<div>Kalpana Dixit thought very deeply about all that had happened in the last three days. One interview that was unpleasant, followed by one telephone call with her batchmate Suresh Timappa that was startling in what it revealed. <br /><br />Kalpana felt it was time to call a spade a spade. She was going to resort to legalese to teach the world that an interview was not a social event.<br /><br />Kalpana’s story: Kalpana was a VP with an MNC bank. All was well until she had a baby (Read: ‘<a href="http://www.businessworld.in/news/case-studies/case-study-this-laptop-does-not-sync/1068875/page-1.html">This Laptop Does Not Sync</a>’ and ‘<a href="http://www.businessworld.in/news/case-studies/case-study-the-hand-that-rocks-the-boat/1103712/page-1.html">The Hand That Rocked The Boat</a>’. <br /><br />Suddenly a manager who had just been lauded and praised and promoted was in the dog house. Sundari Prakash, her boss, belittled her, doubted and questioned her. Her year-end rating was downgraded, insensitive talk about women and childbirth did the rounds, Kalpana’s clients were sought to be reallocated and a bank that had claimed in its corporate ads to be ‘gender sensitive naturally’ was suddenly displaying strange bedside manners.<br /><br />Prakash graduated from mean to vicious. When Kalpana returned to work on the promised date, she was to find that her passwords and access codes had been disabled, her logins deactivated, and her work taken away. Kalpana Dixit was moved to ‘special projects’. Prakash had declared Kalpana inefficient, irresponsible and incapable. And before she knew, she was also sacked on grounds that her job was now redundant.<br /><br />This did not make sense, Sundari Prakash had hired two senior managers at Kalpana’s level just three months ago. The VP HR, Vilas Pandit, her contemporary, was called to deliver her termination letter. When questioned, he had said it was the recession, US was unable to pick up losses... <br /><br />Kalpana: You are lying, Pandit, because between January and March, you hired two new senior managers in my function, at my level! They couldn’t be working for free? Sundari told my clients that I would not be able to work after a baby and introduced them to new CRMs!<br />sundari left the room when artlessly Pandit said, “We have consulted our lawyers and while we cannot legally sack a lady manager during her maternity leave, she can be sacked after she resumes.”<br /><br />So, they had waited for her to resume. And artless as they were Pandit told her, “You can also consult your lawyers....”<br /><br /><img width="624" height="400" align="middle" alt="" src="/image/image_gallery?uuid=069bce5e-ffa1-4820-a7e4-3b687e64a81e&groupId=520986&t=1433840114465" /><br /><br />Kalpana wrote to the global chairman, and asked, “How does this corroborate your ‘women employee friendly policies’? How can this Bank, which prides itself as ‘one of the few organisations high on gender diversity, with women in top management roles’, explain away the fact that they have sacked a VP who has been with them for eight years and have nothing coherent to say for that?”<br /><br />Nothing exceptional happened. ‘We will do a proper investigation and the guilty will not be spared’ they swore, but they were relieved to have Kalpana out of their hair. As for Kalpana, once she decided it was over she did not look back. She reasoned “Sustaining a value at all costs requires intellectual honesty... either you have it or you don’t.” And Geffel Stace Bank, she realised, did not have it.<br /><br />Nuts and bolts was this: Geffel Stace Bank and Prakash waffled over why they had sacked her. Between redundancy, US recession and her discomfort with Kalpana’s motherhood status, the reason remained lost. Inefficiency or incapability or incompetency could not even be a thought, for Kalpana’s appraisals were stellar. Her clients were completely happy with her.<br /><br />Her family prevailed upon her to think of the infant who trusted her to give him her all. “There will always be enough time to get even,” her brother said, and Kalpana agreed. <br /><br />Recently, her batchmate Suresh Timappa had a new job opening at Cyben Pharma, where he was operations director. Fielding for her, he presented her capabilities to Akrur Johri, the financial advisor at Cyben. Cyben was setting up a child health unit as part of their CSR to which they would transfer funds for village health care and cancer care for children. The funds needed to be invested sensibly in mobile hospitals and trauma care units or in income earning securities for the CSR unit. Suresh presented Kalpana’s skills in investing showing Johri how she fitted the bill.<br /><br />Johri asked for a meeting to be scheduled. Yet when Kalpana sat before him, Johri barely went beyond asking her how she was. But given his 67, Kalpana reckoned it was an elderly, old world elegance thing. <br /><br />But then Johri talked. He told her what was on his mind. “Ours is a very tough environment and we have never taken women for this function. For this very reason that women do not have the mental or physical make up for this....”<br /><br />This was when Kalpana began to be confused. “You surprise me, Mr Johri. If you do not plan to hire women, why have you called me for this meeting?”<br /><br />Johri (laughing patronisingly): This is the quality we want, dynamic, bold, ... spitfire...<br /><br />Kalpana (blandly): I don’t understand. What is the purpose of this meeting?<br /><br />Johri: I know how you feel. But women like you should go change the world. It is unfair to women who want to work. Only the other day I met Sushmita Rajan, a chartered accountant from Denver Caloise. I had to tell her the same thing.<br /><br />Kalpana: That is very nice, Mr Johri. Maybe I should be leaving? <br /><br />Johri: Then I must also tell you... Geffel Stace Bank did not have laudatory things to say about you. <br />... Your ex-boss specifically. <br /><br />Kalpana stopped in her tracks and looked at Johri. A trifle surprised and a little outraged at the sudden yet brazen manner of Johri, not to mention the shock of hearing the revisitation of her ex-boss Sundari in her life. A wave of humiliation swept her, almost instantly replaced by defiance. No, she was not giving Johri the joy of disturbing her. She needed to try that much.<br /><br />Kalpana: Well, the person you got the reference from was my boss and I don’t want to say anything about her or her employers. Suffice it to say that there was a difference of opinions, nay, of values. That said I believe the choice is now yours. I will not engage with you any further till you have had a chance to think. Have a good day.<br /><br />And Kalpana left Johri’s office.<br /> </div><div>break-page-break</div><div><br />On her way home, Kalpana called Suresh and shared what happened.... “I don’t know what you told him, Suresh, but he is confused. It appears he does not wish to hire women. But he also has some feedback from Geffel Stace that has clouded his perceptions.<br /><br />Suresh (groaning): We had a very long discussion about your candidature. Everything was on the table! I don’t know why he is waffling now. Leave this with me. I will find out.<br /><br />The story that Johri revealed over lunch shocked Suresh. “I have friends in places,” said Johri. “One such is her ex-boss at Geffel Stace, Sundari. She tells me that Kalpana lacks toughness, that she took ill several times during her pregnancy! We cannot hire such a person! She comes across emotional like women are, you know... her ex-boss said she was seized by emotional imbalance, breakdowns during her pregnancy....this is definitely high risk, if you ask me! She said Dixit went about writing to HR and then to the Chairman... already sounds like an unpleasant person. This is why I say, women are emotional...!”<br /><br />Suresh was now very angry. He said to Johri, “Bosses have selective memory. They forget their own trespasses, but uniquely remember everybody else’s. But leave that be, tell me, is that referral about Kalpana from HR?<br /><br />Johri: No, no... I just happened to ask Sundari on the golf course. We were teeing off, you know, randomly I told her that one of Geffel’s VPs had applied to us. Sundari then told me a lot...she does talk! Ha ha!<br /><br />Suresh: You are talking too, ha ha. Ok, I should go now. But let me leave you with a thought. Cyben has sound HR practices and this is not the way we take referrals. How a reference is taken is important. If referral is taken casually, over a corridor conversation, teeing off... that is both unprofessional and unfair to the candidate. Is that how little you value a candidate, a hiree? HR always takes references on 360 basis and from more than one source. That is when it is unbiased and dependable. Yes, some HR and line managers also go for the anecdotal referrals... but responsible hiring needs facts, Mr Johri, not hearsay.<br /><br />Johri: And you have facts?<br /><br />Suresh: At least I do not stand in the golf course and gossip.<br /><br />suresh left in a huff wondering why Cyben continued to keep Johri.<br /><br />He called Kalpana after he reached home and shared all this. “Yes it does appear Sundari has gossiped. And Johri loves gossip. Your ex-boss’ rambling has only convinced Johri that his worldview about women is right!”<br /><br />Kalpana met Maadhurya Virkar, her friend and a senior HR consultant to bounce off some thoughts.<br /><br />Kalpana: If I was incompetent, inefficient, I will accept Sundari’s blather. But Sundari and HR’s claim was that my role was redundant. Now she says I was emotionally imbalanced. <br /><br />I think one’s position as a boss is one of importance and responsibility. Sundari Prakash now needs to know this legally that her conduct has been irresponsible. The golf course cannot sanctify a thoughtless referral. I need a lawyer.<br /><br />Maadhurya: Lawyer? What are you planning?<br /><br />Kalpana: Tell me, does the Indian law recognise this as a misdemeanour? I am sure it does not. Our laws are usually old fashioned when it comes to women because women are not supposed to protest. Today with women out working and levelling, it is time to have laws for them. Specific laws. (Pause...) Ok, here it is. It is three years since I left Geffel. A responsible boss when asked for a referral would say, “Why don’t you contact my HR, they will give you what you need”. An irresponsible boss will do what Prakash did. Three years and she still uses the same words... why? Why? I really wonder.<br /><br />Maadhurya: Ah, I see. There may not be a law for gender discrimination ... but straightaway it seems to me you have a case for defamation.<br /><br />Kalpana: No! Defamation is too silly and pompous. She has been irresponsible. If you are in charge of people then you need to develop commensurate behaviours. You cannot indulge in loose talk. So. I am not talking just about women who are aggrieved but also women who are in positions of authority without commensurate behaviours. What grounds are available to me, in your opinion to make this a legal issue?<br /><br />maadhurya pondered. She could see that one more unique situation had cropped up, involving the right of the woman to be respected and once again the law was silent. She said, “I would say push for ‘constructive dismissal’ – this is when the organisation contrives an environment so that the person has no option but to leave the organisation. I don’t think India has this provision – and it will be a good legal angle to take. Sundari’s behaviour then was a calculated move to oust you and her behaviour today, such as enlisting the vote of Johri to keep you out of a job, is an extension of that. Hence constructive dismissal. <br /><br />Let me introduce you to Onil Das, a good legal advisor friend. See what he can do for this case...<br /><br />Kalpana: Constructive dismissal is – from what I recall – applicable where an employee is forced to leave through calculated acts of the employer. Here, Geffel Stace Bank sacked me. How do I bring a charge for constructive dismissal? <br /><br />Maadhurya: Why not? India needs new laws for women in the workplace. What we also have in India is a lot of vengeful behaviours towards employees. As I see it, they had calculated every move to ensure your dismissal. By claiming your job’s redundancy they had left no option for you. In fact, by rendering your job redundant AND sacking you, they have axed their feet.<br /><br />Kalpana: You know, I am not thinking anymore of having lost my job. That chapter is closed. But I see Prakash has not closed that chapter... she keeps reviving it, that is unprofessional. The entire sacking drama was initiated by her. My point is: If you sacked me because my job was redundant, what the hell were you up to gossiping with Johri about my ‘emotional’ nature? <br /><br />Onil took a few days to read up on Kalpana’s case. Then he agreed to meet Maadhurya with Kalpana. <br /><br />Onil: Many of the acts perpetrated in this case are calculated to cause humiliation and frustration, such as arbitrarily rendering her job redundant without there being a definite cause; HR’s Pandit claiming US recession does not even make economic sense. Then again changing her job description in her absence, reallocating her clients to others, spreading information to Kalpana’s clients that she is likely to quit, tantamount to rumour mongering. And most important here is forcing her to work in conditions ignoring health and safety to both herself and her baby ...<br /><br />Maadhurya: Sorry? Which one is this?<br /> </div><div>break-page-break</div><div><br />Onil: Oh, I have these notes from the note you sent me. Soon after her C-section Madam Prakash sent Ms Dixit an SMS asking her to commit if she will work as efficiently now as she had done during her pre-natal period...is a case of coercion, attracting legal recourse. There is an implied duty of mutual trust and confidence between employer and employee, which was breached by the employer, whereas employee maintained her end of the respect and returned to work on appointed date of 10 May.<br /><br />Kalpana: Onil, I must clarify. I have no desire to sue Geffel Stace Bank - that period is dead and gone and they can go to hell for all I care. Hence these issues you point out appear to me as a case against Geffel, which I really have no desire to stoke. My aspiration is to haul up Ms Prakash for deluding, misleading, gossiping and bringing disrepute to me in the esteem of a new employer owing to which I lost my candidature at Cyben Pharma. I did not lose on grounds of merit, but owing to an unwarranted, untrue and unprofessional feedback that was delivered casually, entirely with an intent to malign me and cause me loss of job opportunity. And even within all this, the issue I protest against is, her choice of words that paints all women poorly – ‘emotional and imbalanced like women are.’<br /><br />Onil: Yes, yes, I was coming to this and now I see your point. It is not the opinion of Prakash that we concern ourselves with, but her covert intention to lure Johri into confusion, probably knowing his susceptibility, so that he turns against you especially after agreeing to receive your candidature. These points I make are to show that not only was there mal-intent in bringing about your dismissal, that mal-intent now appears centred on an obsession of sorts that causes her to hold the reason fresh after three years and prevent another from hiring you.<br /><br />You may not want to link Geffel to this, but the trigger was your ex-boss, who ran your reputation down despite your excellent performance, and that same attitude she has now carried forth to influence Cyben Pharma.<br /><br />Kalpana: You are right, Onil, but does this make sense – listen to me: Sundari Prakash has worsened the situation by telling Johri that I am “emotional and imbalanced like women.” These were the words that Johri is leaning on. In so speaking, Prakash has belittled women and shown them as being incapable of being employed in responsible positions – for, that has been Johri’s take away – And this is what is wrong.<br /><br />Equally I wish to bring legal action on Johri for being irresponsible an employer. If he wanted referral, he should write to Geffel’s HR. But if he chose the golf course, then that referral cannot be used. He has applied Prakash’s judgement to my appointment. And together they have discriminated against me as a woman.<br /><br />onil Das heard her out keenly, then said, “Indian law contains provisions that prohibit any discrimination on caste, creed, sex, race. Article 14 guarantees equality before law... Article 15 prohibits discrimination ‘only’ on the basis of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth, or any of them. However, these rights are guaranteed only within state and government-run institutions. <br /><br />“Presently, there is no comprehensive anti-discrimination code in India although there are laws that address specific aspects related to equality such as the Maternity Benefits Act, 1961, Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 and the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005, etc., which attempt to address the existent systemic discrimination towards women in employment. <br /><br />Kalpana was horrified. “ You can’t be serious? This is so backward! Since 1961, the needs of women have grown. That being so, what use is an Act of 1961? How old is this Article 15 that circumscribes its application to only the public sector?<br /><br />I can see that this must have been enacted post-Independence when there was only the public sector for employment. Private enterprise may not have even been an idea those days. Today the private sector is huge, should not these laws be examined and applied to the private sector too? More so, women today are mainstream and they have a great need to be looked after (by the law to begin with) until the rest of society comes to accept them and their needs.<br /><br />I am feeling discriminated by gender by both my ex boss and now Johri at Cyben – and this has stood in my way and cost me a fair interview and job at Cyben.<br /><br />So, if as you say Article 15 is not tenable, then what is the recourse available to me under law? <br /><br />casestudymeera@gmail.com <br /><br />(This story was published in BW | Businessworld Issue Dated 29-06-2015)</div>
