Can my email backfire if I send it ? Advise from people needed against my former manager, see my below post I was thinking about sending an email to the management and hr, I wanted to know if it can backfire for future background verification?

I will give you all a context before the email I have drafted I used to work for Cleartrip it's a flipkart company in the Mumbai office and I was unethically fired from the company, I was manipulated and tricked into thinking I was fired due to pip and that I was not performing where as my score was fine there was no problem as such with my work or score it's just my manager was a narcissist a real kne and used to hate people, he used to target someone or the other everytime and he done that before as well, he used to like to see people suffer and used to laugh at their pain, he with the help of the dgm and HRBP had forced me out of the system under pip but the resignation was not actually under pip it was shown as a voluntary resignation, email will explain things properly, please go through it and let me know if I should send it to the senior management and hr, I left that organisation a year ago but suffered in silence and I wanted to speak up to let people know what happened, and the email below seems like something that can or may backfire in background verification or makes me look wrong in the situation, please advise me people from senior leadership hr and management please and please honestly advise me, do not misguide me. Email I am thinking to send us as follows:

Dear Senior Management / HR Leadership,

I am writing to formally place on record a concern regarding the manner in which my Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) and subsequent separation from the organisation were handled in October 2025.

I have deliberately taken considerable time before raising this. I am not writing with the intention of seeking revenge, reinstatement, compensation, or disciplinary action against any individual. I have moved forward with my career since leaving the organisation.

However, after reflecting on the circumstances of my exit, I believe there were significant procedural concerns in the way the PIP was concluded and my separation was handled. I believe these concerns are important enough to be brought to the attention of senior management, particularly because I would not want another employee to find themselves in a similar situation without an independent mechanism to support them.

I am attaching the email dated 7 October 2025 from my reporting manager, Arjun Suresh Chougule, as supporting documentation.

1. The PIP was initiated in the system and was defined as a two-month process

My PIP was initiated through the organisation's internal system and was communicated to me as a two-month performance improvement process.

My understanding was that the PIP would therefore be assessed over the complete two-month period, with appropriate reviews, feedback and a formal conclusion at the end of the process.

However, this did not happen in my case.

The PIP was initiated in the system, but it was not formally concluded in the system. Instead, the process ultimately moved to an email asking me to submit my resignation.

I believe this is a significant procedural concern because if a performance-management process is initiated and tracked through the internal system, the outcome of that process should also be formally documented and closed through the appropriate system and procedure.

2. September was the second and final month of the PIP, but there was no formal September review

The PIP was for two months, and September was part of that defined PIP period and was the final month.

However, I did not receive the September scorecard at the time, and no formal review discussion took place with me to assess my September performance against the PIP objectives.

This is particularly important because the email dated 7 October states:

“Similarly, your current performance for September's KRA is also not on track.”

The same email then states that, because the PIP was for two months and the results from the final month indicated a failure to meet KRA achievements, I was being asked to submit my resignation through the system with a 30-day notice period.

My concern is that the decision to ask me to leave was communicated before I had received and reviewed the September scorecard and before a formal review of the second/final month of the PIP had taken place with me.

I therefore did not have an opportunity to understand the September assessment, discuss the results, provide any clarification, or receive a documented conclusion of the complete two-month PIP before the decision was communicated.

If September was the final month of a two-month PIP, I believe the complete assessment should have been available, reviewed and documented before a decision was taken regarding my continuation or separation.

3. The PIP was not closed through the system

Another specific concern is that the PIP was initiated in the internal system but was not closed there.

Instead, I was told that an email would be sent asking me to resign.

I raised the matter with HR and was told that the system was essentially a formality and that the relevant letter/documentation would be provided after I resigned.

This put me in a very difficult position as an employee who was unfamiliar with the organisation's internal performance-management procedures.

I did not know what the prescribed PIP closure process was supposed to look like, and I therefore relied on the information being provided to me by my manager and HR.

In hindsight, I believe this is precisely where an independent HR process should have been present.

4. I was asked to resign rather than being formally separated following the PIP

I want to make this distinction very clear because it is important to accurately represent what happened.

I did not independently decide to resign from the organisation. I was asked to submit my resignation following the PIP.

The email dated 7 October 2025 from my manager specifically requested that I submit my resignation through the system with a 30-day notice period.

During the process of submitting my resignation, my manager joined me on a video call and instructed me to select “change of domain” as the reason for my resignation rather than recording the actual circumstances that had resulted in my departure.

I was told that selecting a negative reason could affect my future references.

I followed that instruction.

This is one of my most significant concerns about the manner in which my exit was handled.

The reason ultimately recorded in the system therefore did not independently reflect the circumstances under which I was leaving. I believe an employee should be able to accurately record the circumstances of their separation, particularly where the employee is being asked to resign following a formal performance process.

I found it deeply disappointing that, instead of the actual circumstances being transparently documented, I was instructed to provide a different reason for leaving because of concerns regarding future references.

5. There was no independent HR oversight at the point of separation

There was also a turnover/separation discussion in relation to my exit, for which relevant HR stakeholders had been marked on the communication.

However, HR did not attend the discussion.

I subsequently spoke with Abhishek Soni and asked why HR had not attended. I was told that he was busy and that HR does not get involved in every such matter and that these matters are handled by the manager.

I understand that managers are responsible for managing employee performance. However, when a two-month PIP results in an employee being asked to resign, I believe there should be independent HR oversight to ensure that:

the PIP has been properly completed;

the final month's performance has been formally reviewed;

the PIP has been appropriately closed;

the employee understands the basis of the decision;

the circumstances of the separation are accurately recorded; and

the employee has an opportunity to raise any concerns independently.

None of these safeguards were meaningfully available to me at that stage.

6. Concerns regarding consistency of performance assessment

I also want to raise a concern regarding the consistency and objectivity of the performance process.

The monthly performance scorecard was visible to employees, and I had visibility into the performance of other employees as well. My own KRA scores had also improved during the months reflected in the attached communication.

I appreciate that I may not have visibility into every aspect of another employee's performance, responsibilities or management context, and therefore I do not want to make assumptions about individual cases.

However, when I was asked to leave following the PIP, I could see that there were employees whose reported performance appeared lower than mine who continued in their roles.

This raised a legitimate question for me as to whether the same performance-management criteria and processes were being applied consistently.

I believe this is something that can only be properly evaluated by the organisation itself, because senior management has access to the complete performance data and circumstances of each employee.

7. The working environment was also difficult, although that is not the basis of this complaint

I also want to clarify that I am not presenting the working environment as the reason for my separation.

There were, however, repeated incidents during my employment that made the situation extremely difficult and are relevant context to why I felt I had no safe or independent avenue through which to raise these concerns at the time.

These included repeated instances of being shouted at and spoken to in inappropriate or abusive language, calls late at night for matters that did not require such communication, and an expectation of being available outside normal working hours.

There were also multiple occasions when I was expected to remain in the office simply because my manager was still there. I was questioned about leaving around 7:30 PM while my manager remained until approximately 9:30 PM, with the expectation that I should remain until he left even when there was no specific work requiring me to stay.

On another occasion, I was contacted at approximately 9:30 AM on a Sunday. Because I did not answer the call, I subsequently received an email regarding the missed call and was spoken to harshly about not answering.

There were also instances where terms such as “waste of resource” and “liability” were used towards me.

I am including these points for completeness and context. They are not the central reason for this email. The central concern is the manner in which the PIP and subsequent separation were handled.

8. Why I am raising this now

I recognise that I am raising these concerns considerably after the events occurred.

I did not raise them formally at the time because I was trying to navigate the situation, protect my career and understand what was happening. I was also not familiar with the organisation's internal processes or the appropriate senior person to whom I could independently raise my concerns.

At the time, I was in a position where several senior stakeholders were involved in the process, while I had very limited understanding of how the internal PIP and separation procedures were supposed to work.

Looking back, I believe that this is exactly why an employee should have access to an independent HR or employee-relations mechanism during a situation of this nature.

An employee should not have to know the right people within HR personally in order to understand whether the process being followed is correct.

9. What I would like senior management to take from this

I am not asking for disciplinary action against any individual through this email.

I am asking that the circumstances of my case be acknowledged and that the organisation consider whether the existing process provides adequate checks and balances when an employee is asked to leave following a PIP.

In particular, I believe there should be an independent mechanism for an employee in such circumstances to:

receive a formal review of the complete PIP period, including the final month;

have the PIP formally closed in the system through the prescribed process;

understand the documented basis for the outcome;

have an independent HR representative involved before being asked to resign;

record the circumstances of separation accurately rather than being directed to provide a different reason; and

participate in an independent exit interview where the employee can raise concerns about the process without reporting through the same management hierarchy.

This would provide employees with an avenue to speak openly and would also give the organisation an opportunity to identify situations where processes are not being followed as intended.

I believe this is particularly important in an organisation where employees and their managers or HR stakeholders may be based in different cities. An employee working from Mumbai, for example, may have very limited visibility of the HR structure in Bangalore or elsewhere and may not know whom they can approach independently when a serious employment decision is being taken.

10. Final note

I have moved forward with my career since leaving the organisation, and I do not intend to remain engaged in this matter indefinitely.

I am writing because I genuinely believe that what happened in my case should not become a precedent for how another employee is asked to leave.

If an employee is not meeting expectations, the organisation has every right to take appropriate performance-management action. But that process should be transparent, properly documented, consistently applied and independently overseen where necessary.

If an employee ultimately needs to leave, they should be allowed to leave through the correct process and with an accurate record of why they are leaving.

I was not familiar with the process, I relied on the people managing it, and I ultimately left with a reason recorded in the system that did not reflect the circumstances in which I had been asked to leave.

I believe senior management should be aware of that.

I am therefore putting these concerns on record in the hope that they will be reviewed from a process and governance perspective, and that appropriate safeguards can be considered so that another employee does not find themselves in the same position.

Thank you for taking the time to read this.

Regards,

XYZ