical interviews which is followed still. I have had many a bitter experience when candidates crack those but are not able to perform a simple work on the job.

I dont think anyone has an issue with people shopping around before your offer first offer. But stop it once you sign up at one company. You example of car/insurance is not valid in this case. You dont sign up for one insurance, then choose a lower one and ask back the premium from the first insurer. The same for booking car. You pay a penalty to switch.

The big problem is the "worth" you mentioned changes the day he/she signs up the first employer. Even worse, many will not inform the first employer that they are not joining. They just ghost. We wait for 3 months and when we reach out to ship the laptop 2 days before joining date, they will mention they are not joining.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by IndieGooner

TCS did exactly that. Notice period was bumped up to 90 days sometime during 2016.

Was it back to 1 month? I had 3 month notice period even in 1998.

[IndieGooner]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Was it back to 1 month? I had 3 month notice period even in 1998.

Yes, it was brought down to 30 days in 2007 and then reverted in 2016.

[DudeWithaFiat]

Originally Posted by Samurai

I know lot of you will find this hard to believe. But there is no other mystery to this. It might sound like a punitive action to punish those who are quitting (there could be exceptions), but companies are not really into punishment/revenge business. It can't be policy.

This might be true for some companies, but it became a policy and has set a precedence even when the 3 months cushion is not required. I worked in a MAJOR German auto R&D's IT division in Bangalore for a few months. Couple of months after joining, I wasn't doing anything. Neither was our team. Our team of 9 was just sitting their warming the seats. Our job was to watch out for a ticket that comes once or twice a day, copy a line from that ticket and add it to file in one of the servers, reload/restart the service. It literally took less than 5 minutes. That was all. We were working for just 5 minutes a day. We were paid well too. One of our colleagues once commented that our company is actually the largest internet cafe in Bangalore. I was fed up of sitting idle, so I quit. I wanted to negotiate the notice period, but no, our Manager/VP/HR won't agree, because that was the 'company policy'. I know of a few others in the same department resigned for the same reason (lack of work) and they all had to serve the 3 months notice period.

P.S:- One more BHPian too worked at the same company and resigned for the same reason and had to serve the same 3 months notice .

[kaushikduttajsr]

I just came across the news that Coinbase has retracted offer letters for many incoming engineers 1-2 weeks before their joining date.

I want to ask everyone who voted against high salaries, - Is this justified? If not, why do we have different yardsticks to measure ethical behavior for employees and employers?

Affected folks could have used the time to shop for other offers. Now they will be forced to interview without a job at hand. And we all know how recruiters negotiate when folks do not have a job or offer at hand. Makes me feel there is absolutely no trust whatsoever and each side deserves what is happening.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by kaushikduttajsr

I just came across the news that Coinbase has retracted offer letters for many incoming engineers 1-2 weeks before their joining date.

I want to ask everyone who voted against high salaries, - Is this justified?

Is it justified? I didn't know, so I looked at their share price.



Then I looked at their recent P/L.

Coinbase posts net loss of $430 million for Q1 2022

So... yes. I think they have very good reasons for retract the offers. In fact, they would be laying off 10% of their current employees.

https://www.coindesk.com/business/20...r-market-woes/

[kaushikduttajsr]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Is it justified? I didn't know, so I looked at their share price.

Attachment 2316054

Then I looked at their recent P/L.

Coinbase posts net loss of $430 million for Q1 2022

So... yes. I think they have very good reasons for retract the offers. In fact, they would be laying off 10% of their current employees.

https://www.coindesk.com/business/20...r-market-woes/

Unfortunately, private employees do not trade on stock exchanges. But I guess you're saying that it's absolutely okay to ditch a commitment for monetary considerations - runway as per current balance sheet (without considering impact on the other party). IMHO, this logic can be used to justify more employee behavior than employer behavior.

For e.g. share prices do not just impact the company but also the shareholders. By your logic, all Coinbase shareholders can justify shopping for more jobs as their current runway has decreased with falling share prices

Well, nasdaq has fallen by 20%+ since Jan and that makes all employees in the tech sector eligible for this behavior.

Also, all the mind boggling offers being discussed here can be traced to startups (listed or unlisted) burning investor money. None of them have seen profits yet and most of them will never see it. Unsure if you'll still want to hold on to the share price logic.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by kaushikduttajsr

For e.g. share prices do not just impact the company but also the shareholders. By your logic, all Coinbase shareholders can justify shopping for more jobs as their current runway has decreased with falling share prices

Well, nasdaq has fallen by 20%+ since Jan and that makes all employees in the tech sector eligible for this behavior.

Also, all the mind boggling offers being discussed here can be traced to startups (listed or unlisted) burning investor money. None of them have seen profits yet and most of them will never see it. Unsure if you'll still want to hold on to the share price logic.

My bad... I take it all back.