Hey Diana, it is true but this point of time we cant do anythings just to obey the contact.....but before going to contact we must be sure with,the compnay background and polices, if the company is good i dont mind to go with the Bond.. its my view it may be different from you.

It's an interesting and debatable subject, which I studied some time ago being directly implicated in this.

More and more companies add this commitment policy or fidelity policy to the employment contract to tie a employee to the job, position or team inside that company.

Usually when new employees are hired, the company gives a trial period to prove their professional skills, their compatibility with the job requirements, the quality of their work, their capability to complete specific tasks required by their job description.
Often the company assigns a supervisor to test, guide and teach the new employee.
Sometimes the company invests in that new employee providing access to training courses.
In that case, the commitment policy is just an "insurance" for the company that the person won't leave the company until paying back at least the money, resources and time the company invested in him/her.

If this commitment policy comes together with a fidelity bonus, then the employee might be tempted to sign the agreement, although it's usually in company's favor. He has immediate material benefits and he is assured about his position in that company, which might seem a good choice especially in these times of crisis.

The work contract between employee and employer stipulates the conditions and terms of leave on both sides, as well as this additional terms and stipulates the legal and financial consequences of breaking this agreement.

There are hidden disadvantages from the employee side, because often he signs this agreement before having the chance to really get a look from the inside the company or team he'll be part of. It can lead to restraining the employee professional development inside that company, restraining his freedom of choosing another job, another company where he'll may be able to evolve, to learn more, to expand his field of activity, to add knowledge and experience.

I suggest any new employee tempted to sign this kind of agreement to take time to carefully read it, to ask for the help of a legal adviser, to correctly understand all the terms and be aware of the possible implications.

I gave my personal inputs and described a little the situation often seen in Romanian or foreign private companies in my country.
I wait to see your points of view, your opinion as professionals who are for sure much more able to "read" between the lines of a policy like this.

Dear Diana,

Very interesting topic to discuss. To begin with I would like to share with you that I have implemented this policy in my organization four years back and I have been successful and I am sure I am going to continue this process...

In our organization every associates has to give a commitment for two years, irrespective of level the candidate is joining (its applicable from an office assistant - managers).

We should clearly explain the difference between a Bond and a Commitment. You should show the candidate a clear career path with-in the organization and show him/ her progress one can expect after the commitment period.

Unless an organization has a clear career path, T&D process in place, and a work environment which has the culture of empowering people, believe in transparency, Ethics and Values we will not be able to implement and continue this process. It will certainly be a challenge for the recruitment team to hire talent.

To answer your question should we have the Damage clause, Security deposit as part of the agreement? Then my answer is yes.

Within my organization we expect the candidate to deposit original documents for the period of commitment (we given him an acknowledgment on the same) and we also have a damage clause of one lakh.
We should have Damage clause and Security deposit, to have standardization within the organization.
It also brings seriousness to the candidates

Resourcing team plays a very important role in the candidate’s career decision, hence the recruiter should be able to convey the message in a way it inspires and motivates the candidate. Even slightest hesitations from the recruiter may impede the confidence levels of the candidate…

Explain the difference between Bond and Commitment, Bond is usually used between Master and Slave, Corporate world is not slavery.

To implement his process be very clear on some of the VFAQ by the employee.
Why is this…?
This is only for Fresher’s and not for experienced
U r questioning my integrity, trust
What if I am not happy with the job after joining?
What if I am not getting the benefits...?

Diana, I will be happy to discuss the topic with u, call me on 98480 44294

Dear Archana,

Thanks a ton for your comprehensive reply,

Yes, I agree that commitment is different from BOND!

But when you ask for such commitments, they agree at the first place,
the issue starts with the security deposits, certificates or any other forms

...As you have mentioned & pointed out those questions raised by candidates...yes, we do face the same very questions from them... :)


This has been practiced since years now, but what I have noticed is, the "lack of trust" between the employee & employer...

Once these such rules are kept, it automatically builds a wall in between, irrespective of the type of Co. or work or even the career path...

Its the nature of a human being to be free, to have the choice to choose, to have the freedom to "commit" ....

But at the same time, we do have candidates who lack the corporate ethics & do not mind hopping different companies for few thousands here & there, without prior notice or without completing their given tasks...(which spoils their resume image as well )

What I would like to propose is, it should be mentioned clearly during the induction, that it is a "give & take" ...the more you are reliable, the more the employer can take care of you.

Also, leaving the company without notice, absconding from duties...etc would leave a bad impression on his/her profile... relieving letter would not be issued by the Co. which is very important & also their irresponsible action reflects on the background verifications which are very usual now a days. (no employer would like to appoint a candidate who has no respect for the Co.'s policies, notice period...etc)



So, instead of binding a person, with whatever name we call it...isn't it better to put this practice to make them understand & respect the commitment, instead of demanding & forcing it on them....

Is this practical!?


Diana

Dear Diana,

Its true but most of the employer's are taking the bond's from the employees, so that they stik to the company for a given perticular period. But one thing why companies are going to remove the candidates from their jobs even though he signed an agreement or bond with the company for a perticular period.

It means that bond is only the security for the clients. but not the candidate.
How far it is acceptable/ reasonable.

Regards,
Nagappa