An Indian HR professional’s LinkedIn post about an employee who resigned just five minutes after receiving their first salary has ignited a heated debate on social media. The post detailed the frustration felt by HR and training teams who had invested time and effort into onboarding and mentoring the new hire.
The HR professional wrote, “Salary credited at 10:00 AM, resignation emailed at 10:05 AM,” expressing dismay at the employee’s sudden exit. She questioned the ethics behind such behavior, stating, “Let’s talk about professional ethics. The company welcomed you, trusted you, and gave you a platform to grow. And then—five minutes after your first salary hit your account—you walked away. Was that fair? Was it ethical?”
Professional Ethics Under the Spotlight
She further criticised last-minute resignations, saying they reveal “a lack of intent, maturity, and accountability,” while stressing the importance of open communication. “If something didn’t feel right: You could’ve spoken up. You could’ve asked for clarity or help. You could’ve made a conscious exit, not a convenient one,” she added. The HR professional also reminded readers that “No job is ‘easy.’ Every role takes commitment, patience, and effort. Growth doesn’t come with your first paycheck — it comes with perseverance.”
She concluded her post by urging professionals to take responsibility for their career decisions: “So before pointing fingers at ‘culture’ or ‘role mismatch,’ Pause. Reflect. Communicate. Because in the end, your professionalism is defined not by your post — but by your actions.”
Social Media Reacts with Divided Opinions
The post quickly garnered attention, with numerous LinkedIn users sharing their views. One user commented, “Person is not wrong But being Hr you should not post such matters on social media .It clearly shows your immaturity please.” Another user sided with the employee, stating, “Ethics? Let’s be clear: salaries are paid for work already done – not for charity, not in advance. If someone resigns after getting paid, it means they fulfilled their obligation for that month. And let’s not forget: there’s usually a notice period still to be served. So it’s not like the company is being blindsided or shortchanged. If companies want lifelong loyalty, maybe they should issue marriage certificates, not offer letters.”
A third user highlighted the imbalance in employer-employee dynamics: “It works both ways, but it’s not balanced. When an employee does this to a company, the company does not usually collapse. However, when a company does this to an employee, a lot of times entire families are brought to the streets. So, please get that into perspective.”
Disclaimer: This story is based on a post shared by a Reddit User. The details, opinions, and statements quoted herein belong solely to the original poster and do not reflect the views of Financialexpress.com. We have not independently verified the claims.