Manager Rants Against 90-Day Notice Period: Why India’s Long Notice Culture Feels ‘Toxic’ and Outdated

A Big Four manager’s viral rant exposes India’s 90-day notice period as a toxic trap—crushing careers, spiking anxiety, and costing billions. Why do companies cling to this outdated chain when global agility wins? Discover the shocking economics, employee nightmares, and the flexibility revolution brewing. Your next move awaits…

In recent weeks, a fiery LinkedIn post by a manager from one of the Big Four consulting firms has once again set off a nationwide debate. The topic? The dreaded 90-day notice period—a policy that many Indian professionals call a corporate curse. The manager described long notice periods as “painful and toxic,” arguing that they harm employees and employers alike.

This isn’t just an isolated outburst; it echoes something millions of working professionals in India feel every time they decide to move on from a job. Whether you’re at a startup, a multinational corporation, or a government PSU, the three-month notice rule can feel like a chain that shackles employees long after they’ve mentally and emotionally checked out.

But why does such a system exist in India? Why do companies in the world’s fastest-growing economy still insist on keeping employees for 90 days after resignation? And more importantly—does it even make sense anymore?

Let’s unpack the psychology, economics, and toxic workplace culture that fuels India’s obsession with long notice periods.

The Viral Post That Sparked the Debate

The controversy started when a manager from a Big Four firm (the group of global consulting giants—Deloitte, PwC, EY, and KPMG) took to LinkedIn to share his frustration. In his post, he bluntly called the 90-day notice period “a relic of control and mistrust in Indian corporate culture.”

He described how demotivating it feels for both the employee leaving and the team staying behind:

• The departing employee feels trapped—counting down the days instead of contributing productively.
• The team and clients often sense the disengagement, leading to awkward handovers and lack of continuity.
• New employers are forced to wait, sometimes losing momentum or withdrawing offers altogether.

The post quickly went viral, with thousands of comments echoing similar frustrations. Many professionals shared horror stories—instances of managers intentionally delaying “relieving letters” or hinting at blacklisting employees who tried to negotiate shorter exits.

What’s more telling is that most people defending the 90-day policy were senior HR managers or corporate leaders, revealing a deep divide in how the two sides view workplace loyalty and flexibility.

How We Got Here: The Rise of the 90-Day Rule

It’s not that Indian companies always had such long notice periods. In fact, until the 2000s, most organizations—especially in IT and manufacturing—had notice periods ranging from 15 to 30 days. Things began to shift with the arrival of the IT boom and multinational client culture.

Three key factors fueled the 90-day phenomenon:

1. Project-based work: Especially in IT and consulting, employees often manage long-term projects with global clients. Managers feared sudden exits would jeopardize timelines and damage client trust.
2. Talent scarcity: During periods of rapid growth (like the early 2010s tech expansion), replacing skilled employees quickly became difficult. HR departments extended notice periods to “buy time” for hiring replacements.
3. Protecting knowledge capital: Some companies claimed that longer notice periods helped with smoother handovers and “knowledge transfer.”

While these justifications had logic two decades ago, the corporate landscape today has changed dramatically. Remote work, agile teams, and digital workflows have made the traditional idea of a 90-day transition completely outdated.

The Psychological Toll: Employees in “Corporate Limbo”

Let’s be honest—working during your notice period rarely feels like real work. Most employees describe it as being “stuck in limbo.” You’re physically present, but psychologically detached.

Here’s what typically happens during those 90 days:

• Motivation crashes: Once you’ve submitted your resignation, your professional energy often dives. Tasks feel meaningless when you’re no longer emotionally invested.
• Team dynamics collapse: Colleagues and managers treat the exiting employee as “on the way out.” Some may stop involving you in decisions or important meetings.
• Workplace awkwardness: If your manager took your resignation personally (which often happens in hierarchical Indian setups), your last months can feel like walking on eggshells.
• Career disruption: Many new employers in India hesitate to wait three full months for a candidate. Offers get postponed, renegotiated, or, in some cases, withdrawn entirely.

Essentially, those 90 days become a waiting game—a slow, painful stretch between who you were and who you’re becoming next.

The Global Picture: How India Compares with the World

To understand how excessive India’s notice periods are, let’s take a quick look around the globe.

Country	Typical Notice Period	Remarks
United States	2 weeks	Employees can often leave immediately; “at-will employment” model.
United Kingdom	1 month	Many companies allow negotiation or early release.
Germany	4-6 weeks	Structured but flexible; employees can buy out remaining notice.
Singapore	1 month	Typically tied to seniority level, not longer than 1 month.
India	60-90 days	Often rigid and rarely negotiable, even at junior levels.

India stands out not just for the length, but for the inflexibility of its notice periods. The result? Employees feel trapped in a corporate system that values control over trust, and compliance over empathy.

Why the 90-Day System Doesn’t Work

The 90-day notice system doesn’t work because it hurts productivity, slows business decisions, traps employees between two employers, and even creates hidden costs for companies themselves. It has become a rigid control mechanism rather than a genuine tool for smooth transition in India’s modern, fast-moving job market.

1. Productivity collapse

Once employees mentally move on, their engagement and output drop sharply during long notice periods.
Outgoing staff often do only basic tasks, avoid new responsibilities, and focus on interviews or future plans, which drags down team performance.

2. Hiring delays and lost opportunities

Employers routinely lose good candidates because most companies cannot wait three full months for someone to join, especially in tech and product roles.
Candidates stuck in 90-day notice periods frequently see offers withdrawn or not extended at all, leaving them caught between current and future employers.

3. Employee stress and “limbo” phase

Long notices create a limbo where employees feel demotivated, anxious, and exploited, just “waiting for the clock to run out.”
The prolonged uncertainty affects mental health, family planning, relocations, and even confidence, as people worry that future offers may fall through.

4. Hidden financial and business costs

Extended notice norms increase indirect costs for employers, including low productivity, replacement delays, and extra time spent on repeated hiring cycles.
In sectors like tech, three-month notices have been linked with thousands of crores in “hidden costs” due to slowed delivery and demotivated exiting employees.​

5. Mismatch with global and legal realities

Globally, many markets work with 2–4 week notice norms, making India’s 60–90 day standard an outlier and a barrier to agile hiring.
Indian labour laws usually expect around 30 days for “workmen”; 90 days in the private sector is mostly a contractual choice, not a legal necessity, which shows it’s more culture than compulsion.​

6. Why the 90-day notice period doesn’t make sense

The 90-day notice period doesn’t make sense because it’s outdated, inefficient, and harms both employees and employers in India’s fast-paced economy. It originated from project-heavy IT practices but now creates more problems than it solves, like motivation drops and lost opportunities.​

7. Kills employee motivation

Employees disengage early, doing minimal work while stressed about future offers expiring—turning productive months into wasted time.
Teams suffer from low morale as colleagues notice the lack of commitment, creating an unproductive environment.​

8. Blocks career moves

New employers rarely wait 90 days, leading to withdrawn offers and "offer shopping" where candidates drop out.
This traps talent in uncertainty, delaying relocations, financial gains, and family plans without legal mandate—it's purely contractual.​

9. Hurts employers too

Companies face prolonged hiring gaps, knowledge drain from rushed handovers, and financial strain paying disengaged staff.
In agile sectors like AI and tech, it slows innovation while global peers use 2–4 weeks successfully.​

10. Ignores modern realities

No Indian law requires 90 days; state acts cap at 30 days, and mutual consent allows shorter exits.
Digital tools and agile teams make thorough knowledge transfer possible in weeks, not months.​

The Hidden Economics: Why Companies Still Love the 90-Day Trap

If it’s so evidently toxic, why do Indian corporates refuse to drop the 90-day rule? The answer lies in a mix of economics, control, and legacy systems.​

1. Cost and Convenience

Replacing trained employees costs 1.5–2 times their annual salary, including recruitment, onboarding, and lost productivity. Extending notice periods delays these expenses, giving HR 90 days to hunt replacements without immediate payroll pressure.​
Management gains breathing room to avoid rushed hires or overtime payments during gaps, especially in skill-short areas like AI and cybersecurity.​

2. Workforce Inertia

In IT and consulting, 90 days became the norm post-2000s boom; no firm wants to pioneer shorter periods and risk seeming "soft" on retention.
Reducing it could attract job-hoppers, increasing turnover churn in competitive talent wars, so companies stick to industry standards for parity.​

3. Retention by Fear

The policy subtly deters resignations by making exits feel painful—candidates hesitate knowing new offers might expire while waiting.
Psychologically, it fosters "sunk cost" loyalty, where employees endure longer before quitting, stabilizing headcount forecasts.​

4. Legal Ambiguity

No central Indian law mandates 90 days for private managerial roles; it's contractual, letting firms embed it in offers without pushback.
This gray zone enables enforcement via notice-pay recovery or blacklisting threats, turning policy into leverage without regulatory risk.​

As work evolves to gig models and hybrids, these controls weaken—progressive firms like startups opt for 30 days to attract agile talent.​

The Employee’s Perspective: Dreams on Hold

Every job change carries emotional and financial stakes. For Indian professionals, the 90-day clause often feels like a test of endurance, not professionalism.

Here’s how it affects real people:

• Career Opportunities Lost

New employers in competitive fields like tech often withdraw offers rather than wait three months, forcing candidates to restart job searches.
Exciting roles with better pay or growth vanish, leading to prolonged unemployment gaps and stalled professional advancement.​

• Financial Pressure Mounts

Buying out the notice by forfeiting salary isn't viable for everyone, especially amid rising living costs, EMIs, or family obligations.
Many forgo salary just to escape, but others endure cash shortages, delaying savings, investments, or major life expenses.​

• Mental Health Impact

The limbo phase triggers anxiety from uncertain offers, office awkwardness, and divided focus, often resulting in burnout and reduced confidence.
Employees count days in a demotivating environment, feeling trapped and undervalued during what should be an exciting transition.​

• Family Life Disrupted

Relocations, spousal job moves, children's school changes, or family events get postponed until HR issues the relieving letter.
Personal plans suffer from forced delays, straining relationships and work-life balance in an era of mobile professionals.​

In a world where agility and innovation define success, forcing people to wait months before moving on feels regressive.

The Manager’s Burden: The Flip Side

Interestingly, many managers—like the one who started this debate—are also victims of the very system they enforce.

When their team members resign, they get stuck juggling:

• The workload of the departing employee.
• Client pressure to maintain delivery continuity.
• HR rules that limit early releases even when both sides agree.

This creates frustration on both ends. The manager becomes a bureaucrat, not a leader—forced to police policies they don’t believe in.

That’s why even those in positions of authority are starting to speak up. They see firsthand how the 90-day rule suffocates motivation and agility, both crucial for modern business success.

Legal Landscape: What the Law Actually Says

There’s a common misconception that the 90-day notice is backed by Indian labor law. In truth, no central law mandates this length for private employees.

Under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, and its state amendments, notice periods for “workmen” are typically one month. For managerial staff, it’s governed by individual employment contracts, not law.

This means most 90-day policies are contractual, not statutory. Employees technically agree to them when signing their offer letters, though negotiation is rarely possible at the time.

The lack of regulation creates a power imbalance: HR departments use this gray zone to enforce one-sided policies.

The Global Shift Toward Agility

Internationally, workplaces are rewriting the rules of employment. The emphasis has shifted from control to trust and adaptability.

• At-will employment in the U.S. allows both parties to end a job relationship without extended obligations.
• Europe’s evolving hybrid laws promote balanced transitions—clear handovers but rapid exits.
• Asian peers like Singapore and Malaysia maintain 30-day notice norms, backed by transparent contract clauses.

As India aims to become a global innovation hub, its labor culture must adapt too. Long notice periods contradict the very agility that drives the modern economy.

What Shorter Notice Periods Could Achieve

If India collectively moved toward 30-day notices (or flexible alternatives), it would unlock multiple benefits:

1. Higher morale and transparency: Employees would leave on better terms, fostering goodwill.
2. Faster hiring cycles: Businesses could onboard talent quicker, reducing downtime.
3. Healthier competition: Companies would focus on culture and growth, not on restricting exits.
4. Improved productivity: With realistic transitions, work remains meaningful till the very end.

The shift would signal maturity—proof that corporate India values people over paperwork.

The Path Forward: Rethinking Workplace Trust

Ultimately, the 90-day debate isn’t just about policy—it’s about trust.
Indian workplaces still operate with a paternalistic mindset: managers assume employees will exploit flexibility; employees assume managers will exploit authority.

Breaking this cycle means redesigning the employee–employer relationship:

• Focus on output, not presence.
• Enable transparent handovers with digital tools.
• Encourage mentorship-based exits where leaving employees transfer skills gracefully.
• Reward loyalty through culture and purpose, not through control.

As younger generations enter the workforce—driven by autonomy and fluid careers—companies that cling to rigid systems risk becoming obsolete.

Voices from the Ground: Real Stories, Real Frustrations

On social media, especially LinkedIn and Reddit India, the anti–notice period sentiment grows louder every week. A few snippets capture the mood:

• “My new job offer expired because I couldn’t leave early. Three months later, I’m still waiting for HR to ‘initiate clearance.’”
• “What’s the point of making me sit around for 90 days when my handover was done in three weeks?”
• “Long notice isn’t about transition—it’s about control, plain and simple.”

These aren’t isolated complaints—they reflect a generational shift in how Indians perceive work, loyalty, and freedom.

The Middle Ground: How Companies Can Transition Smoothly

It’s unrealistic to expect overnight change. Large organizations have complex workflows and client dependencies. But gradual reform is possible if leaders act decisively.

Best practices to adopt:

1. Tier-based notice policies: 15 days for junior roles, 30 for mid-level, 45–60 for leadership.
2. Incentivized early transitions: Bonus or goodwill credits for faster handovers.
3. Digital handover frameworks: Documentation tools to streamline knowledge transfer.
4. Exit interviews that matter: Analyze patterns behind frequent resignations.

This hybrid approach balances business needs with employee rights.

Letting Go Is Also Leadership

The real measure of organizational maturity isn’t how tightly you hold people back—it’s how gracefully you let them move on.

A 90-day notice period belongs to a bygone era when control mattered more than collaboration. Today’s India runs on speed, innovation, and trust. To stay competitive globally, our corporate policies must evolve just as fast.

The Big Four manager’s rant wasn’t just anger—it was reflection. It voiced what countless professionals whisper every time they hand in their resignation. And perhaps that collective frustration will finally push Indian employers to rethink what loyalty should really look like in the 21st century.