TO BOND OR NOT TO : CONTRACT KILLING TAKES ON A NEW MEANING

First lets not get too carried away with the literal meaning of the words.Contract Killing, to any layman, would probably mean hired mercenaries who kill for money.When both parties have to respect the contract and to violate it means endangering your life.

Company contracts aren't so grave an area that you have to put your life on stake.True.Yet they can hardly be termed as Gentleman's Agreement what with both parties haggling and aggressively pursuing their own interests.What one can be certain though is under any given circumstance at any given time, only and only one party stands to gain. There is zilch to little chance of both parties benefiting from the closure of contract. In such a scenario, the Company tries to gain the upperhand by asking the fresh recruits to sign a bond for 2-3 years generally pledging their loyalty to the company over the period failing which they have to pay a hefty sum. On the other hand the employees want to change ship at the earliest once a better opportunity comes up, paying scant attention to the expenses the company spends on their training.Both parties are tring to gain maximum leverage of the very muddy area that Bond Rules is thus trying to make a killing at the others' expense.and Clearly the atmosphere is built on bedrock of mutual mistrust and apprehensions of the other party's intent.

As has been the general tone of the discussion forum, it clearly points to how discomforting and intimidating the scenario of signing the bond on joining a new company can get for the recruit.Especially for the freshers who only have completed their degree and haven't had a taste of life with job. Most sign the bond because they fear they maynot get a shot at a company that offers no bond stipulations or hold out little longer for company that gives better salary at more acceptable terms.Higher Studies is an option not many can take or are willing to take given the dearth of seats availability for higher studies.Plus it maynot really benefit you in your career unless one has clearly defined vision of what is the specific area he wants to work in.Most fresh graduates behave like the herd, go through one learning experience after another, and only then do they take a decision.

Cut to signing the bonds scenario which virtually paralyses any chance they could have at altering their decisions.They are made hostage to their own decision and they have to abide by it until the bond period ends or else they have to cough up a hefty amount which is essentially a FINE. This is a practise rampant across all IT companies and they justify it as their way of holding off competition and recovering the training expenses they incur on these recruits. This can only be described as a regressive step and as such most employees would be baulking at such "lack of maturity and understanding" shown by the company.The company's HR top brass needs to understand you don't earn loyalty by putting the most stringent of norms and contracts, you only are breeding a lot of wantaway employees and of course ensuring that self-driven initiatives for the company get obsolete.

And given the vulnerability of the fresh graduates that the company os taking advantage of by making them sign the bond and putting a lid on whatsoever career moves they may have planned, they are also ensuring such people would never like to come back to this company in the future.And without goodwill, the only way to poach them is pay them hefty pay packets.

Its all convenient to say charging two lakh for three years bond makes perfect business sense. However it is also giving rise to a potential graveyard for the company when the only way to retain and hire new or experienced employees is to offer them inflated salaries as the sole incentive.On the other hand company with good HR practises and maturity to look beyond Bonds payment model can actually get their target employees paying them reasonable salaries. Sooner or later the companies have to reconcile to the fact that the Standard Procedure is no longer "being interested with the employees affairs only during their stay in the firm", today " its their perception on what the company means to them,whether they are part of it or not" that counts.