I worked for Infosys and had to sign one year bond. I decided to leave the company within one year and therefore had to do some research on the legality and enforceability of the bond in India. The following is the result of my research:
As per the Indian law, bonded labour system is abolished and no bond can force any person to work against his wishes.
Article 19 of Indian Constitution talks of Fundamental Rights and as per the Article 19, the Right to work is a fundamental right, and under no circumstance does the Fundamental rights under Article 19 be waived by any person nor can any person be forced to do something that amounts to the violation of the rights mentioned under Article 19.
As per the Indian Contract Act, if a contract entered between two parties is one sided then such contract would be null and void.
(To prevent the contract from being one-sided, Infosys has put a clause stating that it would provide training bonus after completion of one year of employment)
Again as per the Indian Contract Act, no contract can be enforced on any person if the contract which is being so enforced causes any harm to the person on whom it is enforced and if performed would violate principles of natural justices.
Section 368 of Indian Penal Code is about extortion by threatening to file legal suit. The minimum punishment under this act is two years imprisonment.
Any complain against the company would land the Directors of the company in Jail, as the company is a legal entity and the management are hands and heads of the company.
The court also has stated that the employer cannot hold back any personal document of the employees as they are properties of the employees and the company has no claim on the same.
Bonds are applicable only if the company has spent money on the personal grooming and enhancement of the employees and not just on training that helps employees perform better.
Now coming to the Ethical aspects of Bond, there are two points to consider:
1. Should employees be made to sign the bond?
2. Should companies try to enforce the bond?
Companies invest in its employees. Infosys, for example claim to spend 3.2 lacs per employee on the initial four months training. Though this figure looks too inflated, having personally undergone the training, I can say that the cost would definitely be more than 1 lac (which is the bond amount of Infosys). The company would definitely not want its investment to benefit its competitors.
Morally, the companies should not enforce the bond and should leave it for the betterment of the person. Infosys, for example does not try to enforce the bond if its employee goes for higher studies. But it does send a legal notice when the employee joins its competitor. This is where the ethical dilemma arise- whether to look for the employees interest or to look for the companies self-interest. I personally believe that the bond should not be enforced and look for the welfare of the society at large.
As per the Indian law, bonded labour system is abolished and no bond can force any person to work against his wishes.
Article 19 of Indian Constitution talks of Fundamental Rights and as per the Article 19, the Right to work is a fundamental right, and under no circumstance does the Fundamental rights under Article 19 be waived by any person nor can any person be forced to do something that amounts to the violation of the rights mentioned under Article 19.
As per the Indian Contract Act, if a contract entered between two parties is one sided then such contract would be null and void.
(To prevent the contract from being one-sided, Infosys has put a clause stating that it would provide training bonus after completion of one year of employment)
Again as per the Indian Contract Act, no contract can be enforced on any person if the contract which is being so enforced causes any harm to the person on whom it is enforced and if performed would violate principles of natural justices.
Section 368 of Indian Penal Code is about extortion by threatening to file legal suit. The minimum punishment under this act is two years imprisonment.
Any complain against the company would land the Directors of the company in Jail, as the company is a legal entity and the management are hands and heads of the company.
The court also has stated that the employer cannot hold back any personal document of the employees as they are properties of the employees and the company has no claim on the same.
Bonds are applicable only if the company has spent money on the personal grooming and enhancement of the employees and not just on training that helps employees perform better.
Now coming to the Ethical aspects of Bond, there are two points to consider:
1. Should employees be made to sign the bond?
2. Should companies try to enforce the bond?
Companies invest in its employees. Infosys, for example claim to spend 3.2 lacs per employee on the initial four months training. Though this figure looks too inflated, having personally undergone the training, I can say that the cost would definitely be more than 1 lac (which is the bond amount of Infosys). The company would definitely not want its investment to benefit its competitors.
Morally, the companies should not enforce the bond and should leave it for the betterment of the person. Infosys, for example does not try to enforce the bond if its employee goes for higher studies. But it does send a legal notice when the employee joins its competitor. This is where the ethical dilemma arise- whether to look for the employees interest or to look for the companies self-interest. I personally believe that the bond should not be enforced and look for the welfare of the society at large.
No comments:
Post a Comment