INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOUR LAWS(Page 1)

Name : (Amresh Anjan)

INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOUR LAWS
Q1 (a).Trace the evolution of Industrial relations in India.
Ans.A study of modern industrial relations in India can be made in three
distinct phases. The first phase can be considered to have commencedfrom
about the middle of the nineteenth century and ended by the endof the First
World War. The second phase comprises the period thereaftertill the attainment
of the independence in 1947, and the third phaserepresents the post-
independence era.
First Phase :During the first phase, the British Government in India
was largely interested in enforcing penalties for breach of contract and
inregulating the conditions of work with a view to minimising thecompetitive
advantages of indigenous employers against the Britishemployers. A series of
legislative measures were adopted during the latterhalf of the nineteenth century,
which can be the beginning of industrialrelations in India.
The close of the First World War gave a new twist to the labourpolicy, as
it created certain social, economic and political conditions,which raised new
hopes among people for a new social order. There wasintense labour unrest
because workers’ earnings did not keep pace withthe rising prices and with their
aspirations.The establishment of ILO in 1919greatly influenced the labour
legislation and Industrial relations policy inIndia. The emergence of trade unions
in India, particularly the formationof All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) in
1920 was another significantevent in the history of industrial relations in our
country.
Second Phase :The Policy after the First World War related to
improvement in the working conditions and provision of social securitybenefits. It
was a period of boom for employers. With rising prices, theirprofits went up
enormously. The wages of workers, however did not keeppace with this
tendency. Their economic distress brought together and anorganised working
class movement began in the country resulting strikesor lockouts. During this
period, as a result of ILO influence, various lawswere enacted i.e. Workmen’s
Compensation Act (1923), the Trade UnionsAct (1926) and the Trade Disputes
Act (1917).
During the Second war, employers made enormous profits. The
workersdemanded a share in them. Bonus and dearness allowance were
grantedto them but as money wages did not increase in proportion to the rise
inprices. The years immediately following the war were the most disturbedyears
from the point of view of the pattern of Industrial relations in India. In1946 the
Industrial Employment (Standing orders) Act and the IndustrialDisputes Act, 1947
provided for the settlement of disputes.

Q- Crit

Hospital Management
History and Introduction to Hospital:
The word "hospital" comes from the Latin "hospes" which refers to either a visitor or the
host whoreceives the visitor. From "hospes" came the Latin "hospitalia", an apartment for
strangers or
guests, and the Medieval Latin "hospitale" and the Old French "hospital." It crossed the
Channel in
the 14th century and in England began a shift in the 15th century to mean a home for the
elderly or infirm or a home for the down-and-out.
i
Hospital is an institution or the organization for the treatment, care, and cures of the sick
andwounded, for the study of disease, and for the training of physicians (teaching
hospitals), nurses,and allied health care personnel.
ii
What is the importance of Hospital Management?
The answer to this question is simply that supervisors and managers of hospitals must not
onlyhave vocational, technical knowledge about hospitals and treatment, but also should
have
Prepared by: Mahboob ali khan (M.sc,M.H.M) quality specialist PSBJH
knowledge about contemporary management and its functions and principles. The
work module of any job is based on two pillars, namely technical work and management
work.
What to be managed in Hospital?
Like other organizations and institution hospitals or any healthcare facility passes through
thefollowing stages or in other words they need the management of below sections for the
smooth
running of their organizations, but the hospitals are very complex in its
nature.• O p e r a t i o n s ( a c t i o n s ) • Finance (money and resources),• Personn
el(human relations)• Information(needed information for wise decisions)• Time (yo
ur own and that of others)
According to the Project Definition: “A project is a sequence, set or series of unique,
complex andconnected activities, having one goal or purpose to be completed with time
frame, allocated budgetand according to its specification, now we can say the leading,
controlling, organizing and planningof all these activities is called project management.
Now we can say it easily, that a hospital or anyhealthcare facility is a project in its nature,
therefore; applying the rule of project management will
be no far away from it.
Each of these five elements mentioned, must be managed by any person, who has its own
set of principles and guidelines to follow. For instance, when it comes to managing
people, the teachingsof Industrial Psychology become pertinent. For operations, the
teachings of OperationsManagement as a subject become important. So, in analyzing
these five elements, it also becomesevident that the teachings of Financial Management,
Information Management and TimeManagement, are also important for the other
three elements. In a nutshell, for a hospital manager
it is compulsory to have the sound knowledge of Operations Management, Financial
Management,I n f o r m a t i o n M a n a g e m e n t , H u m a n R e s o
u r c e s M a n a g e m e n t , T i m e M a n a g e m e n t a n d Comm
unication.For the lower level jobs at hospitals and healthcare facilities, the principles
of Supervision canbecome a starting point for teaching or studying the principles
of management. A person in one of the lowest level jobs found at employers must also
plan, organize and control work, even if it isjust to clean an office or do some washing in
one of the departments of the hospital.Top Management members of the hospitals such as Chief
Executive Officer, Financial Manager etc, must be able to plan, organize, control and lead the
wards and departments with a focus onunderstanding and influencing the environment,
setting the strategy and gaining commitment,planning, implementing and monitoring
strategies and evaluating and improving performance. TheTop Management must
therefore have high capabilities with regard to human relations inwards andoutwards,
strategic planning, team building, leadership, and negotiation
and performancemanagement
ically evaluate the industrial relation scenario of an organization

Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of WITH EXPLAIN STATE

CONTROL OF INDUSTRIES ?

Certain industries are under state control in many countries. It plays an

indispensible role for economic development of nations. The term state control
means to govern industry in order to develop the economy and to provide better
services and facilities for the public. In other words, state control refers to the
industry owned by the state or government for national welfares rather than
profit. Research has shown state control of industry as a controversial issue that
has to be research. The well plan system with strict management may leads to
development of industries. It can be consider that, state control of industry
provides services with minimum cost. The state act as a responsible body for
citizen compared to privatization. Therefore, it is an essential for formulation of
plan and policies to carry out state control industry smoothly for the benefit of
nations. However, it can create monopolies that may have a direct impact on
private sector which haSalso vital role for national progress .It is consider that
private sector seems to be under the state control. This essay will attempt to
evaluate positive aspects and consequences of state control of industry by
examining transport, bank, and telecom industry of various countries.
State control of industry invest profitable amount in development of
nations. The industry empower in development program such as scientific
researches and social services. The UK government for instances, spends
approximately 40% of GDP in public expenditure such as health, education,
social protection, transport, industry and agriculture. However, private sector is
not concern for national investment. Thus, people offer a direct benefit from state
control of industry.
State control of industry brings significant growth of national economy
and employment opportunity for public. The benefit of industry through
production of.you ar familiar with ?

Q-2 EXPLAIN THE DEVELOPMENT OF TRADE UNIONS IN INDIA DESCRIBE

THE FUNCTION OF TRADE UNION IN AN ORGANIZATION SEP UP?

Answer
Q3- Explain the concept and function of collective bargaining. Briefly
discuss the conditions necessary for success of Collective Bargaining.
Describe the incidents of collective bargaining you have come across
or know of in your organization or any organization you are familiar
with. Briefly describe the organization you are referring to.

collective bargaining
Process of negotiation between representatives of workers (usually
labour union officials) and management to determine the conditions of
employment. The agreement reached may cover not only wages but
hiring practices, layoffs, promotions, working conditions and hours,
and benefit programs.
Collective bargaining is "a process of negotiation between
management and union representatives for the purpose of arriving at
mutually acceptable wages and working conditions for employees".
Various methods may be used in the bargaining process, but the
desired outcome is always mutual acceptance by labor and
management of a collective bargaining agreement or contract.
The Bargaining Process
The collective bargaining process begins when the majority of
workers of an organization vote to be represented by a specific union.
The National Labor Relations Board , then certifies the union. At this
point, the management of the organization must recognize the union
as the collective bargaining agent for all the employees of that
organization. Once this part of the process is completed, collective
bargaining can begin.
Bargaining always takes place between labor and management, but
negotiations can include more than one group of workers and more
than one employer. Single-plant, single-employer agreements are the
most common. However, if an employer has more than one plant or
work site, multiplant, single-employer agreements can be bargained.
Several different union groups representing the workers of the same
employer can use coalition bargaining. Industry wide bargaining
involves one national union bargaining with several employers of a
specific industry.
Many different negotiation styles can be used when union and labor
representatives sit down at the bargaining table. The two basic modes
of bargaining are traditional bargaining and partnership bargaining,
though there are many variations of each style.
The traditional style of bargaining has been used since collective
bargaining began between management and the early labor unions . It
is an adversarial style of negotiating, pitting one side against the other
with little or no understanding of, or education about, the other on the
part of either party. Each side places its demands and proposals on the
table, and the other side responds to them with counterproposals. The
process is negative and involves a struggle of give-and-take on most
issues. Even with its negative connotations, however, the traditional
style of negotiating is still used effectively in bargaining many union
contracts.
The partnership style of bargaining is the more modern approach to
negotiations. It strives for mutual understanding and common
education on the part of both labor and management, and it focuses
on goals and concerns common to both parties. Because of its
emphasis on each side's being aware of the issues concerning the
other side, partnership-style bargaining is also known as interest-
based bargaining. In this process, labor and management each list and
explain their needs, and the ensuing discussion revolves around ways
to meet those needs that will be not only acceptable but also beneficial
to both parties. This style of bargaining is very positive and imparts a
much more congenial atmosphere to the negotiating process. Many
modern union-management contracts are bargained very successfully
using the partnership style.
A blending of the traditional and partnership styles is widely used in
labor-management negotiations. The combination approach is used for
many reasons, including the fact that many union and management
leaders are more familiar with the traditional style. However, with
today's more participatory relationship between labor and
management in the workplace, the partnership style is becoming more
accepted and is being used more frequently. The negotiating process
may also include both styles of bargaining because of the variety of
issues being negotiated. The partnership style may be used to
negotiate certain issues, while the traditional style may be invoked
when bargaining other terms.
Collective Bargaining Issues
 Labor unions were formed to help workers achieve common goals in
the areas of wages, hours, working conditions, and job security. These
issues still are the focus of the collective bargaining process, though
some new concepts have become the subjects of negotiations.
The Settlement Process
Union contracts are usually bargained to remain in effect for two to
three years but may cover longer or shorter periods of time. The
process of negotiating a union contract, however, may take an
extended period of time. Once the management and union members of
the negotiating team come to agreement on the terms of the contract,
the union members must accept or reject the agreement by a majority
vote. If the agreement is accepted, the contract is ratified and
becomes a legally binding agreement remaining in effect for the
specified period of time.
If the union membership rejects the terms of the agreement, the
negotiating teams from labor and management return to the
bargaining table and continue to negotiate. This cycle can be repeated
several times. If no agreement can be reached between the two
teams, negotiations are said to have "broken down," and several
options become available.
Mediation is usually the first alternative when negotiations are at a
stalemate. The two parties agree voluntarily to have an impartial
third party listen to the proposals of both sides. It is the mediator's
job to get the two sides to agree to a settlement. Once the mediator
understands where each side stands, he or she makes
recommendations for settling their differences. The mediator merely
makes suggestions, gives advice, and tries to get labor and
management to compromise on a solution. Agreement is still voluntary
at this point. The mediator has no power to force either of the parties
to settle the contract, though often labor and management do come to
agreement by using mediation.
If mediation fails to bring about a settlement, the next step can be
arbitration, which can be either compulsory or voluntary. Compulsory
arbitration is not often used in labor-management negotiations in the
United States. Occasionally, however, the federal government requires
union and management to submit to compulsory arbitration. In
voluntary arbitration, both sides agree to use the arbitration process
and agree that it will be binding. As in mediation, an impartial third
party serves in the arbitration process. The arbitrator acts as a judge,
listening to both sides and then making a decision on the terms of the
settlement, which becomes legally binding on labor and management.
Ninety percent of all union contracts use arbitration if the union and
management can't come to agreement .
Sources of Power
If the collective bargaining process is not working as a way to settle
the differences between labor and management, both sides have
weapons they can use to bolster their positions. One of the most
effective union tactics is the strike or walkout. While on strike,
employees do not report to work and, of course, are not paid. Strikes
usually shut down operations, thus pressuring management to give in
to the union's demands. Some employees, even though allowed to
belong to unions, are not allowed to strike. Federal employees fall into
this category. The law also prohibits some state and municipal
employees from striking.
During a strike, workers often picket at the entrance to their place of
employment. This involves marching, carrying signs, and talking to the
media about their demands. The right to picket is protected by law .
Problems sometimes arise during strikes and picketing when
management hires replacement workers, called scabs or
strikebreakers, who
need to cross the picket line in order to do the jobs of the striking
workers.

Collective Bargaining Issues

Wages Hours Working Conditions Job Security
Regular Compensation Regular Work Hours Rest Periods
Seniority
Overtime Compensation Overtime Work Hours Grievance
Procedures Evaluation
Incentives Vacations Union Membership Promotion
Insurance Holidays Dues Collection Layoffs
Pensions Recalls

The boycott is another union strategy to put pressure on

management to give in to the union's demands. During a primary
boycott , not only union members but also members of the general
public are encouraged to refuse to conduct business with the firm in
dispute with the union.
Though it is rarely done, management may use the lockout as a
tactic to obtain its bargaining objectives. In this situation,
management closes down the business, thus keeping union members
from working. This puts pressure on the union to settle the contract so
employees can get back to their jobs and receive their wages.
Management sometimes uses the injunction as a strategy to put
pressure on the union to give in to its demands. An injunction is a
court order prohibiting something from being done, such as picketing,
or requiring something to be done, such as workers being ordered to
return to work.
Grievance Procedures
Once a collective bargaining agreement is settled and a union
contract is signed, it is binding on both the union and management.
However, disagreements with contract implementation can arise and
violations of the contract terms can occur. In these cases, a grievance,
or complaint, can be filed. The differences that must be resolved are
usually handled through a step-by-step process that is outlined in the
collective bargaining agreement. The grievance procedure begins with
a complaint to the worker's immediate supervisor and, if unresolved at
that level, moves upward, step by step, to higher levels of
management. If no resolution is found at any of these levels, the two
parties can agree to have the grievance submitted to an impartial
outside arbitrator for a decision binding to the union and
management.
Collective bargaining is a successful way for workers to reach their
goals concerning accept able wages, hours, and working conditions. It
al lows workers to bargain as a team to satisfy their needs. Collective
bargaining also allows management to negotiate efficiently with
workers by bar gaining with them as a group instead of with each one
individually. Though traditional bargaining can be negative and
adversarial, it does produce collective bargaining agreements between
labor and management. Partnership bargaining can lead to increased
understanding and trust between labor and management. It is a
positive, cooperative approach to collective bargaining that also
culminates in contracts between labor and management.
Collective bargaining is still practiced in the twenty-first century, but
among many of its union advocates it is no longer the most hopeful
road toward either high wages or an updated industrial democracy.
Key service-sector trade unions have sought to fulfill these goals
through a set of increasingly political initiatives. In the janitorial, hotel,
and health care sectors of the economy, firm centered collective
bargaining has been linked, and in some cases subordinated, to
political and social mobilizations designed to advance the well-being of
all workers, regardless of their union status.
======================
The organisation I am referring to

The organization, I am familiar with is a

-a large manufacturer/ marketer of safety products
-the products are used as [personal protection safety] [ industrial
safety]
-the products are distributed through the distributors as well as
sold directly
-the products are sold to various industries like
mining/fireservices/defence/
as well as to various manufacturing companies.
-the company employs about 235 people.
-the company has the following functional departments
*marketing
*manufacturing
*sales
*finance/ administration
*human resource
 *customer service
*distribution
*warehousing/ transportation
*TQM

the organization has negotiated the following

with the trade union
Wages Hours Working Conditions Job Security
Regular Compensation Regular Work Hours Rest Periods
Overtime Compensation Overtime Work Hours Grievance
Procedures Evaluation
Vacations Union Membership
Insurance Holidays Dues Collection Layoffs
Pensions Recalls

############################################
Q4- Explain the historical development of workers participation in
management(WPM). Describe how workers participation in
management is useful for development of the organization. Explain
with an example from an organization you are familiar with. Briefly
describe the organization you are referring to.
The first phase covers the immediate postwar years. After a quarter
of a century of almost inviolate domination by statist ideas and
approaches within the workers’ and socialist movements, interest was
revived in the problems of the worker’s social status in the process of
production. More forceful expression was given to demands for
workers to be at least partially and indirectly included in the decision-
making process. In contrast to earlier historical phases, when this
demand was often formulated in a radical way, chiefly within the
context of projects for a revolutionary change of society, extremely
moderate interpretations now prevailed. While these ideas and
demands earlier reflected aggravated class conflicts, now those social
forces advocating class compromise had the decisive say as to how
they were to be formed. As a result, the majority of developed
countries witnessed the birth of institutions of consultative
participation, usually designated by the term industrial democracy. The
role, competencies and tasks of these institutions were so restricted
and modestly defined that the existing class order was easily able to
absorb them. There is hardly a case in which they managed to destroy
the existing balance of class and political forces. This was a reform
which did not function as a factor of destabilization in the existing
industrial and social establishment. However, one must not lose sight
of the fact that there were attempts during this period to effect
somewhat more radical concepts of workers’ participation. If one looks
at the entire historical period, however, these were chiefly marginal
phenomena.
 The second postwar phase began in the early fifties and continued
until the second half of the following decade. It is marked by the
receding and declining influence of those forces in the workers’
movements which were in favour of various forms of workers’
participation, especially self-management. The advance made
immediately after the war was short-lived and of limited range, and it
gave way to a relatively widespread feeling of disappointment.
Institutions of consultative participation, which were born in an
atmosphere of class compromise marked by pronounced internal
contradictions, did not live up to the expectations of any of the
interested parties. The cause of these contradictions was that, in the
majority of cases, these institutions were conceived in such a way that
they served the interests of “one and the other side.” The workers’ and
socialist left quickly realized that there were poor outlooks for turning
these institutions into a beach-head which would later allow it to
embark on genuine workers’ rule and society’s self-management
organization. Employers and state representatives expected them to
act as an incentive for greater productivity of labour, efficiency in
management and class tranquility in enterprises. Once it became
obvious that such results were not forthcoming, they, too, began to
turn their backs on various mechanisms of industrial democracy.
Reformist parties and trade unions, which had originally extended full
support to these institutions, also began to lose interest. These
institutions seemed unable to serve even those limited objectives
which had been set when they were launched just after World War II.
Especially important is the fact that the relative failure of the
mechanisms of consultative participation (industrial democracy) was
used to substantiate the claim that the entire basic idea (genuine
workers’ participation, i.e., self-management) is unfeasible. In many
countries, advocates of these ideas became severely discouraged and
their ranks thinned out. In some countries, these ideas seemed to
have been “finally buried” and it appeared that the statist orientation,
despite its countless shortcomings, was nonetheless the “only real
alternative.”
The views and appraisals formulated at the end of the fifties by two
authors are extremely indicative. Hugh Clegg, one of Britain’s leading
experts on industrial relations and the problems of industrial
democracy, published a book in 1951 in which he strongly appeals for
putting into effect the idea and practice of consultative workers’
participation. In the late fifties a new book appeared entitled A New
Approach to Industrial Democracy, in which Clegg thoroughly revised
his own views. He admits certain earlier “errors” and firmly defends
the stand that direct workers’ participation in management is utterly
unacceptable for the developed society of the West. “The end of the
movements for workers’ control,” (here, Clegg is thinking of the more
radical current which believed that industrial democracy will be only a
step towards workers’ self-management – B.P.) however is to be
explained as much by flaws in their thinking as by these
circumstances, which provided no more than the occasion of their
downfall. The central tenet of their doctrine was self-government. They
believed that working men and women could come together to run
their own lives, not through representatives, not by controlling
managements and governments, but directly and by themselves. This
notion is now dead. No one -now believes that direct industrial self-
government by workers could provide for the running of a modern
industrialized society ... Modern society does not naturally adapt itself
to working-class self-government... representative political democracy
seems to be a natural mode of government for an industrialized
society ... Men must have a bureaucracy to run a railway, an electricity
supply system, or a government department. They must have
centralized decisions to control a monetary system and to arrange a
national investment programme. These things and working-class self-
government cannot live together." At around the same time, Raymond
Aron wrote that “... abstract theoretical analysis as much as practical
experience lead to the conclusion that at this point in history
enterprises must remain organized along authoritarian principles.
Fundamental decisions must be taken by one person or by a small
group of people – never by all” (he means all employees – B.P.), “nor
can those who decide be under the control of all.”
The only departure from the general trend at that time, the only
exception “which confirms the rule,” was the programme orientation
taken in Yugoslavia with the passing of the Law on Workers’ Councils
and the opening of the process of developing self-management
institutions and relations. At a time when the ideas of self-
management socialism were being widely rejected as an anachronism
of our age, as a vestige of long obsolete concepts of anarchism,
proudhonism or anarcho-syndicalism, and in the best of cases were
ignored as illusions entertained by certain “hotheads,” leading political
forces in the country firmly opted for the road and concept of self-
management socialism. Subsequent developments showed that this
was a choice with far-reaching consequences. Despite numerous
unfavourable domestic (the country’s low level of economic
development) and external circumstances, the choice grew into a
lasting orientation. An important foothold had been attained for the
forces of the self-management alternative.
The first signs of the third phase appeared in the early sixties, when
the conviction again gained ground in certain workers’ circles and
organizations that the horizon of socialist aspirations could not be
limited to state ownership and state management. At first these were
only weak symptoms of the changes which were to occur somewhat
later on in the prevailing mood, The new phase finally took shape and
was established at the end of the sixties when the influence of forces
calling for genuine workers’ participation, or self-management, again
gained broad ground. The historical pendulum which reflects the
centre of gravity of ideological options in the world of socialism began
to shift in favour of various forces of the anti-statist orientation.
Yesterday’s pessimism gave way to pronounced, sometimes even
exaggerated optimism. A report prepared by a group of experts of the
International Labour Organisation for a consultative meeting on self-
management and participation, which was held in Oslo in 1974, says
that at the present moment “the demand for workers’ participation in
managing enterprises is a widespread world phenomenon which, as a
fundamental assumption, is no longer denied; discussions chiefly
revolve around the form of workers’ management “[a])
A change had unquestionably occurred, although its scope is not as
(broad as ILO experts make it out to be. On the other hand, one
should in no way underestimate recent changes in stands and the
prevailing mood. Some political groups which until recently a priori
rejected any idea of direct workers’ participation in management no
longer maintain such exclusive stands, and the possibility is even
allowed and the need stressed for ensuring certain forms of direct
workers’ democracy and participation by the broader strata of working
people in general. Where once support was extended chiefly to certain
very elemental, rudimentary forms of participation, now somewhat
more ambitious and in certain cases, quite radical demands are being
made for expanding and intensifying existing forms of participation.
The number of organized political forces calling for genuine radical
changes in the position of workers has appreciably grown. Certain
progressive political forces, which until recently omitted these ideas
from their programme of social innovations, are now ardently
interested in them. Power-holders whose authority and privileges are
threatened or at least brought into question by new currents in the
workers’ milieu react in a new way.
Certain ruling communist parties have somewhat altered their stand
towards participation and self-management. While it was once felt that
the working class can effect its management rights through “its” state,
party or trade union, now considerable attention is being devoted to
building up various mechanisms of participation. Institutions of
production consultation conferences, which had been abandoned by
Stalinism in the late twenties, have been revived in the Soviet Union.
In addition to these consultation conferences, several other
mechanisms of participation in the economy have been built up in
other fields of social endeavour as well. Certain participatory
institutions which had almost completely withered away during the
years of Stalin’s domination have been activated. The majority of other
East European countries have also established various collective bodies
in enterprises through which workers’ representatives can, mainly in
an advisory capacity, take part in the passing of certain decisions. In
some cases, great efforts are being invested in building up the system
of these institutions and stimulating their work.
Available data show that the results scored are relatively modest.
They are not commensurate with the officially proclaimed goals or
efforts invested. On the other hand, these difficulties are quite
understandable. They stem from the fundamental contradictions
inherent in the adopted “systemic” solution. The possibilities of
participation are extremely limited in situations where rigourous
emphasis is laid on the principle of “yedinonachalie” (one-man
government), i.e., where all fundamental decisions within the
enterprise are made by the director. Maintaining a high degree of
centralism in managing the economy produces similar results.
Workers’ participation is hard put to extricate itself from the narrow
frameworks of consultative competencies in situations where heavy
stress is laid on centralism and “yedinonachalie.” Parallel invocation of
reinforcing centralism and the role of one-man organs of management
(“yedinonachalie”) on the one hand, and genuine democratization of
the system of management by including workers in the decision-
making process on the other is a hard to resolve and relatively
contradictory social task. In pointing to these objective difficulties and
problems, we in no way wish to undermine the importance of new
tendencies in the internal development of certain socialist countries.
The emergence of these institutions testifies at least to the fact that
there is an awareness that the existing system of management is in
need of a democratic “corrective.”
Perhaps more important still are certain changes in the political
theory of socialism, in the theoretical conceptualization of socialism
and communism. While before, the existing form of state socialism
was pointed up as the highest achievement of the new society, and
state management over all fields of social endeavour was accepted as
the most complete form of effecting the direct and long-term interests
of the working class – now certain new notes are being struck. Self-
management is no longer rejected a priori as an expression of
ideological “deviation.” The idea of limiting, suppressing the state and
its final withering away has again won recognition as a legitimate part
of Marxist theory. The new Programme of the Soviet Communist Party,
adopted at the XXII Congress, states: “All-round development and
improvement of socialist democracy, active participation by all citizens
in governing the state, in managing the economy and cultural
construction, improving the work of the state apparatus and
strengthening peoples’ control over its functioning – this is the main
direction in the development of socialist statehood in the period of
building communism. In the process of further developing socialist
democracy, the organs of state authority are gradually to be turned
into social self-management “

OBJECTIVES OF WORKERS’ PARTICIPATION IN MANAGEMENT

Three groups of managerial decisions affect the workers of any

industrial establishment and hence the workers must have a say in it.¬

o Economic decisions – methods of manufacturing, automation,

shutdown, lay-offs, mergers.
o Personnel decisions – recruitment and selection, promotions,
demotions, transfers, grievance settlement, work distribution.
o Social decisions – hours of work, welfare measures, questions
affecting work rules and conduct of individual worker’s safety, health,
sanitation and noise control.

Participation basically means sharing the decision-making power with

the lower ranks of the organization in an appropriate manner.¬
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------
Definitions:

The concept of WPM is a broad and complex one.¬

Depending on the socio-political environment and cultural conditions,
the scope and contents of participation change.¬
International Institute of Labour Studies: WPM is the participation
resulting from the practices which increase the scope for employees’
share of influence in decision-making at different tiers of organizational
hierarch with concomitant assumption of responsibility.¬
ILO: Workers’ participation, may broadly be taken to cover all terms
of association of workers and their representatives with the decision-
making process, ranging from exchange of information, consultations,
decisions and negotiations, to more institutionalized forms such as the
presence of workers’ member on management or supervisory boards
or even management by workers themselves as practiced in
Yugoslavia.¬
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------
Objectives:

Workers’ participation may be viewed as:¬

o An instrument for increasing the efficiency of enterprises and

establishing harmonious relations;
o A device for developing social education for promoting solidarity
among workers and for tapping human talents;
o A means for achieving industrial peace and harmony which leads to
higher productivity and increased production;
o A humanitarian act, elevating the status of a worker in the society;
o An ideological way of developing self-management and promoting
industrial democracy.

Other objectives of WPM can be cited as:¬

o To improve the quality of working life (QWL) by allowing the workers
greater influence and involvement in work and satisfaction obtained
from work; and
o To secure the mutual co-operation of employees and employers in
achieving industrial peace; greater efficiency and productivity in the
interest of the enterprise, the workers, the consumers and the nation.

The main implications of workers’ participation in management as

summarized by ILO:¬
o Workers have ideas which can be useful;
o Workers may work more intelligently if they are informed about the
reasons for and the intention of decisions that are taken in a
participative atmosphere.

Importance:

Unique motivational power and a great psychological value.¬

Peace and harmony between workers and management.¬
Workers get to see how their actions would contribute to the overall
growth of the company.¬
They tend to view the decisions as `their own’ and are more
enthusiastic in their implementation.¬
Participation makes them more responsible.¬
o They become more willing to take initiative and come out with cost-
saving suggestions and growth-oriented ideas.

Scope and ways of participation:

One view is that workers or the trade unions should, as equal

partners, sit with the management and make joint managerial
decisions.¬
The other view is that workers should only be given an opportunity,
through their representatives, to influence managerial decisions at
various levels.¬
In practice, the participation of workers can take place by one or all
the methods listed below:¬

o Board level participation

o Ownership participation
o Complete control
o Staff or work councils
o Joint councils and committees
o Collective Bargaining
o Job enlargement and enrichment
o Suggestion schemes
o Quality circles
o Empowered teams
o TQM
o Financial participation

Participation at the Board level:

This would be the highest form of industrial democracy.¬

The workers’ representative on the Board can play a useful role in
safeguarding the interests of workers.¬
He or she can serve as a guide and a control element.¬
o He or she can prevail upon top management not to take measures
that would be unpopular with the employees.
o He or she can guide the Board members on matters of investment in
employee benefit schemes like housing, and so forth.
The Government of India took the initiative and appointed workers’
representatives on the Board of Hindustan Antibiotics (Pune), HMT
(Bangalore), and even nationalized banks.¬
The Tatas, DCM, and a few others have adopted this practice.¬
Problems associated with this method:¬
o Focus of workers’ representatives is different from the focus of the
remaining members of the Board.
o Communication and subsequently relations between the workers’
representative and the workers suffers after the former assumes
directorship.
He or she tends to become alienated from the workers.¬
o As a result, he or she may be less effective with the other members
of the Board in dealing with employee matters.
o Because of the differences in the cultural and educational
backgrounds, and differences in behaviour and manners, such an
employees’ representative may feel inferior to the other members, and
he or she may feel suffocated. Hence, his or her role as a director may
not be satisfying for either the workers or the management.
o Such representatives of workers’ on the Board, places them in a
minority. And the decisions of the Board are arrived at on the basis of
the majority vote.

Participation through ownership:

This involves making the workers’ shareholders of the company by

inducing them to buy equity shares.¬
o In many cases, advances and financial assistance in the form of easy
repayment options are extended to enable employees to buy equity
shares.
Examples of this method are available in the manufacturing as well as
the service sector.¬
Advantage:¬
o Makes the workers committed to the job and to the organization.
 Drawback:¬
o Effect on participation is limited because ownership and
management are two different things.

Participation through complete control:

Workers acquire complete control of the management through elected

boards.¬
The system of self-management in Yugoslavia is based on this
concept.¬
Self-management gives complete control to workers to manage
directly all aspects of industries through their representatives.¬
Advantages:¬
o Ensures identification of the workers with their organization.
o Industrial disputes disappear when workers develop loyalty to the
organization.
o Trade unions welcome this type of participation.
Conclusion: Complete control by workers is not an answer to the
problem of participation because the workers do not evince interest in
management decisions.¬

Participation through Staff and Works Councils:

Staff councils or works councils are bodies on which the

representation is entirely of the employees.¬
There may be one council for the entire organization or a hierarchy of
councils.¬
The employees of the respective sections elect the members of the
councils.¬
Such councils play a varied role.¬
o Their role ranges from seeking information on the management’s
intentions to a full share in decision-making.
Such councils have not enjoyed too much of success because trade
union leaders fear the erosion of their power and prestige if such
workers’ bodies were to prevail.¬

Participation through Joint Councils and Committees:

Joint councils are bodies comprising representatives of employers and

employees.¬
o This method sees a very loose form of participation, as these
councils are mostly consultative bodies.
Work committees are a legal requirement in industrial establishments
employing 100 or more workers.¬
o Such committees discuss a wide range of topics connected to labour
welfare.
o Examples of such committees are welfare committee, safety
committee, etc.
o Such committees have not proven to be too effective in promoting
industrial democracy, increasing productivity and reducing labour
unrest.

Participation through Collective Bargaining:

Through the process of CB, management and workers may reach

collective agreement regarding rules for the formulation and
termination of the contract of employment, as well as conditions of
service in an establishment.¬
Even though these agreements are not legally binding, they do have
some force.¬
For CB to work, the workers’ and the employers’ representatives need
to bargain in the right spirit.¬
But in practice, while bargaining, each party tries to take advantage
of the other.¬
This process of CB cannot be called WPM in its strongest sense as in
reality; CB is based on the crude concept of exercising power for the
benefit of one party.¬
o WPM, on the other hand, brings both the parties together and
develops appropriate mutual understanding and brings about a mature
responsible relationship.

Participation through Job Enlargement and Job Enrichment:

Excessive job specialization that is seen as a by-product of mass

production in industries, leads to boredom and associated problems in
employees.¬
Two methods of job designing – job enlargement and job enrichment–
are seen as methods of addressing the problems.¬
o Job enlargement means expanding the job content – adding task
elements horizontally.
o Job enrichment means adding `motivators’ to the job to make it
more rewarding.
This is WPM in that it offers freedom and scope to the workers to use
their judgment.♣
But this form of participation is very basic as it provides only limited
freedom to a worker concerning the method of performing his/her
job.♣
The worker has no say in other vital issues of concern to him – issues
such as job and income security, welfare schemes and other policy
decisions.¬

Participation through Suggestion Schemes:

 Employees’ views are invited and reward is given for the best
suggestion.¬
With this scheme, the employees’ interest in the problems of the
organization is aroused and maintained.¬
Progressive managements increasingly use the suggestion schemes.¬
Suggestions can come from various levels.¬
The ideas could range from changes in inspection procedures to
design changes, process simplification, paper-work reduction and the
like.¬
o Out of various suggestions, those accepted could provide marginal to
substantial benefits to the company.
The rewards given to the employees are in line with the benefits
derived from the suggestions.¬

Participation through Quality Circles:

Concept originated in Japan in the early 1960s and has now spread all
over the world.¬
A QC consists of seven to ten people from the same work area who
meet regularly to define, analyze, and solve quality and related
problems in their area.¬
Training in problem-solving techniques is provided to the members.¬
QCs are said to provide quick, concrete, and impressive results when
correctly implemented.¬
Advantages:¬
o Employees become involved in decision-making, acquire
communication and analytical skills and improve efficiency of the work
place.
o Organization gets to enjoy higher savings-to-cost ratios.
o Chances of QC members to get promotions are enhanced.
The Indian Scenario:¬
o Tried by BHEL, Mahindra and Mahindra, Godrej and Boyce among
others.
o Experienced mixed results:
M♣&M (jeep division) with 76 QCs has experienced favourable
results.
• Technical problems got solved.
• Workers got to get out of their daily routine and do something
challenging.
Trade unions look at it as:♣
• A way of overburdening workers, and
• An attempt to undermine their role.
These circles require a lot of time and commitment on the part of
members for regular meetings, analysis, brainstorming, etc.¬
Most QCs have a definite life cycle – one to three years.¬
o Few circles survive beyond this limit either because they loose steam
or they face simple problems.
 QCs can be an excellent bridge between participative and non-
participative approaches.¬
For QCs to succeed in the long run, the management needs to show
its commitment by implementing some of the suggestions of the
groups and providing feedback on the disposition of all suggestions.¬

Empowered Teams:

Empowerment occurs when authority and responsibility are passed on

to the employees who then experience a sense of ownership and
control over their jobs.¬
Employees may feel more responsible, may take initiative in their
work, may get more work done, and may enjoy the work more.¬
For empowerment to occur, the following approach needs to be
followed as compared to the traditional approach:¬
Element Traditional Org. Empowered Teams
Organizational structure Layered, individual Flat, team
Job design Narrow, single task Whole process, multiple tasks
Management role Direct, control Coach, facilitate
Leadership Top-down Shared with the team
Information flow Controlled, limited Open, shared
Rewards Individual, seniority Team-based, skill-based
Job process Managers plan, control, improve Teams plan, control,
improve

Features of empowered or self-directed teams:¬

o Empowered to share various management and leadership functions.
o Plan, control and improve their work.
o Often create their schedules and review their performance as a
group.
o May prepare their own budgets and co-ordinate their work with other
departments.
o Usually order materials, keep inventories and deal with suppliers.
o Frequently responsible for acquiring any new training they might
need.
o May hire their own replacement to assume responsibility for the
quality of their products or services.
Titan, Reliance, ABB, GE Plastics (India), Wipro Corporation and Wipro
InfoTech are empowering employees – both frontline as well as
production staff, and are enjoying positive results.¬

Total Quality Management:

TQM refers to the deep commitment, almost obsession, of an

organization to quality.¬
 Every step in company’s processes is subjected to intense and regular
scrutiny for ways to improve it.¬
Some traditional beliefs are discarded.¬
o High quality costs more.
o Quality can be improved by inspection.
o Defects cannot be completely eliminated.
o Quality in the job of the QC personnel.
New principles of TQM are:¬
o Meet the customer’s requirement on time, the first time, and 100%
of the time.
o Strive to do error-free work.
o Manage by prevention, not correction.
o Measure the cost of quality.
TQM is called participative because it is a formal programme involving
every employee in the organization; making each one responsible for
improving quality everyday.¬

Financial Participation:

This method involves less consultations or even joint decisions.¬

Performance of the organization is linked to the performance of the
employee.¬
The logic behind this is that if an employee has a financial stake in the
organization, he/she is likely to be more positively motivated and
involved.¬
Some schemes of financial participation:¬
o Profit-linked pay
o Profit sharing and Employees’ Stock Option schemes.
o Pension-fund participation.

Pre-requisites for successful participation:

Management and operatives/employees should not work at cross-

purposes i.e. they must have clearly defined and complementary
objectives.¬
Free flow of communication and information.¬
Participation of outside trade union leaders to be avoided.¬
Strong and effective trade unionism.¬
Workers’ education and training. Trade unions and government needs
to work in this area.¬
Trust between both the parties.¬
Workers should be associated at all levels of decision-making.¬
Employees cannot spend all their time in participation to the exclusion
of all other work.¬

Limitations of participation:
 Technology and organizations today are so complex that specialized
work-roles are required.¬
o This means employees will not be able to participate effectively in
matters beyond their particular environment.
Everybody need not want participation.¬
The role of trade unions in promoting participative management has
been far from satisfactory.¬
Employers are unwilling to share power with the workers’
representatives.¬
Managers consider participative management a fraud.¬
===========================================
=
The organisation I am referring to

The organization, I am familiar with is a

-a large manufacturer/ marketer of safety products
-the products are used as [personal protection safety] [ industrial
safety]
-the products are distributed through the distributors as well as
sold directly
-the products are sold to various industries like
mining/fireservices/defence/
as well as to various manufacturing companies.
-the company employs about 235 people.
-the company has the following functional departments
*marketing
*manufacturing
*sales
*finance/ administration
*human resource
*customer service
*distribution
*warehousing/ transportation
*TQM

In this organization, worker participation is implemented in a

limited way.
The program covers the following areas:
1.TQM implementation.
2.Factory rewards system planning/ implementation.
3.Factory emergency security system implementation.
4.Quality circle problem solving team.
5.Suggestion box management.
6.Factory workercouncil.
############################################
#
Q5- Explain the various approaches to grievance resolution. Describe
the mechanism and procedure of grievance handling in any
organization you are familiar with. Also highlight pitfalls in grievance
handling. Briefly describe the organization you are referring to.
GRIEVANCE HANDLING:
Purposes of the Grievance Procedure:
The primary purposes of a grievance procedure are to:
(1) channel conflict into an institutionalized mechanism for peaceful
resolution;
(2) facilitate communication between labor and management
regarding problems that arise in a collective bargaining relationship;
(3) enable employees to complain with dignity knowing that there is a
system of appeals leading to an impartial decision-maker; and
(4) enforce compliance with the terms and conditions negotiated by
the parties.

Handling Employee Grievance:

The following checklist is provided as guidance when an employee
comes to you with a complaint:
CHECKLIST FOR HANDLING EMPLOYEE COMPLAINTS:
PREREQUISITES:
-Know the contract.
-Make sure that meetings with employees to handle complaints are
held in accordance with any contract provisions that regulate the time
and/or location for such meetings.
-Develop good listening and note taking skills.
-Be prepared to spend the time to get the evidence and testimony to
support your case and to refute management's case.
-Treat all employees fairly and consistently.
-Do not make judgments about the case to the employee or anyone
else until you get the facts.
-Keep good records of all transactions, oral and written, that occur
from the time a complaint is brought to you until the case is resolved
in the grievance procedure or in arbitration.
-Know who, when and how to ask for help.

INTERVIEW:
-Let the employee tell his/her story without interruption. Take notes.
When the employee has finished, ask, "Is there anything else you
would like to add?"
-Review the employee's description of the case with him/her to make
sure you have all the facts. Make sure you get the answers to the
questions who, what, when, where, why and how.
-Ask the employee for the names, addresses and telephone numbers
of any witnesses. Then ask the employee to tell you what he/she
thinks each witness knows about the case. Record this information. Try
to clarify any uncertainties about what a witness is supposed to know.
-Ask the employee to give you all of the evidence he/she has
concerning the case. Make copies so that no information is lost.
-Before the employee leaves, check one more time to make sure you
have all the facts, names of witnesses and evidence.

REVIEW:
-Refer to the grievance procedure in the contract to make sure the
issue the employee has raised is defined as a proper subject of a
grievance. If you are uncertain, ask for help. If the issue is not a
proper subject of a grievance, the best thing to do is to tell the
employee and explain how this affects his/her case.
-Check to make sure that the procedural requirements set forth in the
grievance procedure have been complied with.
Key considerations include:
-Is the complaint timely?
-Who should the employee and/or union representative meet with at
the first step?
-What information must be presented by both parties at the first step?
-Review the contract provisions alleged to have been violated to make
sure they fit the issue described by the employee and that no
provisions have been left out.
-Review the evidence. Go through all the documents the employee has
given you. Make sure everything is dated and signed. Carefully check
the content of each document to find out what it actually states, if this
information pertains to the case and is timely. Check for
inconsistencies in the documents and between the documents and the
information the employee has given you. Make a list of all
inconsistencies. Check to see if the documents contain the names of
other potential witnesses that the employee did not mention and/or
that might be called by management. Make a list of these persons and
find out how to contact them.
-Find out is there is any other evidence, e.g., rules and regulations,
past grievances and arbitration decisions, past practice, documents in
the employee's personnel file that he/she may not have, etc., that
have a bearing on the case as viewed by both the union and the
employer. Request documents from the employer as appropriate, in a
timely fashion and in writing.
-Match the evidence you have with the list of potential witnesses.
Make a list of questions to ask each witness when you interview them.
Be sure to include at the end of each list the questions, "Is there
anything else you would like to add?" and "Do you know of any other
witnesses?"
-Interview witnesses. Apply the guidelines as set forth in II. Also,
carefully check the following things as you consider what witnesses
state that they know about the case:
-Does the witness have direct personal knowledge about what
happened or is his/her knowledge based only on hearsay (i.e., second
hand)?
-Is the witness credible (i.e., able to give a reasonable explanation
about the events, and an honest, accurate accounting even if this
means revealing negative things about his/her record/conduct)?
-Does the witness' statement confirm what the employee has said, or
are there differences/inconsistencies?
-Does the witness have any reason to be less than truthful in stating
what he/she knows about the case?
-If there is more than one witness who knows about a given event,
note which ones would be best able to present clear testimony under
the pressure of examination and cross-examination at an arbitration
hearing.
-Verify name, address, telephone, work shift and location.

ANALYSIS:
After you have thoroughly reviewed all of these matters, you may find
that a complaint is not grievable/arbitrable or that the case lacks
merit. One way to proceed is to explain your findings to the employee
and ask if there is any additional information he/she has that might
have a bearing on the case. If not, you should be guided by local or
international union policy and perhaps by counsel, in determining how
to handle this situation. Grievances lacking merit should be screened
out to conserve a union's resources for other cases. This can be done
by committee in consultation with an international representative or
counsel. This determination should be made with care because unions
have a legal duty to fairly represent all employees in the bargaining
unit whether or not they are union members.
-Can you account for any inconsistencies in the case and, if so, how?
-Are there any mitigating circumstances that could explain the
employee's behavior and thus lessen or remove any disciplinary
action?
-Does the evidence and testimony the union has demonstrate one or
all of the following:
-Disparate treatment;
-Arbitrary and capricious action; and/or Discrimination.
-Are there any past practices which pertain to the case and, if so,
how?
-Does the evidence and testimony the union has support the remedy
requested or should some modification be made in that remedy?
-Do you have hard evidence and testimony based upon direct personal
knowledge to support your case or is your case largely based upon
circumstantial evidence?
-Is the remedy requested reasonable or is it nonsensical, outside the
scope of the employer's or of an arbitrator's authority to grant? Would
it be impossible to implement even if granted, etc.?
-Is the contract provision(s) you are relying upon modified by more
specific language in the provision or elsewhere in the contract?
-Where rules and regulations are concerned, have they been posted
and given to employees, are they reasonable and have they been
fairly, consistently and equitably enforced?
-What has been the outcome of other similarly situated cases? Does
this information help or hurt your case? How?
Once you have reviewed and analyzed all these considerations with
respect to the union case, prepare a summary of what you think the
employer's response will be and determine if you have a sound
rebuttal for each of the points the employer could raise.

FILING:
Be sure to properly and timely complete the grievance form. This
includes such items as: names; dates; signatures; clear and accurate
statement of the complaint; contract clauses alleged to have been
violated; and remedy requested.
This is a checklist, not a magic wand. It highlights key points to
consider in handling employee complaints. This task is time consuming
and requires the application of a number of skills. There are no real
short cuts. If you take them, an employer will usually find them at
some stage in the grievance procedure or in arbitration. The result
may be very damaging involving not only loss of a case that might
have been won, but also expenditures of time, other resources and
credibility that a union can ill afford.
Handling Discipline and Discharge Cases:
In all likelihood, most of the grievances you handle will involve
discipline or discharge. Since management is the party that took the
action, (i.e., is the moving party) the BURDEN OF PROOF is on the
employer to show that it has just cause for such action. This means
that, in arbitration, management must go first in showing what
evidence and testimony it has to support the action taken. A union
then responds with the evidence and testimony it has in defense of the
grievant and as rebuttal to the case presented by the employer. There
are 7 commonly accepted tests for just cause. These are:
1. If a rule is alleged to have been violated, was that rule reasonable?
2. Was the grievant given adequate notice that the conduct
complained about was improper?
3. Was the alleged offense sufficiently investigated?
4. Was the investigation fair?
5. Was the misconduct proved?
6. Did the employee receive equal treatment with all others who have
committed a similar offense? If not, were there any mitigating
circumstances?
7. Was the penalty appropriate for the offense committed?
Refer back to the Checklist for Handling Complaints to remind yourself
of the type of information you must collect to support a complaint in a
discipline or discharge case. Remember to find out: who; what; when;
where; why; and how. Collect all of the evidence and interview
witnesses, then review and analyze these in relation to the 7 tests
listed above. This will give you an idea of the strength of support for
the union's case. Remember, you must also consider what evidence
and testimony management may be able to present and assess your
case accordingly.

Contract Interpretation Cases:

These cases involve disputes over the interpretation of contract
language. Unlike discipline and discharge cases, the party that claims
the contract language has been improperly interpreted has the burden
to go forward in presenting its case. Critical to prevailing in a contract
interpretation case can be: evidence obtained from the bargaining
history of the parties (what have they done in the past, for how long,
and what was the intent at the bargaining table); and have any past
practices developed that have changed the meaning of that contract
language. The tests for a binding past practice are that the practice
must be: (1) unequivocal; (2) clearly enunciated and acted upon; and
(3) readily ascertainable over a reasonable period of time as a fixed,
and established practice accepted by both parties. Mutual acceptance
may be tacit, however, an implied mutual agreement determined by
inference from the circumstances. It is very important in contract
interpretation cases that you obtain witnesses who were actually at
the bargaining table when the disputed language was agreed to,
and/or have direct knowledge that the language has been rolled over
in successive contracts without dispute for a period of years, or of past
practices that have changed the meaning of the disputed language. In
such cases, the kinds of proof that can be critical to support either
party's case may include:
Copies of past contracts;
Notes from bargaining sessions;
-Other documentation that will prove how the language has actually
been Implemented (e.g., other arbitration awards);
-Employees with long service that can testify about how a contract
provision has been implemented;
-Whether the disputed language is clear and unambiguous on its face;
-is general language limited by more specific language in the same
provision or elsewhere in the contract;
-Are the disputed terms being interpreted in normal language or as
they usually are in your business or is the interpretation strained;
Will upholding your position or that of management produce a
nonsensical or unworkable result?
============================================
==========================
the grievance procedure and practice in your organisation and present
a brief report.

COMPANY POLICY
COMPANY .................. aims to resolve problems and grievances
promptly and as close to the source as possible with graduated steps
for further discussions and resolution at higher levels of authority as
necessary.

Statement of General Principles

1 Complaints must be fully described by the person with the
grievance
2 The person(s) should be given the full details of the allegation(s)
against them
3 The person(s) against whom the grievance/complaint is made
should have the opportunity and be given a reasonable time to put
their side of the story before resolution is attempted
4 Proceedings should be conducted honestly, fairly and without bias
5 Proceedings should not be unduly delayed.

PROCEDURES
The following is a four level process:

1. The Employee attempts to resolve the complaint as close to the

source as possible.
This level is quite informal and verbal

If the matter is not resolved

2. The Employee notifies the Supervisor (in writing or otherwise) as

to the substance of the grievance and states the remedy sought.
Discussion should be held between employee and any other relevant
party.
This level will usually be informal, but either party may request written
statements and agreements.
This level should not exceed one week.

If the matter is not resolved

1. The Supervisor must refer the matter to the Manager (or Board of
Directors if applicable).
A grievance taken to this level must be in writing from the employee.
The Supervisor will forward to the Manager any additional information
thought relevant
The Manager will provide a written response to the Employee
The Manager also communicate with any other parties involved or
deemed relevant.
This level should not exceed one week following the next scheduled
meeting.

If the matter is not resolved

2. The Employee will be advised of his/her rights to pursue the
matter with external authorities if they so wish.
============================================
============