WORKERS PARTICIPATION

CASE STUDY 1
Sudha Industries Ltd. is a well-managed company manufacturing spare
parts and structures. It- has a workforce of about 800 and is located in
the suburbs of Bombay. its industrial relations have been, however,
strained as there are two rival unions more hostile to each other than
to the management. In accordance with the advice of some
consultants, it decided to pursue workers' participation in management
in its establishment. Anticipating inter-union rivalry and hostility, it was
exploring ways and means of how to get the rank and file of workers to
develop willingness to participate in the scheme. As the traditional
methods would not have worked, the company management decided
on innovative methods. The management wrote first to both the unions
in a very friendly language requesting their co-operation to make the
scheme a success. It also invited the leaders of both the unions to meet
the General Manager (G'M) and the Industrial Relations Manager
together or separately, formally or informally, to talk without any
prejudice to their rights in the collective bargaining area.
Both the unions avoided to formally reply, but informally their leaders
sent word to the management that they would meet the GM and
Industrial Relations Manager. Meetings did take place and the
management was able to persuade the unions not to oppose the
involvement of workers. Then the vexed problem of how to determine
the representation of workers in the joint council came. The
management strongly urged the leaders to accept election of
representatives by the workers. Probably because of fear that secret
ballot might reveal the real strength of each of the rival unions, both
the unions separatery opposed the election. After-a lot of thinking, the
management offered to have parity of workers' nominations between
both the unions and this was finally accepted. The scheme has now
started operating on this basis, and management representatives and
spokesmen of both the unions have been attending the meetings of the
joint council. This has produced some interesting consequences and the
scheme has actually contributed to reducing the inter-union rivalry. The
informal dialogue which started on this with the union leaders is also
picking up as a regular feature with management playing the role of a
mediating influence between the two rival unions.

Questions
1.State the salient features of the case.
2.How far do you agree with management's approach in selling its
scheme of Workers' Participation in Management to the two unions?
Give reasons.
3.What future course of action should be adopted by the management
to improve industrial relations in the organisation?
CASE STUDY -2
The Aristocrat Baggage Company's Suggestion Scheme Committee is
meeting. They are listening to a report by the Secretary on the
discussion that had taken place when he had been invited to attend the
Company's Joint Consultative Committee meeting.
One of the workers' representatives had brought up the case of the
operator, Raman Gandhi who three years before had put in an idea
regarding dispatch procedure which had turned down the suggestion.
Two years later a new Dispatch Manager had been appointed.
Apparently, a year after his appointment he introduced what virtually
amounted to the exact idea suggested by Mr. Gandhi. Mr. Gandhi
wasfurious when he heard about this and complained to the union
leaders. He stated that his idea had been stolen and that he will never
give any new ideas under the suggestion scheme again. "It is ramp" he
announced. Some of his work mates agreed with him.
At the Joint Consultative Meeting, the Secretary had a somewhat tough
passage during the heated discussion. Subsequently, he had talked the
matter over with the new Dispatch Manager who had quite clearly not
heard of Gandhi's idea. "In any case", commented the Despatch
Manager, "the situation is different now. Gandhi's idea could not have
been workable at that time". The suggestion scheme committee
discussed the matter, but failed to take any decision in this case.

Questions
1.What is the problem in this case ?
2.Should it be mandatory for the Suggestion Committee to give reasons
ifit turns down any suggestion by a worker.
3.How would 3!'0U deal with the present situation? What steps would
you take to avoid the recurrence of such a problem in future?
4.How would you encourage the workers to participate in the
Suggestion Scheme?