You are on page 1of 52

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 TITLE PAGE NO.


I INTRODUCTION
1.1 Profile of the organization 1
1.2 Introduction to the study 5
II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 6
III OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY 12
IV RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 13
V DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION 17
VI 6.1 FINDINGS OF THE STUDY 35
6.2SUGGESTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS 37
VII CONCLUSION
38
VIII SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE 39
STUDY

APPENDICES
ANNEXURE I 40
ANNEXURE II 41

LIST OF TABLES

Table No. Table name Page No:


1.1 List of products manufactured 2
1.2 Clients 3
5.1 Distribution of respondents regarding temporary 17
relief
5.2 Distribution of respondents based on age 18
5.3 Distribution of respondents towards supervisors’ 19
level of skill
5.4 Distribution of respondents towards awareness 20
of committees
5.5 Distribution of respondents towards decision 21
given
5.6 Distribution of respondents towards the informal 22
channel
5.7 Distribution of respondents towards real basis of 23
identification of their grievance
5.8 Distribution of respondents towards mechanism 24
followed resolves grievance or not
5.9 Distribution of respondents towards importance 25
given to discussion and conference
5.10 Distribution of respondents regarding whom 26
they redress for grievance
5.11 Distribution of respondents based on 28
qualification
5.12 Distribution of respondents regarding awareness 29
of various committees
5.13 Distribution of respondents regarding regular 31
follow up
5.14 Distribution of respondents regarding 32
supervisors’ authority
5.15 Correlation between Feel about decision and 33
Real basis identified.
5.16 Values for correlation 33
5.17 Correlation between Discussion and Conference 34
And Supervisor’s Skill level
5.18 Values for correlation 34

LIST OF CHARTS
Chart No: Chart Name Page No:

5.1 Distribution of respondents regarding temporary relief 17


5.2 Distribution of respondents based on age 18
5.3 Distribution of respondents towards supervisors’ level 19
of skill
5.4 Distribution of respondents towards awareness of 20
committees
5.5 Distribution of respondents towards decision given 21
5.6 Distribution of respondents towards the informal 22
channel
5.7 Distribution of respondents towards real basis of 23
identification of their grievance
5.8 Distribution of respondents towards mechanism 24
followed resolves grievance or not
5.9 Distribution of respondents towards importance given 25
to discussion and conference
5.10 Distribution of respondents regarding whom they 27
redress for grievance
5.11 Distribution of respondents based on qualification 28
5.12 Distribution of respondents regarding awareness of 30
various committees
5.13 Distribution of respondents regarding regular follow 31
up
5.14 Distribution of respondents regarding supervisors’ 32
authority

CHAPTER I

1.1 PROFILE OF THE COMPANY


Lucas - TVS was set up in 1961 as a joint venture of Lucas Industries plc., UK and T V
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 Starter Motor
Alternator Alternator
Headlamp Small Motor
14W Wiper Motor
WindShield Wiper Motor (GM Range)
LRW Products
Small Motor Dynamo Regulator
Wiper Motor
Blower Motor
Fan Motor
Dynamo Regulator Dynamo
Dynamo Auto Electricals
Ignition Coil
Distributor

Diesel fuel injection

CLIENTS

INTERNATIONAL
CUSTOMER
COLLABORATOR
Cars
Maruti Udyog Suzuki, Japan
Hindustan Motors Isuzu, Japan. Mitsubishi, Japan
TATA Engineering and
Locomotive Company
General Motors, India General Motors, USA
Ford India Ford, UK
Daewoo Motors Co., India Daewoo, Korea
Ind Auto Fiat, Italy
Hyundai Motors, India Hyundai Motors, Korea
Tractors
Mahindra & Mahindra
International Harvestor Corporation,
UK

Tractors and Farm Equipments


Massey Ferguson, UK
(TAFE)
Escorts Ursus, Poland. Ford, UK
HMT Zetor, Czechoslovakia
Eicher Tractors Good Earth, Germany
Punjab Tractors
Gujarat Tractors Zetor, Czechoslovakia
L&T Tractors Johndeer, USA
Greaves Tractors Same, Italy

DIVISIONS

Lucas TVS has grown hand in hand with the automobile industry in the country. The
company's policies have recognised the need to respond effectively to changing customer needs,
helping to propel it to a position of leadership. The company has raised its standards on quality,
productivity, reliability and flexibility by channeling its interests.

At present, there are five divisions:

1. Auto Electricals L-TVS


2. Fuel Injection Equipment (FIE) - DTVS
3. Electronic Ignition Systems (INEL)
4. Automotive Lighting (IJL)
5. After Market Operations (LIS)

ACHIEVEMENTS

Lucas-TVS, a TVS group company, has bagged the prestigious Deming Application Award for
the year 2004. This was announced by the Deming Prize Committee of Japanese Union of
Scientists and Engineers (JUSE).

1.2 INTRODUCTION FOR THE STUDY

1. The aim of the study is to find whether the grievance handling mechanism ensures that
employee’s problems are recognized and appropriately reviewed in a prompt and timely
manner.

2. The grievance mechanism acts as a foundation for a harmonious and healthy relationship
between employee and employer.
3. The grievance mechanism ensures a fair and just treatment of employee’s concerns and
prompt resolution of grievances without discrimination, coercion, restraint or reprisal
against any employee who may submit or be involved in a grievance.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

GRIEVANCE

Grievance is any discontent or dissatisfaction that affects organizational performance. As


such it can be stated or unvoiced, written or oral, legitimate or ridiculous. If the dissatisfaction of
employees’ goes unattended or the conditions causing it are not corrected, the irritation is likely
to increase and lead to unfavorable attitude towards the management and unhealthy relations in
the organization.
The formal mechanism for dealing with such worker’s dissatisfaction is called grievance
procedure. All companies whether unionized or not should have established and known grievance
methods of processing grievances. The primary value of grievance procedure is that it can assist
in minimizing discontent and dissatisfaction that may have adverse effects upon co-operation and
productivity. A grievance procedure is necessary in large organization which has numerous
personnel and many levels with the result that the manager is unable to keep a check on each
individual, or be involved in every aspect of working of the small organization.

The usual steps in grievance procedure are

1. Conference among the aggrieved employee, the supervisor, and the union steward.
2. Conference between middle management and middle union leadership.
3. Conference between top management and top union leadership.
4. Arbitration.
There may be variations in the procedures followed for resolving employee grievances.
Variations may result from such factors as organizational or decision-making structures or size of
the plant or company. Large organizations do tend to have formal grievance procedures involving
succession of steps.

Arbitration
Arbitration is a procedure in which a neutral third party studies the bargaining situation,
listens to both the parties and gathers information, and then makes recommendations that are
binding on the parties. Arbitration has achieved a certain degree of success in resolving disputes
between the labour and the management. The labour union generally takes initiative to go for
arbitration. When the union so decides, it notifies the management. At this point, the union and
company must select an arbitrator.

Guidelines
When processing grievances, there are several important guidelines to consider:
 Check the grievant’s title and employment status to determine if he / she are included in a
union eligible classification.

 Note the supervisor’s respondent obligation under the grievance procedure.

 Review the requested solution to the grievance. Determine if the relief sought is beyond a
supervisor’s authority to grant.

 Review all policies or other information related to the grievance.

 Conduct a thorough investigation of the allegations.

 Prepare a written response including the reason for the decision and provide a copy to the
grievant.

 Grievance materials should be maintained in a separate file from either personnel files or
records.

Articles related to grievance

Measures of supervisory behaviors and supervisor’s knowledge of the collective


agreement should, intuitively, be related to the occurrence of grievable events, but there has been
no theory advanced to explain grievable events. Kliener , Nigkelsburg and Pilarski implicitly
assumed that supervisor monitoring of employees will increase the number of grievable events,
but a theoretical basis or rationale for this assumed relationship is not discussed.

Grievants were less satisfied with their jobs, had poorer attitudes toward their line
supervisors, had greater feelings of pay inequity, had stronger beliefs that workers should
participate in decision-making, were less satisfied with their unions, and more active in their
unions. The lower satisfaction with the union among grievant may be due to dissatisfaction with
the processing of grievances. Grievants were more younger and had less education than
nongrievants.

Gordon and Miller, Allen and Keavney and Klass note the important role that expectancy
theory could play in differentiating grievants and nongrievants. Although not a complete test of
expectancy theory, Lewin and Boroff did include the employees perceived effectiveness of the
grievance procedure as an explanatory variable. Surprisingly, this was not significantly related to
grievance filing. Further research focusing on expectancy theory and grievance filing that more
fully develops testable hypotheses derived from expectancy theory seems appropriate.

Bemmels, Reshef and Stratton-Devine included the shop stewards assessment of how
frequently employees approach them with complaints. Although most grievances are formally
filed by employees, the initiation of a grievance can come from employees or stewards.
Complaining to the shop stewards is the employees’ role in the grievance initiation process. Both
of these studies found the work group with employees who complained to the stewards more
frequently had grievance rates. Employees’ complaining to their stewards is a precursor to
grievance filing. The measure of consideration and structure were significantly related to
frequency of employee complaints in Bemmels and the steward’s assessment of the supervisors’
knowledge of the collective agreement was negatively related to complaints.

Lewin and Peterson found a positive relationship with grievance procedure structure and
grievance rates. They also found higher grievance rates under procedures that include provisions
for expedited grievance handling. It was found that provisions allowing oral presentation of
grievances was related to lower rates of written grievances, and screening of potential grievances
was related to lower rates of written grievance, and screening of potential grievances by a
committee or other union officials was associated with lower grievance rates. The number of
steps in the grievance procedure and the length of time allowed for filing a grievance were not
related to grievance rates.
Lewin and Peterson argued that evaluations of grievance procedure effectiveness should
include subjective evaluations by the participants as well as objective measures reflecting the
operation of the grievance procedure. They argued that subjective evaluations are the preferred
method for evaluating grievance procedure effectiveness. Effectiveness was difficult to interpret
from measures reflecting the operation of grievance procedures such as grievance rates,
settlement levels and arbitration rates since it was not clear what the optimal magnitudes might be
for these measures. Furthermore the purpose of grievance procedure is to resolve disputes about
the interpretation and application of collective agreements. Grievance procedures exist for the
benefit of the employees, employers and unions. If the parties were satisfied with the operation of
the grievance procedure, it seems to more important than attaining some predetermined optimal
magnitude of grievance filing or when, where, and how grievances are being resolved.

Grievance procedures are related to other attitudinal measures and the behaviors of shop
stewards in the grievance procedure. Grievance procedure effectiveness was related to union
members’ overall satisfaction with the union. Grievance procedures have been found to relate to
union commitment, employer commitment and dual commitment. Employer commitment has
found to be negatively related to absenteeism and turnover and union commitment has found to
have a positive relationship with union participation and with shop steward behavior in the
grievance procedure. Many studies still report empirical analysis with no theoretical grounding,
or only intuitive and ad hoc hypotheses.

Grievance could be classified into 4 basic types: Discrimination charges, rules violation,
general or unclassified complaints and discipline.

Discrimination was spelled out as based upon race, sex, religion, color, national origin, age,
veteran status, or handicapped.

Grievance corresponding rules violation was an employees’ interpretation of application of


policies and procedures governing personnel policies, department work rules, unsafe or unhealthy
working conditions, or other policies or procedures of a working nature.
Disciplinary actions are the category least classified as a grievance. Legalistic approach was used
to handle such cases. With the possibility of adverse legal action arising from unjust discipline,
separate systems are often established in discipline cases to ensure the employees’ 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 peer-
review 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

20

10
Percent

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 26-30 29 82.9

Total 35 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 17.1% of respondents are between the age group
19-25 and 82.9% are between the age group 26-30.

Distribution of respondents based on age

Chart No: 5.2

age
19-25

26-30

Distribution of respondents towards supervisors’ level of skill

Table: 5.3
Supervisor
Sl.No. possess necessary Frequency Percentage
skill
Inference:

1 very highly skilled 32 91.4 From the


above table it is
inferred that
2 moderately skilled 3 8.6 91.4% of
respondents state
Total 35 100 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

20
Percent

0
very highly skilled moderately skilled

supervisor has skill

Distribution of respondents towards awareness of committees

Table: 5.4

Sl.No Awareness Frequency Percentag


of e
committees

1 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

40

20
Percent

0
yes

various committee

Distribution of respondents towards decision given

Table: 5.5

Sl.No. Decision Frequency Percentage


given is
satisfactory
or not

1 Highly
satisfactory 31 88.6
2 Moderately 4 11.4
satisfactory

Total 35 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 88.6% of respondents are highly satisfied towards
the decision given by the management and 11.4% of respondents are moderately satisfied
towards the decision.

Distribution of respondents towards decision given

Chart No: 5.5

feel about decision given


100

80

60

40

20
Percent

0
highly satisfactory moderately satisfact

feel about decision given

Distribution of respondents towards the informal channel

Table: 5.6

Sl.No Informal No. of respondents Percentage


channel

1 co worker 23 65.7
2 peer 12 34.3

Total 35 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 65.7% of respondents communicate to their co-
workers 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

20
Percent

10

0
co w orker peer

informal channel

Distribution of respondents towards real basis of identification of their grievance

Table: 5.7

Sl.No. Real basis Frequency Percentage

1 strongly
agree 27 77.1

2 agree 8 22.9

Total 35 100
Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 77.1% of respondents strongly agree that real basis is
identified and 22.9% of respondents agree that real basis is identified.

Distribution of respondents towards real basis of identification of their grievance

Chart No: 5.7

real basis identified

agree

strongly agree

Distribution of respondents towards mechanism followed resolves grievance or not

Table: 5.8

Sl.No. Mechanism No. of Percentage


resolves respondents
grievance or
not

1 yes 34 97.1
2 no 1 2.9

Total 35 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 97.1% of respondents agree that mechanism resolves
grievance and 2.9% of respondents disagree that mechanism does not resolve grievance.

Distribution of respondents towards mechanism followed resolves grievance or not

Chart No: 5.8

mechanism resolves grievance

no

yes

Distribution of respondents towards importance given to discussion and conference

Table: 5.9

Sl.No. Discussion and 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

20
Percent

0
strongly agree agree

discussion and conference

Distribution of respondents regarding whom they redress for grievance

TABLE NO: 5.10

Sl.No. Whom do Frequency Percentage


you redress
1 office 4 11.4
bearers
2 committee 16 45.7
members
3 3 8.6
hr
4 2 5.7
mangers
5 7 20.0
union
members
6 1 2.9
counselor
7 1 2.9
friends
8 1 2.9
co workers

Total 35 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 11.4% of respondents communicate grievances
through office bearers, 45.7% through committee members, 8.6% through HR, 5.7 through
managers, 20% through union members, 2.9 through counselor, 2.9 through friends and 2.9
through co workers.

Distribution of respondents regarding whom they redress for grievance

Chart No: 5.10


to whom to redress

co w orkers

friends
counsellor offiece bearers

union members

mangers
committee members

hr

Distribution of respondents based on qualification

Table: 5.11
Sl.No. Qualification Frequency Percentage

1 higher 31 88.6
secondary

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
Various
Sl.No. committees Frequency Percentage
canteen,sga 1 2.9
1
Sga,tei, 4 11.4
2 transport
transport,welf 6 17.1
3 are,sga
4 transport, 4 11.4
safety,
canteen
5 safety,transpo 4 11.4
rt,sga
6 canteen,tei,sa 3 8.6
fety,transport
7 tei,sga,cantee 9 25.7
n,transport
8 transport, 2 5.7
welfare,
safety
9 tei,sga,transp 2 5.7
ort,welfare

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 No. of Percentage
follow-up respondents

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

40

20
Percent

0
yes

regular follow up

Distribution of respondents regarding supervisors’ authority

Table: 5.14

Sl.No Supervisor has given No. of Percentage


authority respondents

Valid Has given authority 35 100.0

Total 35 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 100% of respondents have agreed that supervisor is given
authority.

Distribution of respondents regarding supervisors’ authority

Chart No: 5.14

supervisor given authority


120

100

80

60

40

20
Percent

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 agree


Table: 5.16
Feel about highly 25 6 31 Values for
decision satisfactory
given correlation

∑x2 ∑y2
moderately 2 2 4 ∑xy
180.5 satisfactory
364.5 256.5
Total 27 8 35

∑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
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 ∑y2 ∑xy


420.5 264.5 333.5

∑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[ ]