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 EFFECTIVENES OF GRIEVANCE HANDLING MECHANISM” is a 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 I
TITLE INTRODUCTION
PAGE NO.
1.1 Profile of the organization
1
II III IV V VI
1.2 Introduction to the study REVIEW OF LITERATURE OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY RESEARCH METHODOLOGY DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION 6.1 FINDINGS OF THE STUDY
5 6 12 13 17 35
6.2SUGGESTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS CONCLUSION
37
VII
38 VIII
SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE
39
STUDY
APPENDICES I
40
ANNEXURE II
41
ANNEXURE
LIST OF TABLES Table No. 1.1
Table name List of products manufactured
Page No: 2
1.2 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 5.11 5.12 5.13 5.14 5.15 5.16 5.17 5.18
Clients Distribution of respondents regarding temporary relief Distribution of respondents based on age Distribution of respondents towards supervisors’ level of skill Distribution of respondents towards awareness of committees Distribution of respondents towards decision given Distribution of respondents towards the informal channel Distribution of respondents towards real basis of identification of their grievance Distribution of respondents towards mechanism followed resolves grievance or not Distribution of respondents towards importance given to discussion and conference Distribution of respondents regarding whom they redress for grievance Distribution of respondents based on qualification Distribution of respondents regarding awareness of various committees Distribution of respondents regarding regular follow up Distribution of respondents regarding supervisors’ authority Correlation between Feel about decision and Real basis identified. Values for correlation Correlation between Discussion and Conference And Supervisor’s Skill level Values for correlation
LIST OF CHARTS
3 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 28 29 31 32 33 33 34 34
Chart No:
Chart Name
Page No:
5.1 5.2 5.3
Distribution of respondents regarding temporary relief Distribution of respondents based on age Distribution of respondents towards supervisors’ level of skill Distribution of respondents towards awareness of committees Distribution of respondents towards decision given Distribution of respondents towards the informal channel Distribution of respondents towards real basis of identification of their grievance Distribution of respondents towards mechanism followed resolves grievance or not Distribution of respondents towards importance given to discussion and conference Distribution of respondents regarding whom they redress for grievance Distribution of respondents based on qualification Distribution of respondents regarding awareness of various committees Distribution of respondents regarding regular follow up Distribution of respondents regarding supervisors’ authority
17 18 19
5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 5.11 5.12 5.13 5.14
CHAPTER I 1.1 PROFILE OF THE COMPANY
20 21 22 23 24 25 27 28 30 31 32
Lucas - TVS was set up in 1961 as a joint venture of Lucas Industries plc., UK and T V Sundaram Iyengar & 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
Lucas-TVS Product Range for
Market
US/European Market
Starter Motor Alternator Headlamp
Starter Motor Alternator Small Motor 14W Wiper Motor WindShield Wiper Motor (GM Range)
Small Motor
LRW Products Dynamo Regulator
Wiper Motor Blower Motor Fan Motor Dynamo Regulator Dynamo Ignition Coil Distributor
Dynamo Auto Electricals
Diesel fuel injection
CLIENTS
CUSTOMER Maruti Udyog Hindustan Motors
INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATOR Cars Suzuki, Japan Isuzu, Japan. Mitsubishi, Japan
TATA Engineering and Locomotive Company General Motors, India Ford India Daewoo Motors Co., India Ind Auto Hyundai Motors, India
General Motors, USA Ford, UK Daewoo, Korea Fiat, Italy Hyundai Motors, Korea Tractors
Mahindra & Mahindra
International Harvestor Corporation, UK
Tractors and Farm Equipments (TAFE) Escorts HMT Eicher Tractors Punjab Tractors Gujarat Tractors L&T Tractors Greaves Tractors
Massey Ferguson, UK Ursus, Poland. Ford, UK Zetor, Czechoslovakia Good Earth, Germany Zetor, Czechoslovakia Johndeer, USA 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’ complete due 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 / 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, prohibition etc: 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 ‘r’. ∑xy Formula for Karl Pearson’s coefficient r =
______________ √∑x2 * ∑y2
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 No. of Percentage relief respondents
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 60
50
40
30
Percent
20
10
0 yes
no
temporary relief
Distribution of respondents based on age Table: 5.2
Sl.No.
Age
Frequency
Percentage
1
19-25
6
17.1
2 Total
26-30
29
35
100
82.9
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 19-25
26-30
Distribution of respondents towards supervisors’ level of skill Table: 5.3
Supervisor possess necessary Frequency Percentage skill
Sl.No.
1
very highly skilled
32
91.4
2
moderately skilled
3
8.6
Total
35
100
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 100
80
60
40
Percent
20
0 very highly skilled
moderately skilled
supervisor has skill
Distribution of respondents towards awareness of committees Table: 5.4
Sl.No
1
Awareness Frequency Percentag of e committees yes
35
100.0
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 120
100
80
60
Percent
40
20
0 yes
various committee
Distribution of respondents towards decision given Table: 5.5 Sl.No.
1
Decision Frequency given is satisfactory or not Highly satisfactory
31
Percentage
88.6
2
Moderately satisfactory Total
4
11.4
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 100
80
60
40
Percent
20
0 highly satisfactory
moderately satisfact
feel about decision given
Distribution of respondents towards the informal channel Table: 5.6 Sl.No 1
Informal No. of respondents Percentage channel co worker
23
65.7
2
peer
12
Total
34.3
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 70 60 50 40 30
Percent
20 10 0 co w orker
peer
informal channel
Distribution of respondents towards real basis of identification of their grievance Table: 5.7 Sl.No. 1 2
Total
Real basis Frequency Percentage strongly agree
27
77.1
agree
8
22.9
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.
1
Mechanism No. of Percentage resolves respondents grievance or not yes
34
97.1
2
no
Total
1 35
2.9
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 No. of Percentage conference respondents
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 100
80
60
40
Percent
20
0 strongly agree
agree
discussion and conference
Distribution of respondents regarding whom they redress for grievance TABLE NO: 5.10 Sl.No. 1 2 3 4
Whom do Frequency Percentage you redress office 4 11.4 bearers committee 16 45.7 members 3 8.6 hr 2 5.7
mangers 5
7
20.0
1
2.9
1
2.9
1
2.9
35
100
union members 6 counselor 7 friends 8 co workers Total
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 through co workers.
Distribution of respondents regarding whom they redress for grievance Chart No: 5.10
to whom to redress co w orkers friends offiece bearers
counsellor
union members
mangers committee members hr
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 canteen,sga 1 2.9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Sga,tei, transport transport,welf are,sga transport, safety, canteen safety,transpo rt,sga canteen,tei,sa fety,transport tei,sga,cantee n,transport transport, welfare, safety tei,sga,transp ort,welfare
4
11.4
6
17.1
4
11.4
4
11.4
3
8.6
9
25.7
2
5.7
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
available comit tei,sga,transport,w e
canteen,sga
transport,w elfare, s
sga,tei, transport
transport,w elfare,sg
tei,sga,canteen,tran
transport,safety, ca canteen,tei,safety,t safety,transport,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 120
100
80
60
Percent
40
20
0 yes
regular follow up
Distribution of respondents regarding supervisors’ authority Table: 5.14 Sl.No
Supervisor has given
No. of
Percentage
Valid
authority
respondents
Has given authority
35
Total
35
100.0 100
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 120
100
80
60
Percent
40
20 0 has given authority
supervisor given authority
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
real basis identified
Total
Strongly agree Feel about highly decision satisfactory given
∑x2 180.5
moderately ∑y2 satisfactory 364.5 Total
r =
agree 25
6
31
2
2
4
27
8
35
Table: 5.16 Values for correlation ∑xy 256.5
∑xy ______________ √ (∑x2 * ∑y2 )
Substituting the values of ∑x2, ∑y2, ∑xy in the above equation we get. 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 Total supervisor has skill moderately skilled very highly skilled discussion and strongly 28
1
29
conference
agree agree
4
2
6
32
3
35
Total
Table: 5.18 Values for correlation ∑x2 420.5
∑y2 264.5
∑xy 333.5
∑xy ______________
r =
√ (∑x2 * ∑y2 ) Substituting the values of ∑x2, ∑y2, ∑xy in the above equation we get. 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. Arun monappa 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.If others,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[
]
