E-Paper
LinkedIn post on 90-day notice period policy sparks debate on corporate 'double standards'
The LinkedIn user argued that the 90-day notice period functions less as a transition tool and more as a constraint on employees seeking better opportunities.
Switching jobs is often seen as a step towards growth and better opportunities. However, for many employees, that transition is slowed by lengthy notice periods - a practice now under scrutiny after a LinkedIn post triggered a debate around the widely followed 90-day rule.
The discussion began after Nishant Joshi, a senior content writer, shared the experience of his college junior working at a Delhi-based agency. Joshi shared that the employee had secured a new role but was required to join within 30 days, far shorter than his current company’s 90-day notice period.
When the employee approached HR to negotiate an early release, he was told the policy was mandatory to ensure a “smooth handover” and maintain “professional ethics”. “The HR handed him the rulebook and smiled. ‘Sorry. 90 days is mandatory for a smooth content handover. It's about professional ethics,’” Joshi wrote.
However, the employee pushed back with a pointed question. Referring to a recent layoff at the same company, he asked, “Last month, when the company fired the entire design team on a Friday evening… where was the 90-day smooth handover then?”
Joshi described the moment as “pin drop silence” and used the anecdote to criticise what he called a one-sided system.
In his post, Joshi argued that the 90-day notice period functions less as a transition tool and more as a constraint on employees seeking better opportunities. “The Indian corporate ‘90-Day Notice Period’ is the biggest one-way street in the market,” he wrote, adding that while companies can terminate employees abruptly, those looking to leave are often required to stay on for months.
He further questioned the effectiveness of such policies, suggesting they neither retain talent nor ensure productivity. “You aren't retaining top talent. You are just forcing an employee who has already mentally checked out to sit at a desk for another 12 weeks,” he wrote, urging founders and HR leaders to rethink the practice.
“Stop demanding 3 months of blind loyalty from people you would let go in 3 minutes if your quarterly revenue dipped,” Joshi concluded.
(Also Read: Delhi techie who works at a 'renowned MNC' says he got ₹9 hike in 2025, no raise this year: 'Underpaid and stuck')
Social media reactions
The post struck a chord online, with many agreeing with Joshi. Several users said that long notice periods are counterproductive for both employees and organisations.
One user wrote, “From the company's perspective, too, I feel that this is not conducive and in its interest. A guy who has resigned and is serving notice is not going to be fully committed to the work. His heart is elsewhere. And, in many cases, they are also going to be demotivating the rest of the team members, or talking them into applying outside and getting out. Do we really need such a situation? It only shows that those who draw up the policy think they are dealing with machines and not humans. Such a sorry state of affairs.”
“I've been thinking about this lately. And, the same company that doesn't let go of an employee for 60-90 day notice period, wants the new joinee to join IMMEDIATELY!! Talk about double standards!” commented another.
“This happens a lot in Delhi mumbai, mp, and Bangalore 3 months’ notice if you resign, but just an hour to fire you. Companies take benefits from the system but don’t treat employees fairly. It clearly reflects a flawed and corrupt system,” wrote a third user.
“I never understood this rule. An employee who has quit has no further interest in the company. Why are you paying him a salary? The only objective seems harassment. It's a bad HR practice and needs review,” commented another.
