Bank staffer seeks Delhi transfer to take care of ill father-in-law. HR says no. Call recording is viral

The incident has triggered intense debate online, with many users calling the HR manager’s stance 'inhumane', while others felt the he had acted within the boundaries of private‑sector norms. (AI-generated image)

A Kolkata‑based bank employee’s emotional appeal for a transfer to Delhi — so she could care for her critically ill father‑in‑law — has sparked a nationwide debate on workplace empathy, HR policies, and the limits of corporate flexibility. A recording of her conversation with the bank’s head HR manager, in which her request is repeatedly denied despite her distress, has gone viral on social media, drawing sharply polarised reactions.

‘My family is suffering… he had four surgeries last month’

In the audio clip, the woman explains that her father‑in‑law, admitted to AIIMS Delhi, had suffered multiple organ complications due to diabetes and had undergone four major surgeries in the previous month. With her husband and in‑laws based in Delhi, she told the HR manager she was struggling to manage caregiving responsibilities from Kolkata.

“But sir, my family is suffering a lot right now because after joining here, my father-in-law fell ill. Diabetes has hampered his liver, kidney... all organs began failing. He had four surgeries last month,” the employee says in the clip, requesting a transfer on humanitarian grounds.

The HR manager responds, “You can either call him here or…,” prompting her to explain that she cannot move him because he underwent a surgery just four days ago and also because her husband is in Delhi.

An ICICI Bank @ICICIBank employee was forced to choose between her job and her humanity. Her father-in-law was critically ill, admitted to AIIMS Delhi, and had undergone multiple major surgeries. She was the only daughter-in-law and solely responsible for his care. Despite HR… pic.twitter.com/JkV1MouXb9

— Vijaya Sharma (@vijayaksharma) February 9, 2026

‘I won’t be able to help you with a transfer’

Despite her repeated requests, the manager insists a transfer is not possible.

“You have to decide what to do. I won’t be able to help you with a transfer,” he says at one point. When she explains that she is in a financial crisis and cannot resign, he denies suggesting resignation but reiterates that her options are limited.

When she offers to furnish medical documents to prove the gravity of the situation, the manager replies, “No, no, it’s not a matter of providing documents. If I had to do it, I would have granted your request when you wrote to me the first time.”

As she breaks down explaining that her father‑in‑law had undergone another surgery just four days earlier, he suggests taking leave instead. When she points out she has only eight days of leave left for the year, he responds, “That you have to see. It’s not my responsibility.”

‘We are like a family here’ — ‘Even in a family we often don’t listen’

At one point, the employee pleads, “Sir, please don’t take this otherwise, but we are both working for the same company, we are like a family here…”

The HR manager replies, “Even in a family, we often don’t listen to what our parents say,” dismissing her final appeal.

The call ends with him firmly stating that her transfer “won’t be possible.”

Internet divided: ‘Insensitive and inhumane’ vs ‘HR is just doing his job’

The clip has triggered intense debate online, with many users calling the bank's HR manager’s stance “inhumane” and lacking basic compassion during what was clearly a documented medical emergency.

One user wrote: “It’s about basic humanity in an extreme, documented medical emergency… Large institutions actually have more capacity for temporary flexibility than small businesses. Saying a big entity ‘can’t accommodate’ is a policy choice, not a limitation.”

Another commented on wider patterns in Indian workplaces. “Not only corporate policies. In PSBs too, HR behaves like dictators. In the name of policy, they torture employees who actually suffer due to family medical emergencies."

Many argued that large institutions should have mechanisms for temporary transfers, remote arrangements or emergency provisions — particularly in cases involving critical illness.

Another section of users, however, felt the manager had acted within the boundaries of private‑sector norms.

“I don’t see anything wrong… it’s not a government office. In the private sector, it’s take it or leave it,” one person wrote.

Another added, “Companies are not charitable organisations made for the comfort of employees.”

Some also said that while the situation was unfortunate, HR departments must operate within structural constraints and cannot accommodate every request.