Most HR teams in India will read about the TCS case and feel relieved it isn’t them. That’s the negative reaction.
Not because every company is hiding something. But because the gaps that led to this situation – ignored complaints, no escalation, a grievance process that existed in name only – are far more common than anyone in HR wants to admit.
This isn’t about pointing fingers at one organization. It’s about asking an honest question: if your employees were raising concerns repeatedly and nothing was happening, would you even know?
78 Emails. Zero Resolution.
That’s reportedly what some employees sent before this situation became a legal matter. 78 emails to HR. Multiple phone calls. And still – no action.
Here’s the thing. Most HR leaders hearing this will assume it couldn’t happen at their company. But ask yourself: when was the last time you audited how complaints are actually being handled – not just logged?
Because there’s a big difference between a grievance system that receives complaints and one that resolves them.
The Real Problem Isn’t the Policy. It’s the Process.
Almost every mid- to large-sized company in India has a grievance policy. Most have an ICC in place. Many have a section on their intranet about how to raise a concern.
And yet, employees still don’t report. Or they report once, hear nothing back, and never try again.
The gap isn’t the policy document. It’s everything that happens – or doesn’t happen – after an employee hits send.
A grievance system that actually works needs a few non-negotiables:
- A response within 48 hours: Not a resolution – just an acknowledgement that the complaint has been received and is being looked into. This alone changes how safe employees feel.
- More than one reporting channel: If the only option is going to HR, and HR is either inaccessible or part of the problem, employees have nowhere to go. A third-party ethics hotline or an anonymous digital tool gives people an alternative.
- An ICC that functions independently: The POSH Act is specific about this. The committee cannot be a rubber stamp for HR decisions. It needs an external member. It needs to operate with real authority.
- Escalation built into the process: What happens if the complaint isn’t resolved at the first level? Who does it go to next? If your process doesn’t answer that question clearly, you have a gap.
The Part Nobody Talks About – When HR is the Problem
This is uncomfortable, but it needs to be said.
The TCS case allegedly involves an HR manager. Which means the very person employees might have approached for help was reportedly part of what they needed help with.
No grievance system designed around HR being the central point of contact is equipped to handle this.
If you haven’t thought about what your process looks like when HR itself is implicated, now is the time. A direct line to the CEO’s office, or a Board-level escalation path, isn’t overkill. It’s just good governance.
Culture Is What Makes or Breaks All of This
You can have the best-designed grievance process in the industry. If employees don’t believe their complaints will be taken seriously – or worse, that raising one will hurt them – they won’t use it.
This is why manager behaviour matters so much. The way a team lead responds when someone raises a concern informally, the way leadership talks about accountability in town halls, the way HR communicates outcomes after an investigation – all of it either builds or erodes the belief that speaking up is safe.
Psychological safety isn’t a topic for workshops. It shows up in the small moments. And employees are watching those moments all the time.
To TCS’s Credit
Once the situation became public, the response from leadership was measured. Accused employees were suspended, an internal investigation was assigned to a senior leader, and the Chairman made a public statement acknowledging the seriousness of the matter.
That’s how crisis response should look. The harder question is whether those same standards – transparency, swift action, senior accountability – are applied before things reach a crisis point.
HR Checklist: Audit Your Grievance System Today
Run through this honestly. Not as a compliance exercise – as a genuine gut check.
- Every employee knows at least two ways to raise a concern – not just one.
- Complaints receive a written acknowledgement within 48 hours.
- Our ICC has an external independent member as required under POSH.
- There is a clear escalation path when frontline HR fails to act.
- We have an anonymous reporting channel that is actually promoted to employees.
- Our ICC functions independently – not as an extension of HR decisions.
- There is a defined process for handling complaints that involve HR staff.
- Employees are updated on the status of their complaint throughout the process.
- Managers have been trained on how to handle disclosures and early warning signs.
- We have reviewed and tested our grievance system in the last 12 months – not just confirmed it exists.
- Complainants are actively protected from any form of retaliation.
- Senior leadership reviews grievance data – frequency, resolution rates, patterns – at least quarterly.
One Last Thing
Grievance systems don’t fail because HR teams don’t care. Most of the time, they fail because nobody stress-tested them before something went wrong.
Pick three items from that checklist. Fix them this quarter. Then come back and do the next three.
That’s how safe workplaces are actually built – not in one big policy overhaul, but in the quiet, consistent work of making sure the process works for the people who need it most.
