Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Lecture 17 PDF
Lecture 17 PDF
Learning Objectives
• What is promotion
• What are objectives of promotions
• What are transfers and demotions
• What are separations
Promotions
• Horizontal promotion
• Vertical promotion
In horizontal promotion, employee’s job classification remains the same. In this case,
only his/her position increases. For example, a lower division clerk may be promoted as
upper division clerk with the same job assignment and responsibility. In vertical
promotion, an employee crosses his/her job classification. This increases the person’s
responsibility and status. For example, a superintendent becomes departmental manager.
William Spriegal has classified promotion into three parts. These are as follows:
• Inter-departmental
• Departmental
• Inter-plants
1. Organizational needs-- No organization can rely on outside recruitment to fill all its
requirements. It is true that certain jobs are similar in most of the organizations but
most jobs require some specialization which can be acquired in a particular
organization. This is even true for jobs which are not quite unique and may require
familiarity with people, procedures, policies and special characteristics of the
organization in which these are performed. Thus, promotional ladders are needed to
provide promotions those who have had broad experience in the organization.
Many complex and interrelated factors enter into the decision in a promotion system.
Management faces difficult task of deciding whom to promote since there are usually
more candidates than openings. The bases on which decision can be made concerning
promotion are:
• Merit
• Seniority
However, the argument for merit has little foundation unless conscientious and
systematic attempts are undertaken to measure merit. The main difficulty in weighing
merit, while making a promotion decision, is the lack of objective criteria. Test scores,
performance appraisal and analysis of behavior can be taken for consideration. However,
there is no accurate assessment procedure that is free of judgment.
In order to determine comparative merit for promotion, the specific traits, attitudes,
personalities and skills that make up merit and ability are frequently ambiguous. For this
reason, some organizations often rely on objective measurements. This includes the years
of education. There are two main criteria for executive success. These are as follows:
These two factors can be taken for measuring ability for promotion. They are quite
difficult to apply and both are conceptually weak. In spite of the various difficulties
involved in measuring merit, they are taken as base for promotion decision.
2. Special groups-- The second task in establishing a seniority system is that of deciding
what groups are to be given special treatment in the form of exemptions from the
rules. This is commonly known as super-seniority. The labor unions generally require
that their officials should be awarded super-seniority over all others. The super-
seniority is granted to protect seniority of personnel of particular groups. In some
situations, employees may hesitate to accept promotion at supervisory positions lest
they should lose their seniority status and rights.
3. Seniority unit-- Seniority can be counted on the basis of company, plant, division,
department, or occupation. Anyone or all of these areas can be used for different
purposes. Generally for promotion purposes, the seniority is confined to occupational
area, whereas in the case of vacation choice it may be company-wide. However, it is
important specially to indicate the particular units in which seniority can be
accumulated and company should maintain exact and accurate seniority lists of all
personnel.
1. 1.Seniority as the basis for promotion is based on objectivity and equality. The use of
such criteria as performance appraisal, selection tests and superior’s opinions leads
many employees to feel that promotions are not made fairly. This ultimately results in
declining morale and productivity. To avoid this difficulty, it is often suggested that
promotions should be based on seniority which is objectively determined.
Promotion based on seniority alone has many limitations and weaknesses. It provides
scope for inefficiency as employees are assured of promotion after certain years of
continued service. Sometimes, experience and ability do not have any correlation.
Individuals vary widely in their ability to develop through experience. Some merely
accept their daily experiences, whereas others deliberately seek and create experience
opportunities for themselves.
Each basis of promotion has its own relative strengths and weaknesses. Every
organization should decide on the relative weights it will give to merit and seniority in
making promotion decisions. Many organizations try to maintain a balance between merit
and seniority. Instead of taking a particular factor as the sole criterion, they take a
combination of both as shown in figure 17.1.
Some organizations follow the practice where seniority governs completely the
promotion in the lower job classes and merit governs completely the promotion in the
higher job classes. The primary reason behind this arrangement is the amount of
influence an employee can rightly be expected to exert in two types of jobs. In the lower
jobs, where employee is more restricted and controlled, knowledge factors are more
important. In the higher jobs, where the individual can exert a stronger influence on the
manner in which job is performed, personality factors are more important.
Transfers
Transfers serve a number of purposes. They are used to give people broader job
experiences as part of their development and to fill vacancies as they occur. Transfers are
also used to keep promotion ladders open and to keep individuals interested in the work.
For example, many middle managers reach a plateau simply because there is no room for
all of them at the top. Such managers may be shifted to other positions to keep their job
motivation and interest high. Finally, inadequately performing employees may be
transferred to other jobs simply because a higher-level manager is reluctant to demote or
fire them. Increasingly, however, some employees are refusing transfers because they do
not want to move their families or jeopardize a spouse’s career.
Discipline usually progresses through a series of steps. This includes the following:
• Warning
• Reprimand
• Probation
• Suspension
• Disciplinary transfer
• Demotion
• Discharge
This procedure if followed until the problem is solved or eliminated. Some ineffective
managers may be asked to go for retraining or development. Others maybe promoted to a
position with a more impressive title but less responsibility.
If demotion or transfer is not feasible, separation is usually better than letting a poor
performer stay on the job. No matter how agonizing the separation decision may be, the
logic of human resource planning frequently requires that it be made. Interestingly, a
surprising number of poor performers at one firm become solid successes at another.
Union Carbide has approached discipline in an alternative fashion through what is called
positive discipline. When problems arise at work, the supervisor confronts the employee.
Although subsequent incidents are met with increasing severity, punishment is not the
initial response. The first time an incident occurs, for example, an employee may be
required to take a day’s leave with pay to think about what happened. At the same time,
positive discipline encourages recognition of good performance by employees.
Duracell, for example, worked closely with outplacement consultants Pauline Hyde
Associates (PHA) when it closed its factory in Crawley, England. Even before the
announcement of the closing, PHA, quietly contacted 5,000 companies about job
opportunities, resulting in the posting of 100 unadvertised vacancies potentially available
for Duracell workers. Then, immediately after the news of the closing was delivered,
PHA counselors began meeting with employees on-site. Of the 300 workers, 150 were
out of a job immediately with three month’s severance pay. Employees registered at the
job shop, which was available to them whenever they needed it. The job shop had a firm
orientation toward achievement, with an average placement rate of two people a day.
News about job successes was posted on bulletin boards to generate optimism among the
employees still working. In the end, 92 percent of those laid off found new positions
through the outplacement effort.
It has become increasingly important for managers to establish and follow to the letter a
policy on termination. For many years, it was accepted doctrine that managers could fire
at their own discretion. Through legislative and judicial action, however, employees have
won an increasing number of complex rights. As a result, more and more companies are
finding themselves answering charges of wrongful termination in courts that seem to
view jobs as a form of legal contract or property, with roughly comparable rights.
Judgments of wrongful termination challenge the doctrine of “at-will” employment used
in many jurisdictions.
To handle disputes about discipline and document their resolution, formal complaint
procedures are common. At Federal Express, the discipline procedure includes a formal
grievance review process called the Federal Express Guaranteed Fair Treatment
Procedure (GFTP). It provides for up to three levels of review. These are as follows:
• Management review
• Officer review
• Executive review
Employees, not satisfied with the results of review at one level, may resubmit the
complaint to the next level. At each stage, both the complaint and the response should be
timely and in writing.
Let us look at some definitions of important concepts such as suspension, dismissal and
retrenchment or separation.
Definitions
Suspension-- This means prohibiting an employee from performing the duties assigned to
him/her. This involves withholding wages for as so long as that prohibition continues.
During the period of such prohibition, the contract of employment between an employer.
In this case, the employee is considered suspended. In other words, suspension does not
mean termination of service but only denial of work for some time.
Suspension
Procedural Suspension
During the period of suspension, the worker is paid a subsistence allowance equal to one-
half of the gross wages for the first ninety days and three-fourths of the wages beyond
ninety days. Till recently, this subsistence allowance was paid only in the Government
and public sector establishments. But in other establishments, it was paid only if it was
provided in their standing orders or model standing orders prescribed under the Industrial
Employment or Standing Orders Central Rules applicable to them. With the recent
amendment of the rules passed under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act,
1946, the offender can be placed under suspension pending enquiry. It has been made
obligatory for all employers to pay to the worker during his/her suspension. This includes
a subsistence allowance equal to one-half of the basic wage, dearness allowance and
other compensatory allowances to which he/she would have been entitled if the person
had not been suspended. Such subsistence allowance is paid for ninety days. If the
enquiry is prolonged beyond ninety day, the allowance is increased to three fourths of
normal emoluments. If, however, the responsibility of prolongation were that of the
workman, the allowance would be reduced to one-fourth of the normal emoluments.
Like fine and warning, suspension is generally considered as a minor punishment which
may be inflicted for misconduct such as unpunctuality or irregular attendance. It is
important that these are not habitual or often repeated. As a rule, punishment should be
commensurate with the gravity of the offence. In establishments covered by the Industrial
Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, the acts and omissions which constitute major
and minor misconducts and for which various punishments may be awarded, are usually
specified in the standing orders. In such cases, the punishment awarded should only be
that which is permissible under the standing orders. It is within the discretion of the
management to award a lesser punishment than that indicated in the standing orders.
However, they cannot award a major punishment like suspension for minor misconduct,
as it will not be legal under the standing orders.
The power to suspend an employee and withhold payment of wages during the period of
suspension by way of punishment, like the power to make penal deductions from the
remuneration of employees, is not an implied term in ordinary contract between master
and servant. As such, unless power is reserved to the employer specifically in the contract
of employment itself, an employee cannot be punitively suspended. Hence, in
establishments where standing orders have been framed governing the contract of
employment between the management and the workman. Provision is usually made for
reserving powers in the management to punitively suspend the workman and also for
prescribing maximum number of days of suspension which are generally four. If the
punitive suspension exceeds the number of days mentioned in the standing orders, it may
be regarded as a major punishment and may be dealt with as such.
Dismissal and discharge have the same result, that is, termination of the service of the
employee. It is on this account that these terms are often used indiscriminately by
employers and employees and even sometimes by the labor courts as though they were
interchangeable. But there is a difference between the two expressions and it is desired
that this is clearly understood. The aspects that need to be noted in this connection are as
follows:
a) While dismissal is a punishment for some misconduct, discharge is not always a
punishment.
b) The acts and omissions, for which the punishment of discharge may be inflicted, are
generally the same for which the extreme punishment of dismissal would be
warranted. However, on consideration of equity, expediency or extenuating
circumstances, it may be deemed desirable by the employer to discharge an employee
instead of dismissing him/her.
d) The agreed or reasonable notice may have to be given in case of discharge, but not so
in case of dismissal which is usually summary, i.e., without notice.
e) In case of dismissal, the employer can withhold the contribution to provident fund,
bonus and gratuity payable to the employees. The dues can be used to make up the
loss caused to the concern by his/her misconduct. In most cases, discharge of a
worker is still entitles him/her these benefits and other dues.
f) For dismissing a worker, the employer has to hold disciplinary proceedings. He may
or may not do so for discharging an employee. The employer can discharge an
employee by giving an agreed or reasonable notice, as provided in the standing orders
or contract of service, without serving him with a charge sheet, receiving explanation
and holding an enquiry, as is usually done for dismissing an employee. However, the
employer may be required to prove the bonafides of both the actions.
For persons covered by industrial law, such as Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and
Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, the following items of misconduct
for which a workman may be dismissed are prescribed under the rules framed under the
latter Act:
a) Willful insubordination or disobedience, whether alone or in combination with others,
to any lawful and reasonable order of a superior.
f) Habitual absence without leave or absence without leave for more than ten days.
i) Riotous and disorderly behavior during working hours at the establishments or any
act subversive to discipline.
j) Frequent repetition of any act of omission for which a fine may be imposed to a
maximum of three per cent of the wages in a month.
k) Striking work in contravention of the provisions of any law or rule having the force of
law.
The above list of misconducts warranting dismissal is only illustrative. Several other Acts
and omissions can be added to this. This may include willful slow down or inciting others
to slow down, assault on manager or supervisors and other offences under the Indian
Penal Code involving moral turpitude. This takes into consideration the nature of the
industry or the establishment.
Employers have been claiming right to hire and fire from time in memorial. The
unfettered exercise of this right by the employers was recognized in common law. Under
common law a person wrongly discharged or dismissed cannot be reinstated, and can get
at the most some prescribed monetary compensation by way of relief. The industrial law
which has replaced the common law for regulating relations between employer and
employee also upholds the right of the employer to manage and discipline his employees.
But this right has been abridged considerably with the enactment of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, and the
Payment of Wages Act, 1936 and with the emergence of the principles of social and
natural justice, and their extensive use made by Labor Court, Industrial Tribunals, High
Courts and Supreme Court, in deciding disciplinary cases and other industrial disputes.
Under the common law the authorities decide cases only in terms of contractual rights
and obligations, but under the industrial law the authorities have to take into
consideration the principles of social justice, and so they can even order the reinstatement
of the workman discharged or dismissed wrongly. The employers do retain their right to
take disciplinary action, but in a bonafide manner. Under the Industrial Disputes Act, the
employees have acquired the right to question the action taken against them, appeal to
labor and other higher courts against it. The higher courts can intervene if the dismissal or
discharge is malafide. It sometimes smacks of victimization or unfair labor practice and
violates the principles of natural and social justice.
In view of these changed conditions under which employers’ action can be challenged
and set aside, the employers are now compelled to observe such principles and
procedures in taking disciplinary action, including discharge or dismissal of their
workers, as to minimize the chances of their action being annulled or set aside.
No desirable procedure which may comply with principles of natural justice has been laid
down in any law for dismissal or discharge of an employee, nor has it been the subject of
any collective bargaining, or tripartite understanding. However, a model procedure which
should be followed has been evolved from various awards and judgments of labor courts,
industrial tribunals, high courts and the Supreme Court. The procedure follows the steps
given below:
The punishing authority is to consider the report and decide the punishment to be
awarded if the employee is found guilty. In deciding the punishment it has to be seen that
it is in proportion to the offence committed. He has also to see that the enquiry has been
conducted properly (see Appendix to the unit on ‘Discipline’ in this booklet) before
communicating the decision to the employee concerned. If at that time, the employee is a
party to any dispute pending before the Conciliation Officer or Board of Conciliation or
Labor Court or Tribunal, the punishing authority should take the approval of the
concerned authority before whom the dispute is pending, before conveying his decision
to the employee. Even if the decision is conveyed to the employee, before taking
necessary permission, he may be informed that necessary permission is being obtained,
and his dismissal will take effect from the date the permission is given, In the meanwhile,
he will be considered as suspended.
Other restriction on dismissal-- Under Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947,
allows dismissal or discharge of an employee under special conditions. The person is
considered party to a dispute which is pending before any conciliation or arbitration or
adjudication authority. Prior to this, a permission or approval of that authority has to be
taken for passing any order of dismissal or discharge. If the employee concerned is not
party to the dispute, he can be dismissed with a one-month notice or one-month wages in
lieu of the notice. During that month, the employer has to apply for permission for
dismissal to the authority concerned. Incase of protected workmen, prior permission for
dismissal and discharge is essential even when they are not connected with the dispute.
These protected workmen are trade union office. These are bearers who are declared, as
such, to save them from being victimized for raising or conducting the dispute. The
unions nominate them and the number does not exceed one per cent of the total
workforce. It is subject to a minimum number of five.
Retrenchment
Lastly, in case of lay-off compensation payable is half of the wages which would have
been payable to a workman, had he not been laid-off, and this he can claim as statutory
right. In case of retrenchment, compensation payable is half month’s salary for every
completed year of service, besides one month notice in case of undertakings employing
less than 100 persons and three months notice in case of undertakings with 100 or more
employees or wages in lieu of notice. But retrenchment compensation is not the statutory
right of the retrenched worker. It is only a pre-condition of retrenchment, because if it is
not paid the workman will not be considered as the retrenched process. Chapters V-A and
V-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, regulate it. These Chapters were not in the
principal Act to start with. Chapter VA and Chapter V -B were introduced in 1953 and
1976 to check and minimize retrenchment and lay-off which were causing a spate of
industrial disputes resulting in strikes and lockouts. Chapter V-A regulates retrenchment
in establishments employing 100 or fewer workmen. According to Sec. 25 of this Chapter
no workman employed in any industry who has been in continuous service for not less
than one year or who had worked for 240 days on the surface of 190 days underground in
12 calendar months under an employer shall be retrenched by that employer unless
(a) The workman has been given one month notice in writing indicating the reason for
retrenchment and the period of notice has expired, or the workman has been paid one
month’s wages in lieu of notice.
(b) The workman has been paid, at the time of retrenchment, compensation equal to 15
days average pay for every completed year of service or any part there of in excess of
six months.
(c) Notice in the prescribed manner is served on the appropriate Government. No such
notice may be required if the retrenchment is under an agreement which specifies a
date for the termination of service. The 240 and 190 days working period which
qualifies a workman for receiving compensation includes days for which he was on
leave with wages, or laid-off under an agreement or is permitted by standing orders or
absent due to temporary disablement caused by accident arising out of or in course of
employment, and in case of a female employee the days on which she has been on
maternity leave.
Procedure for retrenchment-- In case of workmen who are Indian nationals, the principle
of “first come last goes” has to be followed for retrenchment. The authorities can retrench
any other workman after recording the reasons for the same. For this purpose, seniority is
to be considered in relation to the same category of workers.
Re-employment of retrenched persons-- Where any workmen are retrenched, and the
employer proposes to reemploy any persons, he shall give an opportunity to the
retrenched workmen who are citizens of India to offer themselves for re-employment,
and such retrenched workmen who offer themselves for re-employment, shall have
preference over other persons.
Retrenchment Compensation
The statutory payment of compensation for retrenchment is not peculiar to India. In fact,
payments for such a contingency are widely prevalent both in developing and developed
countries. Such payments are, however, known differently, such as redundancy
allowance, separation or severance allowance. The last two allowances are payable even
in case of discharge and dismissal. Provisions for such payments are made either by
legislation or by collective agreements.