Notice Of Cessation Of Employment: Fill & Download for Free

Yes they should. Most employers will want you to use this time to:finish any work you have in progress that can be finished in 2 weeksMake a list of the status of all your tasks and projectsMake a list of where all your files are saved in relation to the aboveMake sure you have an ‘out of office message” set up on your email so people know who to contact after you have gonehelp them organise your replacement - recruitment etc with HRThey will probably want to organize a farewell for you, assuming you are departing on amicable terms.Whilst this wont take 2 weeks, that's why most employers want you to work the 2 weeks notice. After you resign, all supervisors know you've lost interest and wont be starting anything new - just tidying up lose ends before you go. 2 weeks isn't that long and goes quickly.If you can do all of the above in 1 or 1.5 weeks, then you could ask to leave early and be paid in lieu of working the full 2x weeks notice, or take it as annual leave. Most employers will want to you take annual leave, as it will reduce the $ amount of any untaken leave they need to pay you on cessation of employment, and is easier admin.

I would like to point out that the Buddha appeared to be less of a critic and more of a transformer. Often when I hear discussions to questions like this, I notice an immediate application of the critical dualistic mind: what is right, what is wrong. If we are to take the suttas as our guide to understanding the historical Buddha (a bit of a leap of faith, I admit), then I think the approach and response to this question would need to be very different. For starters:1. The Buddha believed that clinging to an ideology is the most dangerous capacity of the mind. Over money, greed, sensuality, vanity, etc. the tendency to claim an ideological truth that trumps all others inevitably leads to suffering. Even the teachings of the Buddha should be wholly abandoned if it leads one to impart suffering on others or self. (Hence the Zen saying, "If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him.") As such, I don't think the Buddha would be looking too closely at the manner in which modern Buddhism is practiced.2. In the Tipitaka, it is clear that the Buddha does not engage in argumentative discourse. His mode of teaching seemed more Socratic: he asked some deep, probing questions to understand the mind of the person he was speaking with, then issued a teaching appropriate for that mind, at that time, at that place. If anything is obvious about the Buddha it is his lack of dogmatism. He did not espouse a "cookie-cutter" method to his teachings. The Buddha wouldn't evaluate the practices of today based on the teachings of yesterday.3. In multiple instances, the Buddha clearly stated what (and only what) it is that he teaches: "This is suffering. This is the origin of suffering. The cessation of suffering is possible. This is the path to the cessation of suffering." Obviously, he did teach more, but all of his teachings lead to this one goal. As with then as now, I think all the teachings of Buddhism should still be leading towards this one goal, with a de-emphasis on how.4. When the Buddha was dying, he made it clear that each person is responsible for his/her own path. He appointed no successors. He didn't bother writing anything down. To a large extent, how we apply the Buddha's teaching is immaterial. That the path ultimately leads to well-being, transforms the painful and messy business of living into an act of compassion and loving kindess... that is the point.Humbly and in short, we don't know, but I think the evaluative rubric the Buddha would be employing hinges on modern Buddhism's ability to actively alleviate suffering. To this end, I think the Buddha would be pleased that countless numbers of people are finding liberation in walking an ancient, well-trod path in a manner that best suits their culture.

Strike is defined under sec 2(q) of the Industrial Dispute Act" strike" means a cessation of work by a body of persons employed in any industry acting in combination or a concerted refusal, or a refusal under a common understanding, of any number of persons who are or have been so employed to continue to work or to accept employment;Certain conditions have been laid out in the same statute that gives the criteria to identify illegal strike.The classification of illegal strike is done on basis of workmen employed in public utility Service and general prohibition on strike for all workmen.Sec 22(1) of Industrial Dispute Act deals with person employed in public utility servicesNo person employed in a public utility service shall go on strike in breach of contract--(a) without giving to the employer notice of strike, as herein- after provided, within six weeks before striking; or(b) within fourteen days of giving such notice; or(c) before the expiry of the date of strike specified in any such notice as aforesaid; or(d) during the pendency of any conciliation proceedings before a conciliation officer and seven days after the conclusion of such proceedings.Sec 23 of the Industrial Dispute Act outlines general prohibition on strike irrespective of one is employed in public utility services or notGeneral prohibition of strikes and lock- outs.- No workman who is employed in any industrial establishment shall go on strike in breach of contract and no employer of any such workman shall declare a lock- out--(a) during the pendency of conciliation proceedings before a Board and seven days after the conclusion of such proceedings;(b) during the pendency of proceedings before a Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal and two months after the conclusion of such proceedings;(bb) during the pendency of arbitration proceedings before an arbitrator and two months after the conclusion of such proceedings, where a notification has been issued under sub- section (3A) of section 10A; or(c) during any period in which a settlement or award is in operation, in respect of any of the matters covered by the settlement or award.Thanks for A2A.