A Post That Touched My Conscience
A few days ago, while scrolling through social media, my attention was drawn to a strongly worded post written in Hindi. It read:
“90 दिनोंकीनोटिसपीरियडयहसिर्फएककॉर्पोरेटप्रक्रियानहीं, बल्किमानसिकगुलामीकाआधुनिकरूपहै।” (The 90-day notice period is not just a corporate process. It is a modern form of mental slavery an invisible chain around an employee’s freedom, career, and dignity.)
The words struck a chord. They pained me, not because they were extreme, but because they reflected a sentiment that many employees carry silently. After spending over 45 years in Human Resources and Industrial Relations, I’ve always believed that policies must be people-sensitive. This post reminded me that when policies become rigid and mechanical, they lose their human purpose.
This prompted me to reflect more deeply. Is the 90-day notice period still relevant as a business tool, or has it evolved into something more burdensome, even oppressive, for employees?
The Origin of the 90-Day Policy
In the early 2000s, as India’s IT, consulting, and MNC landscape grew, the 90-day notice period emerged to support business continuity. It allowed organizations to manage project transitions, knowledge transfers, client handovers, and replacement hiring timelines. The logic was sound; important roles required adequate time for a smooth exit process.
Also read – Het Shah joins LCC Projects as AGM- HR (Head HR)
Over time, however, what began as a protective buffer became a rigid mandate, one that increasingly failed to consider the real-life pressures and emotional realities of employees seeking to move on.
When Policy Turns into Personal Struggle
Consider the experience of a professional who receives an attractive job offer from a competitor. The new role offers a better work-life balance, a significant pay hike, and a location closer to aging parents. The new employer wants the person to join in 30 days.
But their current employer insists on the full 90-day notice. Despite offers to complete all documentation, train a successor, and support a clean handover, the request for early release is denied.
What follows is a draining three-month ordeal. The employee finds themselves excluded from meetings, detached from decision-making, and increasingly isolated. Their sense of contribution fades. At home, relocation plans stall. School admissions are missed. Family members grow anxious. Emotionally, the employee feels like a stranger in their workplace, stuck, stressed, and mentally checked out.
This is no longer a transition. It becomes a slow emotional unraveling. The final 90 days, instead of honoring the employee’s service, become a source of exhaustion and humiliation.
The Emotional and Mental Toll
The mental strain of serving a long notice period after resignation is not often acknowledged. Yet, it is very real.
Employees in such situations frequently report anxiety, disengagement, and a sense of invisibility. Colleagues treat them differently. Managers shift focus to future hires. Work becomes transactional. Some employees even stop receiving basic communication and updates.
Outside the workplace, the stress continues. Partners worry about financial instability. Children wait for decisions to be made. Elderly parents remain in need of care. The employee is caught in limbo, emotionally disconnected from the current job and unable to begin the next chapter of life.
This leads not only to a decline in productivity but also to emotional distress and a loss of trust in people, in policies, and sometimes in the profession itself.
The Unequal Power Dynamic
What adds to the employee’s frustration is the asymmetry of the rule. Companies often reserve the right to terminate employees with one month’s notice or even immediately, in some cases. But when the employee wants to resign, they are asked to serve a full 90 days, regardless of circumstances.
This unequal flexibility creates an imbalance that is hard to ignore. While organizations need to manage operational continuity, employees too have valid and urgent reasons to move forward whether it’s a family crisis, a better opportunity, or mental well-being.
When one party is bound by strict timelines and the other has exit discretion, it no longer feels like a professional contract. It begins to resemble control. That is what employees refer to when they use terms like “mental slavery.”
The Damage to Employer Brand and Reputation
This rigidity also carries a long-term cost to the company’s brand image.
In today’s connected world, former employees are not just alumni; they are ambassadors. If their exit experience is negative, they are more likely to leave critical reviews on platforms like Glassdoor, share stories on LinkedIn, or discuss their frustration in forums. That’s exactly what happened with the post I read.
These stories spread quickly. They shape perception. They influence whether top talent chooses to join your organization in the future.
A rigid 90-day notice policy, especially when handled without empathy, may help retain manpower for a few extra weeks, but it costs trust, loyalty, and reputation in the long run.
Is “Mental Slavery” an Exaggeration?
As an HR professional, I understand that calling a policy “mental slavery” may sound harsh. But the phrase reflects more than just anger; it reflects helplessness. It signals that the individual no longer feels respected or heard within the system.
Mental slavery today is not about physical bondage. It’s about emotional exhaustion, lack of autonomy, and the denial of humane consideration. If any of our policies evoke that feeling, we must listen, not react defensively.
The Way Forward
The goal is not to dismantle the structure, but to reintroduce flexibility, fairness, and empathy.
Companies must start by differentiating notice periods based on the nature of roles. Not every position demands 90 days. Operational and junior roles can be transitioned in 30 to 45 days with proper planning.
Organizations should also offer structured buy-out options for early release. If the employee or their next employer is willing to compensate and ensure a clean handover, there is no practical reason to hold them back.
Exit management should not become a punishment. Managers should be trained to treat exiting employees with the same dignity as new joiners. Compassion, not control, must guide the exit process.
And above all, exceptional personal situations, like family medical emergencies, children’s education deadlines, or mental health concerns, should be grounds for consideration, not rejection.
Let’s Lead with Humanity
Policies are meant to serve people, not to bind them. If our systems are causing distress, even unintentionally, then we must reflect and respond.
The 90-day’ notice period was created for operational needs. But when it begins to damage morale, dignity, and emotional well-being, it becomes more than a policy it becomes a problem.
That one Hindi post I read wasn’t just a complaint. It was a window into the silent suffering of many. It was a reminder that in the name of order, we must not forget the people we are meant to support.
As HR professionals and business leaders, let us not hide behind “policy”. Let us lead with empathy. Let us build a work culture where policies support performance and people feel respected, even on their way out.
The true test of an organization is not just how it welcomes people but how it lets them go.
Stay connected with us on social media platforms for instant updates click here to join our LinkedIn, Twitter & Facebook
