[anumod]

Originally Posted by ajmat

Thank you

The question is - who discloses the criiminal act to the employer - the police or employer!

Police can report it to the employer, as this is a safety issue. In case of a Govt employee, they get suspended immediately, if they are in custody for 48 hours. (Not even imprisonment).

[Thilak29]

Originally Posted by anumod

Police can report it to the employer, as this is a safety issue. In case of a Govt employee, they get suspended immediately, if they are in custody for 48 hours. (Not even imprisonment).

Government employees are bound by service rules/conduct rules (enforced by law) and if such rules have consequences defined it is fair play.

In the private sector that practices vary with the organisation and rules of the road are not really backed by law in a literal sense.

Also, wonder why to stop at reporting situation to the employer, why not set up marriage counselling for spousal intervention and have school authorities (where his kids are studying) involved too?

[anumod]

Originally Posted by Thilak29

Also, wonder why to stop at reporting situation to the employer, why not set up marriage counselling for spousal intervention and have school authorities (where his kids are studying) involved too?

Currently in Hyderabad, there is a counselling happens for drink and driving (it has been going on for sometime now) and it is mandated to have a close blood relations (Elderly Siblings/Parents/Spouse) us mandatory for it.

[theredliner]

DUI is like providing a powerful weapon in the hands of a mentally unstable person. I side with the coppers on this one (a rare case). In fact, I'm of the opinion that anyone who causes any injury to someone else while DUI should be tried with attempt to murder. DUI has increased significantly in India in the last few years. Without strict and impactful punishments, we simply won't be able to bring it under control.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by theredliner

Without strict and impactful punishments, we simply won't be able to bring it under control.

Well, India needs to make up her mind on how to go about it. History around the world has shown that alcohol related issues are rarely solved by punishment, prohibition or increasing the price of alcohol. Think USA, think Sweden.

This is a huge educational and health challenge more so than just a legislative and enforcement issue. (the latter two are the easiest, must be done, but rarely have a huge impact by itself).

Jeroen

[vnabhi]

Originally Posted by anumod

Police can report it to the employer, as this is a safety issue. In case of a Govt employee, they get suspended immediately, if they are in custody for 48 hours. (Not even imprisonment).

Not entirely correct. It depends on the gravity of the crime. A crime involving moral turpitude like murder or rape will definitely call for a suspension, and also disciplinary action in some cases.

On the other hand, conviction for drunken driving may not call for suspension, but can be addressed with mere counselling.

This is because an employee who is suspended is not allowed to work--he only needs to report for attendance daily and go back, in order to draw subsistence allowance. The subsistence allowance is normally 50% of his basic pay plus dearness allowance, which could be increased to 75% or reduced to 25% in case the departmental inquiry gets delayed beyond 90 days (or 180 days in cases not connected with employment). It is increased when the charge-sheeted employee is not at fault for the delay in proceedings, and reduced when he is the cause of the delay.

I'm saying this after working for 2 decades as an HR Manager in SAIL, and I was manning the cell that provides advice on all departmental cases within the organization for a major part of my service there.

Coming back to the point, there were cases where we suspended two employees who were arrested for a murder case not connected with the organization. We however reinstated them after 5 years when the court found them not guilty. Imagine paying back wages for 5 years, without extracting an iota of work from them!

[anumod]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

Well, India needs to make up her mind on how to go about it. History around the world has shown that alcohol related issues are rarely solved by punishment, prohibition or increasing the price of alcohol. Think USA, think Sweden.

This is a huge educational and health challenge more so than just a legislative and enforcement issue. (the latter two are the easiest, must be done, but rarely have a huge impact by itself).

Jeroen

Here we are not talking about reducing the alcohol consumption, but make sure that Public is safe, when they are on road. See an accident that happened a couple of weeks back in Hyderabad. http://www.newindianexpress.com/citi...m-1922015.html
In this case, the lady was taking bath in her bathroom, and this guy under the influence of Alcohol, jumped out of the road and crashed in to their house. Sadly she lost the life.

Originally Posted by vnabhi

Not entirely correct. It depends on the gravity of the crime. A crime involving moral turpitude like murder or rape will definitely call for a suspension, and also disciplinary action in some cases.

I was referring to the clause mentioned here. https://lawrato.com/labour-service-l...or-48-hrs-3309.

[Gansan]

Many employers have a rule that an employee convicted by a court of law can be dismissed from service. The duration of punishment does not matter. The letter says he was imprisoned for four days. If his employer had such a rule, he would have been in soup for hiding information anyway, even without the police letter.

My employer of 35 years from whom I retired recently had such a rule. It was part of the service rules.

[GTO]

Hmmmm. What is worse? Driving drunk and knocking off a 2-wheeler or killing a pedestrian? Or the cops informing your employer?

Sorry guys, if this is what it takes to get a drunkard off the road, so be it. I'm with the police on this. The more the deterrents, the better. I say that anyone driving with a BAC level over the legal limit should:

- Be put behind bars
- Be made to pay a fine of Rs 1 lakh
- Have the driver's licence suspended for 1 year (1st offence), 3 years (2nd offence) and 5 years (3rd offence)
- Have his car confiscated
- Have his HR department informed & his family members too

Let's see if anyone has the guts to drive after 5 drinks then.

Originally Posted by Jeroen

History around the world has shown that alcohol related issues are rarely solved by punishment, prohibition or increasing the price of alcohol.

In Mumbai, drunk driving has gone down by over 75% since the cops started cracking down hard and putting drivers behind bars. What's more, the accident fatality rate dropped too - lots of statistics & updates in this thread (Drink and drive? Go straight to JAIL!).

[Mu009]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

Well, India needs to make up her mind on how to go about it. History around the world has shown that alcohol related issues are rarely solved by punishment, prohibition or increasing the price of alcohol. Think USA, think Sweden.

This is a huge educational and health challenge more so than just a legislative and enforcement issue. (the latter two are the easiest, must be done, but rarely have a huge impact by itself).

Jeroen

Originally Posted by GTO

Hmmmm. What is worse? Driving drunk and knocking off a 2-wheeler or killing a pedestrian? Or the cops informing your employer?

Sorry guys, if this is what it takes to get a drunkard off the road, so be it. I'm with the police on this.

Well, I'm with Benjamin Franklin on this one - "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

We live in a world fraught with such debates ever since the increasingly pervasive nature of technology, and anti-terror fear mongering in certain Western nations. So it's not a surprise that many take up the view they do - both here and elsewhere.

I understand why the cops may be trying this, and the possible positive effects of such a step. I also understand how much of a problem drunk driving is, especially in our country (despite the fact that I stipulate there are many other, much bigger issues than drunk drivers on our roads).

But not only do the ends not justify the means here, but to try and tackle a part of a much bigger problem that stems from a lack of education, awareness, sympathy and courtesy for your fellow man with such a worryingly invasive scare tactic does not bode well for personal freedoms that so many democracies claim to prize and champion.

I am not entirely unworried.

[hema4saran]

I have to agree with the cops here. If that is what it takes to pull DUI down, then better go ahead and do it. In a densely populated country like ours where roads are filled two wheelers and pedestrians, we need these kind of actions to curb DUI.

My close buddy's brother works as a safety manager in one of the renowned company in Chennai and he has to comply with certain rules and regulations as part of his job.

1. Occupants and him should be belted up if he is in office cab or his personal car.
2. He should not be seen anywhere in two wheeler without helmet.
3. If drunk driving/rash driving is reported on his name, he needs to undergo a separate medical examination by his company's medical team for DUI. If found true, he will be fired.

For riding without helmet and seatbelt, there are various levels of inquiry he needs to face and if found true appropriate actions will be taken.

[Lalvaz]

IMO this is a breach of privacy and there is no legal backing for this. The cops can dare do this here only because of our broken judicial system.

I don’t advocate drunk driving and I support any action against it, as long as it is within the ambit of the law.

Quick question: If the intention is to get the offender scared of loss of employment due to his illegal actions then isn’t that an unfair advantage to those who are in business?

Laws are made after deliberation and considering various nuances. They are not taken in a knee jerk reaction. If the cops feel that the current laws are inadequate to address the problem of drunk driving they should move to amend the laws, not implement their own version in an arbitrary manner.

[Gansan]

I wonder what is to be considered as the private affairs of the employee and what is not. There will be a very thin line. The moment someone is on the wrong side of law and is convicted for it, that line is crossed I think. If I indulge in some unlawful activity after work hours, can I say it is my private affair and none of the business of the employer?

There may have been various reasons as to how they came to know about his employer. He might have dropped the name of his employer intentionally or showed his company ID card. If the police ask about his occupation and he clams up, or gives some wrong info, that will be even worse for him.

[am1m]

To me, this is not about privacy at all. It's certainly not about letting people off lightly for drunk driving either. I fully support stringent action on drunk drivers.

I'm just surprised that this (informing the employer) is required at all. Isn't jail time enough of a deterrent? To me the prospect of spending any length of time, even a day, in one of our jails is a far scarier prospect than anything any employer of mine can do!

If it works great, but to me this is a poor reflection on our law enforcement if the burden of action is being shifted to the employer.

I won't be surprised if most companies decide that they won't be taking any action. It's a law enforcement issue, let law enforcement deal with it. As long as the employee was not drunk in the office or while on official work, they don't have much of a say. A company/business can't be expected to teach behavior that should have been taught by family and the education system. For those incidents, we have a police force and the courts.

[srishiva]

Originally Posted by avdhesh15

In my case, being an entrepreneur, who do they go to? My investors? My customers? My suppliers? Novel idea but this can take public shaming to a whole new level.

Maybe they will put it in newspaper Just kidding.
HR if they are really the activist types could send it to everyone in company.

Police should do what their job is and leave the counselling and other motives behind. Why dont they just pursue what is there in law strictly? Hope they really do this.