It is mandatory to serve the notice period before joining a new company. While some organisations have a 30-day rule, others extend to 60 days and a few can even stretch to 90 days. Without serving the notice period, employees run the risk of not receiving their certificates and final settlements. But on the other hand, if they get a job elsewhere, the new company often requests the employee to try and reduce the notice period, citing immediate and urgent joining. This often leaves a professional in a dilemma, forcing them to balance contractual obligations with career growth.
Employee turns the tables
Along similar lines, career counsellor Simon Ingari dropped a post on his X-handle where he recounted the story of one such employee who was rejected by a new company because the HR refused to approve the notice period duration of the employee’s previous organisation. But even in the face of rejection, the employee asked a simple question to the HR, which spoke volumes about the ‘unfair’ hiring procedure in most firms.
The post revealed that during the discussion, the HR asked the candidate about his notice period, to which he replied that it was 60 days. When the HR wanted to know if the duration could be negotiated, the employee clarified that it was not flexible. The HR then expressed their inability to proceed, stating that the organisation was seeking someone who could join within 30 days.
Employee calls out hiring bias
Before the conversation ended, the professional requested permission to ask a question. Upon receiving the approval, he inquired about the notice period policy that the company adheres to, to which the HR responded that their organisation operates on a 90-day notice period. In his follow-up question, the individual asked the HR if an employee at their company wished to leave within 30 days, would the organisation permit it?
The HR admitted that such a request would not be accepted, citing the need for adequate time to arrange a replacement and ensure a smooth handover. It was then that the candidate highlighted the unfair contradiction, questioning why companies expect prospective hires to join sooner when they themselves do not offer the same flexibility to their existing employees.
The employee’s words not only left the HR momentarily speechless but also underscored a broader concern around fairness in hiring practices, resonating with many professionals navigating similar situations.
Employee turns the tables
Along similar lines, career counsellor Simon Ingari dropped a post on his X-handle where he recounted the story of one such employee who was rejected by a new company because the HR refused to approve the notice period duration of the employee’s previous organisation. But even in the face of rejection, the employee asked a simple question to the HR, which spoke volumes about the ‘unfair’ hiring procedure in most firms.
The post revealed that during the discussion, the HR asked the candidate about his notice period, to which he replied that it was 60 days. When the HR wanted to know if the duration could be negotiated, the employee clarified that it was not flexible. The HR then expressed their inability to proceed, stating that the organisation was seeking someone who could join within 30 days.
Employee calls out hiring bias
Before the conversation ended, the professional requested permission to ask a question. Upon receiving the approval, he inquired about the notice period policy that the company adheres to, to which the HR responded that their organisation operates on a 90-day notice period. In his follow-up question, the individual asked the HR if an employee at their company wished to leave within 30 days, would the organisation permit it?
The HR admitted that such a request would not be accepted, citing the need for adequate time to arrange a replacement and ensure a smooth handover. It was then that the candidate highlighted the unfair contradiction, questioning why companies expect prospective hires to join sooner when they themselves do not offer the same flexibility to their existing employees.
The employee’s words not only left the HR momentarily speechless but also underscored a broader concern around fairness in hiring practices, resonating with many professionals navigating similar situations.
