The notice period meant for knowledge transfer is now being used by employees to renegotiate their offers with multiple companies till they join the next company. At the same time, employers do not trust that candidates will join in three months. "Professionals have been taking maximum advantage of the three months Notice Period while Organizations, Recruitment, and HR fraternity have been at the receiving end," says VP UST Krishna Kishore Ankarboina, author of Three Months' Notice Period - An Advantage or Disadvantage. 

The Notice Period can be a double-edged sword, good for some, and in certain situations, less helpful or even a hindrance for others. "Long Notice Period" is suddenly being used by employees to their advantage in the current job environment in India.

It is an excellent time to speak about the subject when you notice outright war and hostility in hiring candidates. 

Do the companies require three months to complete knowledge transfer? Do the Organizations need to build mechanisms and processes to make sure it happens in a month? The same organizations with 60- 90 days as their notice period expect candidates to join within a few weeks, which doesn't really add up.

On the other hand, recruiters who have worked for 8 or 10 years are shocked to see new employees with two years' experience rejecting salary offers twice that of their current. I hope you will now realize the severity of the problem. 

A few reasons why organizations need to review and redefine the notice period terms seriously are illustrated below:

No change in employee attrition rate:

A longer notice period has not been shown to impact the employee attrition rate. 

Loss of productivity: 

An employee on notice period has little motivation and mentally/ psychologically has already left the organization. At the most, a one-month employee will contribute productively but do not expect him to continue the same performance levels.

Psychological effects: 

Once an employee has decided to leave, they tend to disconnect emotionally.

Employee during his remaining tenure continues to interact with other employees and may knowingly /unknowingly highlight the negatives of the current organization. This could impact the morale of other employees too.

Discipline issues and peer departure: 

It's usual for notice period employees to start coming late to work, take long breaks, and be absent from their desks.

Outgoing employees are likely to share their new compensation details and influence colleagues to seek salary hikes or greener pastures.

Any disciplinary action does not matter to them.

Confidential data:

If the employee role includes working on sensitive and private data, it's ideal for encouraging them to leave the organization as quickly as possible.

"Year on year, organizations have been increasing their salary spend and hike percentages as per the analysts. Very soon, we will be losing the cost of Arbitrage that we have been talking about for years," Krishna Kishore Ankarboina warns.

There is a critical need for industry bodies and individual players to go back to the whiteboard and relook at the existing notice period rules. Organizations need to manage the notice period as a project with well-defined deliverables, timelines, and measurement criteria. They should keep the duration as short as required for a smooth knowledge transfer. The short notice period will help them plan transition, recruit, train, and onboard more effectively.

Do you think the above is the right solution, or is the problem much worse than we think? Is this a problem without a solution? I request readers post their opinions, especially if you are Head of Talent Acquisition. It's your thoughts that would help many.

We wish to gather employer and employee input, stories, and experiences in a series of articles on the Long Notice Period. We want to hear more from the Global Recruiting Heads, APAC Recruiting Heads, and India Recruiting Heads. 

Reference: 

Ankarboina, K, august 7, 2019  Three Months' Notice Period - An Advantage or Disadvantage