A STUDY ON EFFECTIVENESS OF GRIEVANCE HANDLING MECHANISM SUMMER PROJECT REPORT Submitted by SHWETA SINGH Under the guidance of Mrs.R.

HEMALATHA, PGDM Faculty, Department Of Management Studies in partial fulfilment for the award of the degree of POST GRADUATE DIPLOMA IN MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES SRI MANAKULA VINAYAGAR ENGINNERING COLLEGE PONDICHERRY UNIVERSITY PUDUCHERRY, INDIA SEPTEMBER 2009 BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the project work entitled A STUDY ON is a

EFFECTIVENES OF GRIEVANCE HANDLING MECHANISM

bonafide work done by R.GAYATHRI [REGISTER NO: 27348310] in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the award of Master of Business Administration by Pondicherry University during the academic year 2008-2009. GUIDE HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT Submitted for Viva-voce Examination held on ________________________ External Examiner 1.

2. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT It gives us great ecstasy of pleasure to convey our deep and sincere thanks to our Principal Dr. V.S.K. Venkatachalapathy, for his kind support, which helped us to complete the project successfully. We have great pleasure in expressing our sincere gratitude and hearty thanks to our beloved Faculty, Mrs.R.Hemalatha, Department of Management Studies for consenting to be our guide. She had been a great source of encouragement and inspired us throughout our project. We are greatly thankful to her for everything she has done for us. We would like to express our deepest gratitude to Mr.Jayakumar, Head of the Department, Department of Management studies for giving constant encouragement We express our hearty thanks to Mr.D.Umamaheswaran, Senior Personnel Officer, Lucas TVS Ltd., who provided valuable guidance throughout the project in his busy schedule. We thank our Management, Department Staffs, and Our Parents for their support and above all to God for showering his blessing upon us. A special word of thanks to all those we have failed to acknowledge. ABSTRACT This study focuses on Effectiveness of Grievance Handling Mechanism at Lucas-TVS Limited,Puducherry. Grievance is any kind of dissatisfaction with regard to pay,promotion,suspension,working condition etc.. The objective of the study is to find the effectiveness of grievance handling mechanism being followed. The sample size is 35 and the population size is 140. The tools used for the study are Percentage method and Correlation.

The study infers that most of employees are highly satisfied with the mechanism being followed. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES i LIST OF CHARTS ii CHAPTER TITLE PAGE NO. I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Profile of the organization 1 1.2 Introduction to the study 5 II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 6 III OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY 12 IV RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 13 V DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION 17 VI 6.1 FINDINGS OF THE STUDY 6.2SUGGESTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS 35 37 VII CONCLUSION 38 VIII SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY 39 APPENDICES ANNEXURE I 40 ANNEXURE II 41 LIST OF TABLES Table No. Table name Page No: 1.1 List of products manufactured 2

1.2 Clients 3 5.1 Distribution of respondents regarding temporary relief 17 5.2 Distribution of respondents based on age 18 5.3 Distribution of respondents towards supervisors level of skill 19 5.4 Distribution of respondents towards awareness of committees 20 5.5 Distribution of respondents towards decision given 21 5.6 Distribution of respondents towards the informal channel 22 5.7 Distribution of respondents towards real basis of identification of their grievance 23 5.8 Distribution of respondents towards mechanism followed resolves grievance or not 24 5.9 Distribution of respondents towards importance given to discussion and conference 25 5.10 Distribution of respondents regarding whom

they redress for grievance 26 5.11 Distribution of respondents based on qualification 28 5.12 Distribution of respondents regarding awareness of various committees 29 5.13 Distribution of respondents regarding regular follow up 31 5.14 Distribution of respondents regarding supervisors 32 5.15 Correlation between Feel about decision and Real basis identified. 33 5.16 Values for correlation 33 5.17 Correlation between Discussion and Conference And Supervisor s Skill level 34 5.18 Values for correlation 34 LIST OF CHARTS Chart No: Chart Name Page No: 5.1 Distribution of respondents regarding temporary relief 17 5.2 Distribution of respondents based on age 18 5.3 Distribution of respondents towards supervisors level authority

of skill 19 5.4 Distribution of respondents towards awareness of committees 20 5.5 Distribution of respondents towards decision given 21 5.6 Distribution of respondents towards the informal channel 22 5.7 Distribution of respondents towards real basis of identification of their grievance 23 5.8 Distribution of respondents towards mechanism followed resolves grievance or not 24 5.9 Distribution of respondents towards importance given to discussion and conference 25 5.10 Distribution of respondents regarding whom they redress for grievance 27 5.11 Distribution of respondents based on qualification 28 5.12 Distribution of respondents regarding awareness of various committees 30 5.13 Distribution of respondents regarding regular follow up

31 5.14 Distribution of respondents regarding supervisors authority 32 CHAPTER I 1.1 PROFILE OF THE COMPANY Lucas - TVS was set up in 1961 as a joint venture of Lucas Industries plc., UK and T V SundaramIyengar& Sons (TVS), India, to manufacture Automotive Electrical Systems. One of the top ten automotive component suppliers in the world, Lucas Varity was formed by the merger of the Lucas Industries of the UK and the Varity Corporation of the US in September 1996. The company designs, manufactures and supplies advanced technology systems, products and services to the world's automotive, after market, diesel engine and aerospace industries. The combination of these two well-known groups has resulted in the establishment of a vibrant company, which has had a successful track record of sustained growth over the last three decades.TVS is one of India's twenty large industrial houses with twenty-five manufacturing companies and a turnover in excess of US$ 1.3 billion. The turnover of Lucas-TVS and its divisions is US$ 233 million during 2003-2004. Incorporating the strengths of Lucas UK and the TVS Group, Lucas TVS has emerged as one of the foremost leaders in the automotive industry today. Lucas TVS reaches out to all segments of the automotive industry such as passenger cars, commercial vehicles, tractors, jeeps, two-wheelers and off-highway vehicles as well as for stationary and marine applications. With the automobile industry in India currently undergoing phenomenal changes, Lucas-TVS, with its excellent facilities, is fully equipped to meet the challenges of tomorrow. PRODUCTS Lucas-TVS manufactures the most comprehensive range of auto electrical components in the country. A range which continues to set standards in the industry. The products are designed to meet the demands of vehicle manufacturers both in India and worldwide. With the emission

standards in India becoming increasingly stringent, Lucas-TVS has ensured that each of its products is manufactured to meet global standards LIST OF PRODUCTS MANUFACTURED Lucas-TVS Product Range for Indian Market Lucas-TVS Product Range for US/European Market Starter Motor Starter Motor Alternator Alternator Headlamp Small Motor 14W Wiper Motor WindShield Wiper Motor (GM Range) LRW Products Small Motor Wiper Motor Blower Motor Fan Motor Dynamo Regulator Dynamo Regulator Dynamo Dynamo Auto Electricals Ignition Coil Distributor Diesel fuel injection CLIENTS CUSTOMER INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATOR

Cars MarutiUdyog Suzuki, Japan Hindustan Motors Isuzu, Japan. Mitsubishi, Japan TATA Engineering and Locomotive Company General Motors, India General Motors, USA Ford India Ford, UK Daewoo Motors Co., India Daewoo, Korea Ind Auto Fiat, Italy Hyundai Motors, India Hyundai Motors, Korea Tractors Mahindra & Mahindra International Harvestor Corporation, UK Tractors and Farm Equipments (TAFE) Massey Ferguson, UK Escorts Ursus, Poland. Ford, UK HMT Zetor, Czechoslovakia Eicher Tractors Good Earth, Germany Punjab Tractors Gujarat Tractors Zetor, Czechoslovakia L&T Tractors Johndeer, USA Greaves Tractors Same, Italy DIVISIONS Lucas TVS has grown hand in hand with the automobile industry in the country. The company's policies have recognised the need to respond effectively to changing customer needs,

helping to propel it to a position of leadership. The company has raised its standards on quality, productivity, reliability and flexibility by channeling its interests. At present, there are five divisions: 1. Auto Electricals L-TVS 2. Fuel Injection Equipment (FIE) - DTVS 3. Electronic Ignition Systems (INEL) 4. Automotive Lighting (IJL) 5. After Market Operations (LIS) ACHIEVEMENTS Lucas-TVS, a TVS group company, has bagged the prestigious Deming Application Award for the year 2004. This was announced by the Deming Prize Committee of Japanese Union of Scientists and Engineers (JUSE). 1.2 INTRODUCTION FOR THE STUDY 1. The aim of the study is to find whether the grievance handling mechanism ensures that employee s problems are recognized and appropriately reviewed in a prompt and timely manner. 2. The grievance mechanism acts as a foundation for a harmonious and healthy relationship between employee and employer. 3. The grievance mechanism ensures a fair and just treatment of employee s concerns and prompt resolution of grievances without discrimination, coercion, restraint or reprisal against any employee who may submit or be involved in a grievance. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE GRIEVANCE Grievance is any discontent or dissatisfaction that affects organizational performance. As such it can be stated or unvoiced, written or oral, legitimate or ridiculous. If the dissatisfaction of employees goes unattended or the conditions causing it are not corrected, the irritation is likely

to increase and lead to unfavorable attitude towards the management and unhealthy relations in the organization. The formal mechanism for dealing with such worker s dissatisfaction is called grievance procedure. All companies whether unionized or not should have established and known grievance methods of processing grievances. The primary value of grievance procedure is that it can assist in minimizing discontent and dissatisfaction that may have adverse effects upon co-operation and productivity. A grievance procedure is necessary in large organization which has numerous personnel and many levels with the result that the manager is unable to keep a check on each individual, or be involved in every aspect of working of the small organization. The usual steps in grievance procedure are 1. Conference among the aggrieved employee, the supervisor, and the union steward. 2. Conference between middle management and middle union leadership. 3. Conference between top management and top union leadership. 4. Arbitration. There may be variations in the procedures followed for resolving employee grievances. Variations may result from such factors as organizational or decision-making structures or size of the plant or company. Large organizations do tend to have formal grievance procedures involving succession of steps. Arbitration Arbitration is a procedure in which a neutral third party studies the bargaining situation, listens to both the parties and gathers information, and then makes recommendations that are binding on the parties. Arbitration has achieved a certain degree of success in resolving disputes between the labour and the management. The labour union generally takes initiative to go for arbitration. When the union so decides, it notifies the management. At this point, the union and company must select an arbitrator. Guidelines When processing grievances, there are several important guidelines to consider:

Check the grievant s title and employment status to determine if he / she are included in a union eligible classification. Note the supervisor s respondent obligation under the grievance procedure. Review the requested solution to the grievance. Determine if the relief sought is beyond a supervisor s authority to grant. Review all policies or other information related to the grievance. Conduct a thorough investigation of the allegations. Prepare a written response including the reason for the decision and provide a copy to the grievant. Grievance materials should be maintained in a separate file from either personnel files or records. Articles related to grievance Measures of supervisory behaviors and supervisor s knowledge of the collective agreement should, intuitively, be related to the occurrence of grievable events, but there has been no theory advanced to explain grievable events. Kliener ,Nigkelsburg and Pilarski implicitly assumed that supervisor monitoring of employees will increase the number of grievable events, but a theoretical basis or rationale for this assumed relationship is not discussed. Grievants were less satisfied with their jobs, had poorer attitudes toward their line supervisors, had greater feelings of pay inequity, had stronger beliefs that workers should participate in decision-making, were less satisfied with their unions, and more active in their unions. The lower satisfaction with the union among grievant may be due to dissatisfaction with the processing of grievances. Grievants were more younger and had less education than nongrievants. Gordon and Miller, Allen and Keavney and Klass note the important role that expectancy theory could play in differentiating grievants and nongrievants. Although not a complete test of expectancy theory, Lewin and Boroff did include the employees perceived effectiveness of the grievance procedure as an explanatory variable. Surprisingly, this was not significantly related to

grievance filing. Further research focusing on expectancy theory and grievance filing that more fully develops testable hypotheses derived from expectancy theory seems appropriate. Bemmels, Reshef and Stratton-Devine included the shop stewards assessment of how frequently employees approach them with complaints. Although most grievances are formally filed by employees, the initiation of a grievance can come from employees or stewards. Complaining to the shop stewards is the employees role in the grievance initiation process. Both

of these studies found the work group with employees who complained to the stewards more frequently had grievance rates. Employees complaining to their stewards is a precursor to

grievance filing. The measure of consideration and structure were significantly related to frequency of employee complaints in Bemmels and the steward s assessment of the supervisors knowledge of the collective agreement was negatively related to complaints. Lewin and Peterson found a positive relationship with grievance procedure structure and grievance rates. They also found higher grievance rates under procedures that include provisions for expedited grievance handling. It was found that provisions allowing oral presentation of grievances was related to lower rates of written grievances, and screening of potential grievances was related to lower rates of written grievance, and screening of potential grievances by a committee or other union officials was associated with lower grievance rates. The number of steps in the grievance procedure and the length of time allowed for filing a grievance were not related to grievance rates. Lewin and Peterson argued that evaluations of grievance procedure effectiveness should include subjective evaluations by the participants as well as objective measures reflecting the operation of the grievance procedure. They argued that subjective evaluations are the preferred method for evaluating grievance procedure effectiveness. Effectiveness was difficult to interpret from measures reflecting the operation of grievance procedures such as grievance rates, settlement levels and arbitration rates since it was not clear what the optimal magnitudes might be for these measures. Furthermore the purpose of grievance procedure is to resolve disputes about the interpretation and application of collective agreements. Grievance procedures exist for the

benefit of the employees, employers and unions. If the parties were satisfied with the operation of the grievance procedure, it seems to more important than attaining some predetermined optimal magnitude of grievance filing or when, where, and how grievances are being resolved. Grievance procedures are related to other attitudinal measures and the behaviors of shop stewards in the grievance procedure. Grievance procedure effectiveness was related to union members overall satisfaction with the union. Grievance procedures have been found to relate to

union commitment, employer commitment and dual commitment. Employer commitment has found to be negatively related to absenteeism and turnover and union commitment has found to have a positive relationship with union participation and with shop steward behavior in the grievance procedure. Many studies still report empirical analysis with no theoretical grounding, or only intuitive and ad hoc hypotheses. Grievance could be classified into 4 basic types: Discrimination charges, rules violation, general or unclassified complaints and discipline. Discrimination was spelled out as based upon race, sex, religion, color, national origin, age, veteran status, or handicapped. Grievance corresponding rules violation was an employees interpretation of application of

policies and procedures governing personnel policies, department work rules, unsafe or unhealthy working conditions, or other policies or procedures of a working nature. Disciplinary actions are the category least classified as a grievance. Legalistic approach was used to handle such cases. With the possibility of adverse legal action arising from unjust discipline, separate systems are often established in discipline cases to ensure the employees process rights. Five types of grievance systems were typically noted in the literature. They were the open door policy, step-review method, peer-review also called the grievance committee or roundtable, ombudsman and hearing officer. In the public sector study. The predominant method of grievance adjudication was the step-review method used either singularly or in combination with a peerreview committee. The step-review method had characteristics similar to the grievance / complete due

arbitration procedures found in union contracts. The step-review method has a preestablished set of steps for reviewing employee complaints by succeeding higher levels of agency personnel. Benefits of having Grievance procedure: The grievance procedure provides a means for identifying practices, procedures, and administrative policies that are causing employee complaints so that changes can be considered. They reduce costly employment suits. A grievance procedure allows managers to establish a uniform labour policy. A grievance system can be a reliable mechanism to learn of, and resolve employee dissatisfaction. It can produce early settlements to disputes or provide for correction of contested employment issues. CHAPTER III OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY PRIMARY OBJECTIVE To study the effectiveness of grievance handling mechanism. SECONDARY OBJECTIVE 1. To identify whether the employees are aware of the grievance handling mechanism. 2. To identify whether the grievance handling system leads to a favorable attitude towards the management 3. To identify that the grievance handling system leads to a mutual understanding between workers and the management 4. To know the level of satisfaction towards the grievance handling procedure of the organization 5. To identify the factors influencing the effectiveness of the grievance handling in the organization CHAPTER IV

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY RESEARCH Research is a process in which the researcher wishes to find out the end result for a given problem and thus the solution helps in future course of action. The research has been defined as A careful investigation or enquiry especially through search for new fact in any branch of knowledge . RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The procedure using, which researchers go about their work of describing, explaining and predicting phenomena, is called Methodology. Methods compromise the procedures used for generating, collecting, and evaluating data. Methods are the ways of obtaining information useful for assessing explanation. TYPES OF RESEARCH The type of research used in this project is descriptive in nature. Descriptive research is essentially a fact finding related largely to the present, abstracting generations by cross sectional study of the current situation .The descriptive methods are extensively used in the physical and natural science, for instance when physics measures, biology classifies, zoology dissects and geology studies the rock. But its use in social science is more common, as in socio economic surveys and job and activity analysis. DESCRIPTIVE RESEARCH AIMS To portray the characteristics of a particular individual situation or group(with or without specific initial hypothesis about the nature of this characteristics). To determine the frequency with which something occurs or with which it is associated with something else( usually , but not always ,with a specific initial hypothesis). The descriptive method has certain limitation; one is that the research may make description itself an end itself. Research is essentially creative and demands the discovery of facts on order to lead a solution of the problem. A second limitation is associated whether the statistical techniques dominate. The desire to over emphasis central tendencies and to fact in

terms of Average, Correlation, Means and dispersion may not always be either welcome. This limitation arises because statistics which is partly a descriptive tool of analysis can aid but not always explain causal relation. DESIGN OF DESCRIPTIVE STUDIES: Descriptive studies aim at portraying accurately the characteristics of a particular group or solution. One may under take a descriptive study about the work in the factory, health and welfare. A descriptive study may be concerned with the right to strike, capital punishment, prohibitionetc: A descriptive study involves the following steps: 1. Formulating the objectives of the study. 2. Defining the population and selecting the sample. 3. Designing the method of data collection. 4. Analysis of the data. 5. Conclusion and recommendation for further improvement in the practices. Description of statistical tools used Percentage method Correlation Percentage method In this project percentage method test and used. The following are the formula Percentage of Respondent = No. of Respondent x 100 Total no. of Respondent CORRELATION Correlation analysis deals with the association between two or more variables. It does not tell anything about cause and effect relationship. Correlation is describd or classified in several different ways. Three of the most important ways of classifying correlation are : 1. Positive and Negative 2. Simple, Multiple and Partial

3. Linear and Non-Linear Karl Pearson s method is popularly known as Pearson s coefficient of correlation. It is denoted by the symbol xy Formula for Karl Pearson s coefficient r = ______________ x2 * y2 r .

The value of the coefficient of correlation as obtained by the above formula shall always lie between +1 and -1. When r = 1, it means there is perfect positive correlation between variables. When r = -1, it means there is perfect negative correlation between variables. When r = 0, it means no relationship between variables. Data collection method Data was collected using Questionnaire. This method is quite popular in case of big enquires. Private individuals, research workers, private and public organizations and even government are adopting it. A questionnaire consists of a number of question involves both specific and general question related to Grievance Handling. Sources of data The two sources of data collection are namely primary &secondary. Primary Data: Primary data are fresh data collected through survey from the employees using questionnaire. Secondary Data Secondary data are collected from books and internet. Research design Research design is the specification of the method and procedure for acquiring the information needed to solve the problem. The research design followed for this research study is descriptive research design where we find a solution to an existing problem. The problem of this study is to find the effectiveness of Grievance Handling at Lucas- TVS Limited.

Sample Design Sample Element : Employees at Lucas- TVS Limited. Sample Size : 35 samples Sample Test : Percentage Method & Correlation Sample Media : Questionnaire Sampling Method : Simple Random Sampling CHAPTER V DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION Distribution of respondents regarding Temporary relief Table: 5.1 Sl. No. Temporary relief No. of respondents Percentage 1 Yes 19 54.3 2 No 16 45.7 Total 35 100 Inference: From the above table it is inferred that 54.3% of respondents state that they are being provided with temporary relief and 45.7% stating they are not being provided relief. Distribution of respondents regarding Temporary relief Chart No: 5.1 temporary relief temporary relief yes no Percent

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Distribution of respondents based on age Table: 5.2 Sl.No. Age Frequency Percentage 1 19-25 6 17.1 2 26-30 29 82.9 Total 35 100 Inference: From the above table it is inferred that 17.1% of respondents are between the age group 19-25 and 82.9% are between the age group 26-30. Distribution of respondents based on age Chart No: 5.2 age 26-30 19-25 Distribution of respondents towards supervisors level of skill Table: 5.3 Inference: From the above table it is inferred that

91.4% of respondents state that their supervisor are highly skilled and 8.6% state that their supervisor is moderately skilled. Distribution of respondents towards supervisors level of skill Chart No: 5.3 supervisor has skill supervisor has skill very highly skilled moderately skilled Percent 100 80 60 40 20 0 Distribution of respondents towards awareness of committees Table: 5.4 Sl.No Awareness of committees Frequency Percentag e 1 yes 35 100.0 Sl.No. Supervisor

possess necessary skill Frequency Percentage 1 very highly skilled 32 91.4 2 moderately skilled 3 8.6 Total 35 100 Total 35 100 Inference: From the above table it is inferred that 100% of respondents are aware of the various committees that are framed for redressing their grievance. Distribution of respondents towards awareness of committees Chart No: 5.4 various committee various committee yes Percent 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Distribution of respondents towards decision given Table: 5.5 Sl.No. Decision given is

satisfactory or not Frequency Percentage 1 Highly satisfactory 31 88.6 2 Moderately satisfactory 4 11.4 Total 35 100 Inference: From the above table it is inferred that 88.6% of respondents are highly satisfied towards the decision given by the management and 11.4% of respondents are moderately satisfied towards the decision. Distribution of respondents towards decision given Chart No: 5.5 feel about decision given feel about decision given highly satisfactory moderately satisfact Percent 100 80 60 40 20 0 Distribution of respondents towards the informal channel Table: 5.6

Sl.No Informal channel No. of respondents Percentage 1 co worker 23 65.7 2 peer 12 34.3 Total 35 100 Inference: From the above table it is inferred that 65.7% of respondents communicate to their coworkers and 34.3% of respondents communicate to their peer. Distribution of respondents towards the informal channel Chart No: 5.6 informal channel informal channel co w orker peer Percent 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Distribution of respondents towards real basis of identification of their grievance Table: 5.7 Sl.No. Real basis Frequency Percentage 1 strongly

agree 27 77.1 2 agree 8 22.9 Total 35 100 Inference: From the above table it is inferred that 77.1% of respondents strongly agree that real basis is identified and 22.9% of respondents agree that real basis is identified. Distribution of respondents towards real basis of identification of their grievance Chart No: 5.7 real basis identified agree strongly agree Distribution of respondents towards mechanism followed resolves grievance or not Table: 5.8 Sl.No. Mechanism resolves grievance or not No. of respondents Percentage 1 yes 34 97.1 2 no 1 2.9 Total 35 100 Inference: From the above table it is inferred that 97.1% of respondents agree that mechanism resolves grievance and 2.9% of respondents disagree that mechanism does not resolve grievance. Distribution of respondents towards mechanism followed resolves grievance or not

Chart No: 5.8 mechanism resolves grievance no yes Distribution of respondents towards importance given to discussion and conference Table: 5.9 Sl.No. Discussion and conference No. of respondents Percentage 1 strongly agree 29 82.9 2 agree 6 17.1 Total 35 100 Inference: From the above table it is inferred that 82.9% of respondents strongly agree that discussion and conference is facilitated and 17.1% of respondents agree that discussion and conference is facilitated. Distribution of respondents towards importance given to discussion and conference Chart No: 5.9 discussion and conference discussion and conference strongly agree agree Percent 100 80 60

40 20 0 Distribution of respondents regarding whom they redress for grievance TABLE NO: 5.10 Sl.No. Whom do you redress Frequency Percentage 1 office bearers 4 11.4 2 committee members 16 45.7 3 hr 3 8.6 4 2 5.7 mangers 5 union members 7 20.0 6 counselor 1 2.9 7

friends 1 2.9 8 co workers 1 2.9 Total 35 100 Inference: From the above table it is inferred that 11.4% of respondents communicate grievances through office bearers, 45.7% through committee members, 8.6% through HR, 5.7 through managers, 20% through union members, 2.9 through counselor, 2.9 through friends and 2.9 throughco workers. Distribution of respondents regarding whom they redress for grievance Chart No: 5.10 to whom to redress co w orkers friends counsellor union members mangers hr committee members offiece bearers Distribution of respondents based on qualification Table: 5.11 Sl.No. Qualification Frequency Percentage 1 higher secondary

31 88.6 2 diploma 1 2.9 3 under graduate 3 8.6 Total 35 100 Inference: From the above table it is inferred that 88.6% of respondents are qualified up to higher secondary, 2.9% of respondents are diploma and 8.6% are under graduate. Distribution of respondents based on qualification Chart No: 5.11 qualification under graduate diploma higher secondary Distribution of respondents regarding awareness of various committees Table: 5.12 Sl.No. Various committees Frequency Percentage 1 canteen,sga 1 2.9 2 Sga,tei, transport 4 11.4 3 transport,welf are,sga

6 17.1 4 transport, safety, canteen 4 11.4 5 safety,transpo rt,sga 4 11.4 6 canteen,tei,sa fety,transport 3 8.6 7 tei,sga,cantee n,transport 9 25.7 8 transport, welfare, safety 2 5.7 9 tei,sga,transp ort,welfare 2 5.7 Total 35 100 Inference: From the above table it is inferred that 2.9% of respondents are aware of canteen-sga committee,11.4% of respondents are aware of sga-tei-transport committee,17.1% of respondents are aware of transport-welfare-sga,11.4% t of respondents are aware transport, safety, canteen , 11.4% of respondents are aware safety,transport,sga ,8.6% of respondents are aware of

canteen,tei,safety,transport,25.7% of respondents are aware tei,sga,canteen,transport,5.7% of respondents are aware transport, welfare, safety and 5.7% of respondents are aware of tei,sga,transport,welfare. Distribution of respondents regarding awareness of various committees Chart No: 5.12 availablecomit tei,sga,transport,w e transport,welfare, s tei,sga,canteen,tran canteen,tei,safety,t safety,transport,sga transport,safety, ca transport,welfare,sg sga,tei, transport canteen,sga Distribution of respondents regarding regular follow up Table: 5.13 Sl.No. Regular follow-up No. of respondents Percentage 1 Yes 35 100.0 Total 35 100 Inference: From the above table it is inferred that 100% of respondents have agreed that there is regular follow up to ensure right decision is given.

Distribution of respondents regarding regular follow up Chart No: 5.13 regular follow up regular follow up yes Percent 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Distribution of respondents regarding supervisors authority Table: 5.14 Sl.No Supervisor has given No. of Percentage authority respondents Valid Has given authority 35 100.0 Total 35 100 Inference: From the above table it is inferred that 100% of respondents have agreed that supervisor is given authority. Distribution of respondents regarding supervisors authority Chart No: 5.14 supervisor given authority supervisor given authority has given authority

Percent 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 ANALYSIS USING CORRELATION To know whether there is correlation between feel about decision given and real basis identification Let X be Feel about decision given Let Y be Real basis identification Table: 5.15 Table: 5.16 Values for correlation x2 y2 xy

180.5 364.5 256.5 xy r = ______________ ( x2 * y2 ) x2, y2, xy in the above equation we get.

Substituting the values of r=1 Inference:

Since the value of r is equal to one the variables are positively correlated. A variation in one variable will cause variation in another

ANALYSIS USING CORRELATION To know whether there is correlation between discussion and conference and supervisor has skill Let X be Discussion and conference. Let Y be Supervisor has skill. Table: 5.17 supervisor has skill Total very highly skilled moderately skilled discussion and strongly 28 1 29 real basis identified Total Strongly agree agree Feel about decision given highly satisfactory 25 6 31 moderately satisfactory 224 Total 27 8 35 conference agree

agree 4 2 6 Total 32 3 35 Table: 5.18 Values for correlation x2 y2 xy

420.5 264.5 333.5 xy r = ______________ ( x2 * y2 ) x2, y2, xy in the above equation we get.

Substituting the values of r=1 Inference:

Since the value of r is equal to one the variables are positively correlated. A variation in one variable will cause variation in another. CHAPTER VI 6.1 FINDINGS OF THE STUDY 1. 54.3% of respondent s state that they are being provided with temporary relief until final decision is taken. 2. 82.9% of the respondents are between the age group 26-30. 3. 91.4% of respondents state that their supervisors are highly skilled that is the supervisors possess necessary human relation skills. 4. 100% of respondents are aware of the various committees that are framed for redressing their grievance. 5. 88.6% of respondents are highly satisfied towards the decision given by the management. 6. 65.7% of respondents communicate to their co-workers. It is their informal channel. 7. 77.1% of respondents strongly agree that real basis of there is identified.

8. 97.1% of respondents agree that mechanism being followed resolves their grievance. 9. 82.9% of respondents strongly agree that discussion and conference is facilitated rather than executive authority. 10. 45.7% of respondents immediately redress their grievance through committee members.

11. 88.6% of respondents are qualified up to higher secondary. 12. 25.7% of respondents are aware of tei, sga, canteen, transport committees available. 13. 100% of respondents have agreed that there is regular follow up to ensure right decision is given. 14. 100% of respondents have agreed that supervisor is given authority to take action necessary to resolve the problem. 15. When there is deviation in the real basis identification it will be reflected in the level of satisfaction regarding decision given. 6.2 SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Job descriptions, responsibilities should be as clear as possible. Everyone should be informed of company s goals and expectation including what is expected from each individual. 2. Informal counseling helps to address and manage grievances in the workplace. 3. Conflict management in the organization will be helpful to reduce the number of grievance rates. 4. Open door policy can be used. The barriers that exist between the various categories are to some extent broken by personal contact and mutual understanding. 5. Suggestion boxes can be installed. This brings the problem or conflict of interest to light. 6. Accident rates, Requests for transfers, Resignations, and disciplinary cases should be analyzed since they reveal the general patterns that are not apparent. 7. Temporary relief can be provided so that the delay does not increase his frustration and anxiety and thereby not affecting his / her morale and productivity. CHAPTER VII

CONCLUSION The study reveals that the Grievance handling mechanism is satisfactory. The organization is recognizing the importance of satisfying the employees and retaining them. Further improvements can be made so that all members are highly satisfied with the procedure. The suggestions and recommendations when implemented will still more benefit the organization. CHAPTER VIII Limitations of the study The sample size was restricted to 100 Personal interview was not allowed. Scope for the study The project throws light on need for Grievance handling mechanism and this study facilitates the management for further improvement on the same. This study will be useful when similar kind of research is undertaken. ANNEXURE I BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Aswathappa, K., Human resource and Personnel management, TATA McGraw- HILL. 2. Arunmonappa and Saiyadain, Mirza S., Personnel management, TATA McGraw- HILL. 3. Flippo, Edwin B., Personnel management, McGRAW-HILL International Publications. WEB SITE 1. www.citehr.com 2. www.findatricles.com ANNEXURE II QUESTIONNAIRE 1. Name: 2. Gender: i.Male [ ] ii.Female[ ]

3. Age: i.19-25 [ ] ii.26-30 [ ] iii.31 and above[ ] 4. Edicational qualification: i.Higher secondary[ ] ii.Diploma [ ] iii.Under graduate [ ] iv.Post graduate [ ] 5. Marital status: i.Married [ ] ii.Unmarried[ ] 6. Are you aware of the various committees that redress the grievance? i.Yes[ ] ii.No[ ] 7. If yes for above question kindly list out the various committees available 8. Are you aware of the members of the various committees? i.Yes[ ] ii.No[ ] 9. Are you aware of the weekly/monthly meetings of the various committees which are being held? i.Yes[ ] ii.No[ ] 10. .In case the grievance has to be immediately redressed to whom do you communicate? 11. Is there any informal channel to redress your grievance such as i.Co-worker[ ]

ii.Peer[ ] iii.Ifothers,please specify( ) 12. Is the real basis of your problem identified? iStrongly agree[ ] ii.Agree[ ] iii.Disagree[ ] iv.Strongly disagree[ ] 13. Does your higher authority listen when your grievance is presented? i.Listens patiently[ ] ii.Shouts at you[ ] iii.Does not listen at all[ ] 14. Is imporatance given to what is right rather than who is right? i.Yes[ ] ii.No[ ] 15. Are you constantly informed on what is being done about your grievance? i.Very often being informed[ ] ii.Seldom being informed [ ] iii.Does not inform at all [ ] 16. Is an atmosphere of cordiality and co-operation facilitated through mutual discussion and conference? i.Yes[ ] ii.No[ ] 17. Is there a positive and friendly approach during grievance handling? i.Yes[ ] ii.No[ ] 18. Do you feel that discussion and conference is given more importance rather than executive authority?

i. Strongly agree[ ] ii. Agree[ ] iii. Disagree[ ] iv. Strongly disagree[ ] 19. Is there a spirit of give and take and sharing and working together? i.Yes[ ] ii.No[ ] 20. Has the mechanism being followed resolves you grievance? i.Yes[ ] ii.No[ ] 21. How do you feel about the decision given corresponding to your grievance? Is it i.Highly satisfactory[ ] ii.Moderately satisfactory[ ] iii.No satisfaction[ ] 22. Is there regular follow up to ensure that the right decision has ended up in satiafaction? i.Yes[ ] ii.No[ ] 23. Is there any temporary relief provided until proper decision is made so that it does not raise any adverse effects within the organization? i.Yes[ ] ii.No[ ] 24. Do the various committee members actively engage in resolving your problem? i.Yes[ ] ii.No[ ] 25. If the decision is not satisfactory are you given opportunity to take it to hjgher officials? i.Yes[ ] ii.No[ ]

26. Do you feel open to share your grievances? i.Yes[ ] ii.No[ ] 27. Do you feel that the supervisor possesses necessary human relation skills in terms of understanding your problem? i.Very highly skilled[ ] ii.Moderately skilled[ ] iii.Not skilled[ ] 28. Are the matters relevant to the grievance kept confidential? i.highly confidential[ ] ii.Not kept confidential[ ] 29. Are the procedures for conveying grievance simple and easy to utilize? i.Very simple[ ] ii.Difficult to utilize[ ] 30. Is the supervisor given authority to take action necessary to resolve the problem? i.Has given authority[ ] ii.Does not have authority[ ] 31. Are proper records maintained on each grievance? i.Yes[ ] ii.No[ ]