Thinking of employment bond, first thing that comes to the mind is an employee whose freedom has been snatched temporarily just because he was found suitable for a job in an organization and because the organization was going to train him for some period, no matter that the training was being provided for him to work for the organization itself.
Employment bonds surely act as a deterrent for some employees, but if an employee is seriously considering some other options, then these bonds are meaningless. At that time they only serve the purpose of creating nuisance to the employee and I believe in such a case the employee gets even more determined to leave the company and wants to get over with it as quickly as possible.
When I joined Larsen & Toubro in 2004 as a Graduate Engineer Trainee, there was no employment bond to be signed, but a few years later, the new joinees had to sign such a bond. The trend remains the same, employees still leave the organization whether or not they signed the bond. Those who have made their mind to leave will leave.
In such a scenario, any organization should introspect to seek answer to questions like why this organization was a preferred employer at the time of campus placement and why after working for some time, employees want to leave. Is something wrong with the organizational culture, does the organization not provide sufficient growth in career or is there any other reason?
Recovering the training or hiring costs through such bonds is like treating the symptoms of a disease but the root cause remains untreated. Employment bonds may serve a purpose for a short term, but till the time the root cause is addressed, the company is still losing in a longer term.
No comments:
Post a Comment