1) termination clause gives discretion to company to terminate services of employee and relieve employee on such date as it deems fit . it is at discretion of company to pay salary in lieu of notice period or recover salary

2) confirmed employee can also resign by giving 2 months notice period but it is at discretion of company to relive employee on such date as it deems fit

3) it is not unilateral

4) practice of employer is not fair in asking employee to leave th e organisation if he has been in one post for 7 years or so . if employee had poor ratings then company could terminate his services

if the exit criteria for poor performance has been changed without prior intimation and is not intimated to employees in writing then it unfair on part of the employer

2) employer should give time to employee to show improvement

3) you had raised identical query earlier too wherein i had opined that employer should give time to employee to improve his performance then take a call

4) you have stated that employees are managerial cadre and would not fall under category workmen

5) if there services are unfairly terminated employees would not be granted reinstatement by courts . they would at most be entitled to claim compensation from employer

chennai court judgment mentioned in money control article mentioned that labour court had ruled that the job of an engineer in a software company involved skills and technical knowledge, and so Ramesha was a ‘workman.’

2) managerial cadre employees do not fall in the category of workmen and would not be entitled to any relief of reinstatement

3) ibtimes article cited by you mentions that company has been asked to hold discussions with the workers and come up with a solution.incase they are workmen they would fall within the parameters of the Industrial Disputes Act

4) the issue that arises for consideration is whether mangerial cadre employee can be regarded as workmen or not . if you are assigned any controlling, supervising, administrative or managerial authority over the other employees you do not fall within defintion of workmen

5) Supreme Court in S.K Maini vs M/S Carona Sahu Co. Ltd. and Ors. AIR 1994 SC 3 wherein it was held that a Manager or an Administrative officer is generally invested with the powers of supervision, in distinction to stereo type work of a clerk.

whether or not employee was entitled to recommend leave or initiate disciplinary action.?

bombay HC has held that Managers do not become workmen because their decisions are structured by processes and approvals. Absolute autonomy is not a norm in managerial decision-making. Nor does a law insist on absolute discretion or absolute automony for a person to be a manager",

Managers cannot be termed workmen, the Bombay high court has held, in a significant verdict that throws light on a vexed issue on who constitutes a workman in the post-liberalisation era.

"Basically the answer to the question must depend upon the dominant nature of the duties and responsibilities," the court said.

www.rediff.com › Business

Most of the IT companies or some major private companies boasting themselves to be MNCs have scant respect for the labor law of the land.

They act as if they are the bosses and dont even consider that whatever law or conditions they put them in the offer letter are Galilee and unlawful.

The present acts initiated by most of the IT industry employers to terminate their employees without valid reason or n such flimsy grounds is actually to cut down the expenses drastically by cutting down the strength of the employees.

It is not only unlawful but also against natural justice.

You may approach high court with writ petitions and all the affected should approach high court frequently making the employer restless and to decide about winding up his business for such continuous tortures.

I request you to read the implications of both ratings of poor performance & its implications for the previous & current year which I mentioned earlier. Also take into account, the changed criteria for exit is not informed in advance (before the commencement of appraisal process) & that to, verbally after the closure of appraisal.

Whatever may the reason be the company canot implement its new rules on the existing employees who were given a set of rules and conditions attached to the employment offer letter.

If the company has to decide about implementing new rules then it can enforce it on the employees who are joining subsequently and this rule can be effective protectively and not retrospectively.

Legal actions as suggested may be the next option left before the employees.

The information what you have provided is the solution to the present problems going on in some IT industries.

The government will not turn a bind eye to such atrocities done by the IT majors which are against the interests of the employees as well as meting out injustice to them.

There are solution in law for anything and everything, hence you may approach court for relief and remedies.

1. Within the sweep of termination clause extracted by you the company has indisputable discretion to terminate the employees. The discretion of the employer, which is traceable to the contract itself, cannot be questioned, but the manner of termination can be questioned. The employer has to, regardless of his discretion, terminate the employees in a manner that is far and not arbitrary.

2. In so far as the notice period is concerned the termination clause is bilateral.

3. It is unfair and arbitrary on the part of the employer to terminate an employee who does not have poor ratings. It can be challenged before the competent court/quasi judicial authority.

1. If the ratings is poor then the employer can terminate the services without affording an opportunity to mend his ways.

2. If, however, the performance appraisal criteria underwent a change which was not communicated to the employee then the termination can be declared as illegal by the court. Alternatively, the court may grant compensation instead of ordering the reinstatement of the employee.

The court can objectively grant compensation by making a holistic assessment without limiting itself to the contractual compensation.