CHAPTER 2

RESEARCHES ON INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS IN INDIA-A REVIEW

Industrial relations is an area which has attracted the attention of a

number of researchers. It is necessary to evaluate critically the existing research
on the subject, with a view to place in proper perspective the important
contributions in the field, identify the gaps, deficiencies, and the comparative
neglect of the important research areas, and thus provide an analytical
framework for the future studies in the field of Industrial relations. A brief
summary of the major studies, which are particularly relevant to the present
study, together with a critical evaluation is presented here.
The literature review of the subject is classified and presented under five
heads. First one is Industrial Relations in general. Second part of the literature
survey highlights studies about job satisfaction. Third part of the literature
analysis accounts for Industrial Disputes and dispute settling machinery. Fourth
part reveals studies pertaining to trade unionism and workers participation in
management.Last part of the literature review highlights various studies
pertaining to industrial relations in Kerala.
2.1. Industrial Relations in General
Many researchers in the country have concentrated on the study of
industrial relations at the national level on the basis of aggregate data. In his
study Viramani (1995)1 has pointed out that the Indian industrial relations
system has all along been adversarial with collective bargaining approach being
its mainstay. He contented that collective bargaining and participation need
different attitudes and hence cannot co-exist. In any new model of I R the
adversarial approach and collective bargaining must give way to participative

28

structures or development of institutions which check the adversarial approach.

He suggested various changes in the roles of management, union and
Government for redefining Industrial relations.
Chellappa and Jhourney (1982)2 have attempted to identify the factors
which have facilitated the development of harmonious industrial relations. They
identified informal, open and uninhibited interpersonal relations between
employees and the pressures of production, hierarchical status and day-to-day
work problems did not reduce the communication between the individuals.
Datta (1990)3 analysed why employees oppose automation, what are the
steps to be taken for its smooth introduction and how the staff and their unions
can be involved in this task. The utilization and deployment of workforce in the
context of automation has also been analysed. He emphasized the inalienable
connection between automation and industrial relations and suggested that in
their own interest both the managements and the unions must join hands for
phased adoption of new technology.
Johri (1990) 4 discussed several paradoxes of Indian industrial system and
identified that the industrial relations system has now emerged as a major
obstacle to technological progress and competition of Indian industries. He
concluded that Indian industrialism does not reflect a natural stage of economic
evaluation; it may be viewed as a sub-economic system created by the planning
strategy of providing industrialization in a society which continues to be poor
and technologically backward.
Ratnam (1998)5 pointed out that most of the laws pertain to the organized
sector only and this comprises only 8% of the total workforce. He stressed that
economic development should be the means and the human development, the
goal. As regards labour, legislation needs be aligned with the overall shift in
economic and industrialization policies. It under scanned the need to pay
attention to the formulation of a timely, adequate and reliable database on labour
upon which policy planning may be based.

29

Nath (1995)6 focused on the Indian Industrial law, its inadequacies for a
growing industrial economy and its judicial interpretations and implications in
the light of I L Os conventions and universal practices. He strongly argued for
pragmatic and practical industrial laws which meet the growing needs of a fast
industrializing economy. While pleading for equality in enforcement of laws, he
concluded that India can attain the universally acceptable objectives of industrial
relations only after an overhaul of the existing industrial laws.
Johnnie (1992)7 has presented an account of Dunlops Industrial Relation
System theory, critically examining and commenting on Dunlops methodology,
and the theoretical contributions which have been used by other scholars to
further develop the frontiers of knowledge in the study of Industrial Relations.
Although Dunlops work attracted criticism from a good number of scholars, the
author contended that Dunlops work still stands out clearly as a monumental
effort in contemporary industrial relations analysis.
Nayar (1985)8 has attempted to develop a conceptual model of
effectiveness of industrial relations at the enterprise level by building on two
distinct streams of literature-organizational theory and industrial relations. The
purpose was to develop an operationalizable model of industrial relations subsystem effectiveness. Her model was helpful in developing linkage between the
variables, to assess any given system as to its effectiveness and to identify some
of the characteristics of the internal system variables which contribute to
effectiveness.
Sharma and Sundara Rajan (1983)9 reported the findings of an All-India
survey of organizational climate and its influence on labour -management
relations. They isolated two factors that together explain 58% of the variation in
labour-management relations in India. Those are (1) grievance handling system
and (2) scope for advancement.
Johri (1996)10 has analyzed several consequences of badly designed
legislative controls over Indian industrial relations system. The failure of

30

tripartite consultations in producing the agreed outcomes has left the industrial
relations system with only one anchor and it is the body of labour laws as
administered by the Government machinery and interpreted by the courts.
Various suggestions are offered for amending the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
He suggested that in accordance with the requirements of Indias more rapidly
developing modern economic sector, all the actors, including the Government
machinery, would learn to adapt and moderate the I R system to accommodate
its main pressures and growth determined needs.
Reddy (1992)11 has approached the problem of industrial relations in the
context of new economic realities, competitive environment and strategic quest.
According to him, the reformation of the industrial relations climate to cope with
the emerging strategic environment requires efforts from all the three parties to
the system. He suggested that the trade unions need to play a complementary
role in understanding the strategic directions, and in turn use their primary power
of opinionating among their members to bring about greater human resource
integration in the firms movement towards the future.
Ghosh (1995)12 observed that not all industrial restructuring exercises can
be lumped together in one undifferentiated category. He identified three distinct
patterns, which have been shaped as much by economic environment and market
compulsions as by prevailing labour-management relations. He suggested some
strategic choices available to labour and management as conventional responses
like bargaining and casualisation are proving inadequate in the wake of
fundamental changes in work practices and employment relations.
Khurana (1972)13 has tried to evaluate the industrial relations in the
private and public sectors in India. He found that industrial relations in both the
sectors had progressively deteriorated during 1962-68 and that public sector
registered a better performance on the criterion of industrial conflict, but when
viewed in the context of its performance in terms of the tripartite forums, the
code of discipline, and the prevalent attitudinal climate it has been no difference

31

from the private sector. He concluded that it cant be said with certainty that
there exist any linear relationship between ownership and industrial relations.
Chander (1979)14 and Rao (1981)15 have analyzed the Gandhian
philosophy of Industrial relations specifically related to minimum wages, labour
strikes and trusteeship and advised to follow Gandhian values for a congenial
industrial atmosphere.
Sharma (1988)16 argued that like employers, unions too have catered only
to the physical well-being of the worker and have paid little attention to improve
the quality of his work life. He argued that the bond between the worker and the
union is not at all strong as the relationship is based on negative motivation. He
suggested that employers and unions can co-operate and collaborate with each
other if they come to agree upon some common goal like improvement of
quality of work life.
Pandey (1999)17 has evaluated the role of IR managers in changing
industrial scenario and concluded that collective action by individuals on issues
of mutual interest shall lay the foundation for individual growth and freedom
which shall be fostered by industrial relations managers of the organization.
Bhatnagar and Sharma (1984)18 studied about the role and effectiveness of
labour welfare officer in industrial relations. They concluded that labour welfare
officers, by and large, are not able to perform their duties faithfully. They
suggested that the mode of appointments and service conditions of the labour
welfare officers be suitably modified so as to accord them a reasonable degree of
functional autonomy. They also suggested for periodic reports to the
Government regarding the welfare activities so that the Government might
proceed against the recalcitrant managements.
While studying the aftermath of Structural Adjustment Programme upon
the labour standards, Palo et al (2000)19 pointed out that Structural Adjustment
Programme has brought income gains to the working class despite their relative

32

job insecurity. Leelavathy (2000)20 examined challenges and strategies of

industrial relations in India and suggested for integration and simplification of
labour laws and greater autonomy for labour tribunals and conciliation
committees. She advocated for modifying Governments strategy based on
Japans model of industrial relations.
Srivastava (2001)21 has given an analysis of changing power dynamics in
the emerging industrial relations scenario and suggested to evolve a mechanism,
which can facilitate business success in a market economy along with protecting
the interest of the working class. He proposed a change in the I R Act which will
help managements, workers and unions deal with each other like partners, not
opponents.
In his study, Srivasthava (2004)22 pointed out that regular, open, two-way
communication in the organization is an important prerequisite for promoting
proactive I R. It would keep the workers updated with employers changing
circumstances, constraints, strategies and plans and giving them an opportunity
to adapt and reposition themselves. He advocated for formulating appropriate
conduct and disciplinary regulations for the protection of employers rights.
Public sector has been the main focus of attention in most of the general
and historic studies. Karim (1972)23 and Mathur (1986)24 have given a good
analysis of the issues of industrial relations in public sector and have
recommended various direct and indirect measures to bring about harmonious
relations between the labour and the managements.
De (1973)25 analysed whether such state of industrial relations do exist in
enterprises as will facilitate the continued fulfillment of its stated objectives and
concrete goals. He suggested the basis for determination of and the role of the
bargaining agent, establishment of integrative collective bargaining relationship,
development of performance-based reward system as part of action plan for
effective industrial relations in the public sector.

33

Patil (1998)26 studied about the changing industrial relations in different

industries and organizations in Karnataka to determine the nature of changing
relations and concluded that labour unions are becoming more defensive and
more concerned with protection of jobs. He also found out that workers are
positively responding to the demands of the managements for improvement in
production, job flexibility and shop floor designing.
Gani (1990)27 studied about the factors that help or obstruct the
maintenance and development of cordial and constructive relationship between
labour and management in Jammu and Kashmir. He suggested that clear cut
policies relating to promotion, reward system, training, working conditions and
grievance handling should be formulated and implemented.
2.2 Job satisfaction
Gardner& Pierce (1998)28 and Mathieu, Hofman &Farr (1993)29 found
that although a variety of factors might contribute to job satisfaction for most
workers, the connection between such factors and job satisfaction may not be a
direct link. Job satisfaction may be mediated by the perception of the individual
workers. This is because different employees may perceive the same job
differently, and it is those individual perceptions that determine whether or not
an employee is satisfied with the job.
The study conducted in Japan by Kumara & Koichi (1989) 30 found that
supportive supervision as well as support from co-workers, was positively
correlated with workers job satisfaction. According to them, support from coworkers and supervisors was especially important to employees who did not feel
positive about the work they performed.
Takalkar & Coovert (1994)31 conducted a study comparing the job
satisfaction of white collar workers in the United States and India. They found
remarkable similarity in the factors that contributed to these workers job
satisfaction.

34

According to Porter and Lawler (1968)32 job satisfaction and performance

are not directly linked. Instead, effective job performance leads to job related
rewards, such as pay increases, promotions or a sense of accomplishment. If the
process for offering these rewards is perceived as fair, receiving these rewards
leads to job satisfaction and also to higher and higher levels of performance.
This creates a situation in which job satisfaction and job performance are
actually independent of one another, but are linked because both are affected by
job- related rewards.
Judge, Thoresen, et al., (2001)33 suggested that job satisfaction might be
more strongly related to job performance for individuals in complex jobs, such
as managers, scientists and engineers, than in more structured jobs such as
accounting and sales. Complex jobs, because they require creativity and
ingenuity, might offer more opportunity for intrinsic reinforcement, and that may
strengthen the connection between satisfaction and performance, in comparison
to more routine jobs, where satisfaction may be more affected by the structure or
conditions of work, or extrinsic rewards.
Miceli (1993)

34

emphasized that the perception of fairness or justice in

pay is the most important part of the link between performance and job
satisfaction. That is, relative deprivation (a discrepancy between a workers
expectation and rewards) and perceived fairness of pay may mediate the
relationship between performance and job satisfaction, regardless of the actual
rewards obtained.
Although it is conceivable that a worker could be quite satisfied with a
job but have low feelings of commitment to the organization, or vice versa, the
feelings tend to be positively related. Studies showed mixed results as to the
direction of influence between these two constructs. ODriscoll and colleagues
(1992)35 found that job satisfaction may directly affect organizational
commitment, whereas another study (Becker & Billings, 1993)36 indicated that
organizational commitment leads to job satisfaction.

35

The studies of Mukherjee (1980)37 and Kathiresan (1987)38 confirmed the

fact that poverty-stricken workers are more concerned with immediate and
personal economic gains and their economic condition appear to be a central
source of life satisfaction.
Srivasthava and Srivasthava (1983)39 and Narchal et al (1983)40 found
wage pattern, working conditions and job permanency as the most important
factors in workers job satisfaction.
Rao and Ganguli (1971)41 and Chathopadyaya and Venkiteswara (1972)42
found that job satisfaction is correlated with certain personal attributes and
background variables such as age, educational level, number of dependents,
occupational level and marital status.
Mamta Panda (2004)43 examined the relationship between the industrial
relations environment and work culture in a private and a public sector
organization belonging to the same industry. She suggested intensive training
programmes to be organized for making the employees aware of the need for
adoption of normative approach, collaborative orientation, competency building
and developing holistic perspective.
Srivastava (2004)44 studied the effect of welfare facilities on job
satisfaction and attitude of workers towards management amongst the workers of
public and private sectors. The results indicated that welfare facilities affect the
workers attitude towards management and job satisfaction in both sectors. He
concluded that public sector provide better welfare facilities to their workers and
public sector workers are more satisfied with their jobs as compared to the
private sector workers.
2.3 Industrial disputes
One of the grim threats to the efficient conduct of the modern industrial
system seems to be the ravaging industrial disharmony characterized by
embittered relationship between the employers and the workers. The causes of

36

industrial disputes in India were psychological, political and economic. Hence to

secure industrial peace, changes in the attitude of the workers, employers, trade
unions are required along with political and economic changes.
Strikes are the most visible and spectacular manifestations of industrial
conflicts which in turn, arise out of bad industrial relations. A good number of
studies undertaken to study the causes of industrial disputes have shown that
several economic and non-economic factors have caused industrial disputes in
the country. Papola (1972)45 and Varma (1978)46 concluded that inadequate pay,
rising prices and other economic benefits or pressure might be considered as the
major causes of industrial disputes in India.
Mahapathra (1977)47 and Srivasthava and De (1967)48 found the
multiplicity of trade unions, inter-union and intra-union rivalries, indiscipline
among union members, frustration of workers with the pattern of Industrial
relations are the causes of disputes.
Siva Prasad and Murthy (1977)49 and Gani (1991)50 identified inadequate
wages bonus issues, workers demand for higher cost of living allowances are the
main causes of conflicts.
Verma (1972)51 was of the view that disputes relating to wages,
allowances and bonus constitute approximately 40% of the industrial disputes
whereas Singh (1968)52 opines that more than 50% of the industrial disputes are
caused by wages, bonus and gratuity.
According to Nagaraju (1981)53, the wage issue has been the most
important single issue among the several causes which have given rise to
disputes.
Ramanujam (1979)54 studied about the reasons and remedies of
disharmony in industrial relations and suggested that industrial relations have to
be carefully and continuously nursed in order to retain it at the peak level of its
health. Just as in the case of an individuals health, so also in the case of the

37

health of industrial relations, the preventive aspect must receive adequate

attention.
Reddy (1988)55 argued that the authoritarian and retrograte attitude and
indecisiveness of the management; insensitive, indifferent and anti-labour
attitude of the Government and the inter-union rivalries and competition-all
together forced the trade unions to launch general strikes. While studying
industrial relations in coal mining industry in Andhra Pradesh, he found that
over a period of one and a half decades, (1969-70 to 1983-84) there was a
thirteen fold increase in the number of strikes with an annual growth rate of
78.5%.
Mohanan (1999)56 analysed some aspects of industrial relations since
New Economic Policy and concluded that it have improved considerably. He
found that the strikes and lockouts leading to loss of man days reduced
substantially and an atmosphere for the effective functioning of joint
consultative machinery was created. He added that the trade unions have become
more responsible in securing the welfare of workers and national integration.
After studying about the emerging trends of industrial relations in public
and private sector industries in India, Sudama Singh and Binod Singh (1988) 57
concluded that industrial unrest has deep rooted in the industrial relations realm
of India. Industrial sector being a part of the whole economic system bears the
impact of the type of administration prevalent in the country.
While studying about the nature and magnitude of industrial disputes in
India in the post liberalization period, Jacob (2002) 58 observes that the attitude of
workers and trade union leaders to strike work for any thing and every thing has
been changed on account of the globalised and liberalized mood of the economy.
He identified that the man days lost due to lockouts is more than that of the
strikes.

38

Disputes settling machinery

Machinery for the maintenance and promotion of industrial peace has
widely been studied. The working of collective bargaining has occupied a
greater part of studies of most of the researchers. Mehrotra (1966) 59 and Rao
(1961)60 described the practice and procedure relating to collective bargaining in
various companies.
Guha (1959)61 and Bose (1967)62 focused the constraints in the operations
of collective bargaining. The important among them being multiplicity of trade
unions, outside leadership, political intervention and the problems of selective
and representative unions.
Conciliation has been deemed to be the other legitimate forum for settling
industrial disputes. Patil (1977)

63

found the functioning of conciliation

machinery in Karnataka as most unsatisfactory and largely ineffective.

Shroff (1953)64 and Kumar (1966)65 studied the functioning of
conciliation machinery in Mumbai and Rajasthan respectively.
Singh (1968)66 and Nagaraju (1981)67 have assessed the functioning of
conciliation machinery in Kanpur and Karnataka respectively. The functioning
of conciliation machinery in Orissa and Punjab were studied by Murthy et al.
(1986)68 and Ashdhir (1987)69.
All of them are critical of the working and effectiveness of conciliation
machinery on the ground that the percentage of settlements through conciliation
declined and that of withdrawal, failure and pending cases increased and have
concluded that the machinery as a whole has failed to make any contribution in
the sphere of industrial relations by lessening the strikes and by providing the
adequate machinery for dispute settlement.
On voluntary arbitration, there have been only a few studies because of its
limited use in India. Chatterjee (1966) 70 and De (1977)71 identified the skill
required by an arbitrator and the part he could play in building healthy industrial

39

relations. Like conciliation, arbitration has also been severely criticized for its
poor performance.
The role of labour courts and tribunals for settling disputes has also
received greater attention of various scholars. Banerjee (1963) 72 reported that
adjudication in India is prevalent because workers are poor and uneducated and
trade unions are incoherently organized.
Giri (1972)73 was also opposite to any court at all as they retarded the
growth of unions and favoured voluntary negotiation. Chowda (1971) 74 also
reported the delay in settlement of disputes through adjudication.
Murty (1980)75 observed that the adequacy and competence of a grievance
procedure for the maintenance of good industrial relations depend to a large
extent upon the good spirit with which the individuals concerned use it rather
than a comprehensive and elaborate structure of grievance procedure. He
suggested that it must subject to change to keep pace with the changing
aspirations and interests of management and labour, and with the fluctuating
needs and demands of the developing economy.
Ratna Sen (1988)76 observed that the effects of the political bias in union
verification, in conciliation or adjudication or other political interventions, is
apparent from the increasing recourse to court decisions. Both management and
trade unions or workers have more faith in the judiciary than the Government
machinery for dispute settlement. He found that both short term and long-term
strikes are increasing. It indicates less patience and greater obduracy on the part
of both labour and management.
Most of these studies are mainly concentrated in wage issues and have
suggested that unless suitable measures for the eradication of these problems are
taken the cordial climate of industrial relations will only be a myth.

40

2.4 Trade unionism and Workers participation in management

Trade Unionism has been a popular field of research in the literature of
industrial relations because the conflicts and co-operation between workers and
management are influenced by the nature of workers organization. There have
been a good number of research studies in different aspects of trade unionism
such as their growth and development, organization and structure, leadership,
politics, union involvement and participation in union activities etc.
While analyzing the changed dimension of industrial relations since new
economic policy, Mohan (1999)77 observed that though there are more than
52,000 registered trade unions in the country, only 17 %of them are submitting
returns and whose activities are on the record. Further, the density level of trade
unions in India is as low as 9.1% as against 81% in Sweden, 54% in Norway,
39% in U. K., 32% in Germany, and 30% in Canada.
Mathur and Mathur (1962)78 and Padmanabhan (1980)79 traced the history
of Trade Union movement in India and made suggestions for the improvement
of trade unions.
Other studies include those of Nigam(1984)80 and Ratnam(1984)81 who
have focused on some issues such as the process of unionism and its role in the
context of economic development, the role and policy of the Government in
promoting unionism, labour-management co-operation and conflict and other
issues regarding trade union movement.
Attempts have also been made to analyze trade unionism in public
services and white collar employment sectors. Goel (1968)

82

and James and Rao

(1972)83 reported on the unions of Government employees. These researches aim

at studying the organization and strategies of unions.
These studies of Rao (1984)84 and Seth and Jain (1968)85, aimed at
leadership efficiency, influence of legal aspects on union leaders, background,

41

role, status, and style of local trade union leaders, their political affiliation and its
consequences etc.
Halder (1985)86 felt that the Indian unions are very sensitive politically
and multi-unionism has become a fact of life in most of the industries. Ashraf
(1974)87 and Ramaswamy (1973)88 also noted the relationship between union
politics and management politics, relationship between political dependence and
union weakness, political manipulations, transfer of union funds for political
activities and vice-versa, consequence of outside influence, politicization of
workers and their commitment to unions.
Choudhury (1980)89 and Foneseca (1965)90 studied the attitude of workers
towards unions, their perception of union functions, degree of unionization and
the union participation and its socio-economic variables. They concluded that
the level of participation was low in Indian situation and reported considerable
apathy or hostility among workers towards union works.
Pandey and Vikram (1969)91 and Sinha and Pai (1963)92 observed that
economic and protective functions of the unions seem to appeal to the workers
and the union is looked more as the guardian of their interest than as an agency
for political power.
Based on the nature of bargaining and the contents of the agreement,
Murty and Das (1988)93 concluded that steel industry bargaining involves all the
four sub-processes of negotiation behaviour viz., distributive bargaining,
integrative

bargaining,

attitudinal

structuring

and

intra-organizational

bargaining. So it has taken a good leap from distributive bargaining to

integrative bargaining.
In his study, Patil (1998)94 pointed out that trade unionism and trade union
movement in India and Karnataka continue to be politically oriented, divided,
sub-divided and fragmented, failing to protect the interest of the labour, the
industry and the economy.

42

Sodhi (1993)95 examined the response of the three main actors in I R,

highlights the challenges and opportunities which have come up with the new
economic policies. The analysis showed that the response of the management is
positive and the trade unions have reacted against the policies. The State is
announcing policies, but is showing a weak commitment to their
implementation. He warns that with the introduction of various economic
policies, the trade unions may not survive in their traditional role.
While comparing the industrial relations in Japan and India, Zachariah
(1991)96 analysed that one of the major problems of the Indian trade union
movement is the fragmentation of the unions. This multi-unionism has posed a
serious threat to industrial harmony in India. It was argued that the Japanese
model offer learning for the management, unions, workers and Government in
India.
Das (1990)97 argued that trade unions are not really industrial
organizations in the Indian situation. They are loosely knit protest committees,
with weak structure and finding themselves in very difficult situations relating to
positive decision-making and needing to be bailed out either by the management,
political parties or the Government. They enjoyed the vested interests in the
fruits of backwardness which has dominated the stances of almost all the
political parties in the country.
Sharma (1990)98 has tried to take a critical look at the move for
managerial unionism and its implications for industrial relations. He argued that,
in the industrial relations situation, the emergence of separate unions for
managerial employees is bound to aggravate the I R problems still further.
Sodhi (1999)99 examined the role of the actors of the I R system in the
changed economic scenario, highlighted some specific challenges and pressures
for bringing about change in I R and HRM. He found out that the managements
have taken positively to the changes and the unions at the macro level remain

43

opposed to the reform process. He said that the new economic scenario is also
making various unions join hands.
Sen (1997)100 argued that unionization has been growing in the small,
medium and informal sectors or even in the unorganized pockets of organized
industry. He warned that the tendency to depoliticize workers require a response
from unions to decentralize union structures and decision-making and much
greater concern for plant level issues.
Mankidy (1993)101 observed that the new workforce have different
orientation to trade unionism and may not be as loyal to unions as their earlier
counterparts. He warned that unless management take a proactive stance and
introduce greater industrial democracy, the new united front being formed by the
unions may still lead to a return of the spectre of trade union militancy.
Singh102explored the pattern of I R in Maharashtra and analyzed the
inevitability and universality of the conflict in any industrial unit, between the
employer and the employees. He stressed the need for the management of the
conflicts and not the eradication of it. He put forward the suggestion that there
should be a central trade union organization, to which all the unions should be
affiliated.
Pandey (1998)103 exclaimed how the antiquated Trade Union Act of 1926,
which was formulated by an alien Government permitting indiscriminate
registration of trade unions in tune with its divide and rule policy, is still on the
Statute Books of an independent democratic country. He criticized that the
political overtones of Government decisions in labour matters and the
unnecessary interference weakening the forces of collective bargaining.
Choudhury (1998)104 felt that in the western parts of India Trade Unions
were dominated by the individual leaders, whereas, in the east, trade unions were
dominated by the political party affiliation. The strength changes on the basis of

44

the party in power in the State. He put forward the following roles for an ideal
Trade Union.
a) Organize worker education programme for better quality of work life
of the workers, making them hygiene and safety conscious, organize small group
activities for better team work and inter dependence.
b) Bargain with the worker-colleagues for the improvement of
productivity and establishment of eight-hour work culture.
c) Protest against unfair management practices and social evils like AIDS,
alcoholism, pollution etc. in the interest of the workers and the society at large.
Varma (1998)105 studied about the new roles to be played by different
actors of industrial relations and suggested that each state Government should
prepare a panel of arbitrators who must be experts(not necessarily judges)with
practical knowledge and experience of industrial issues, ethos and work culture.
There should be no scope or possibility of appeal against the arbitrators award.
Rath and Misra (1996)106 analysed the effects of economic environment
change on the industrial relations scenario of our country and made an attempt to
put forth a possible futuristic model of industrial relations in the years to come.
They argued that with the specter of obsolescence on the horizon, the attention
of the trade unions will be more to secure appropriate training and empowerment
techniques from the management than to strive for short-term benefits of wages
and welfare.
Rao and Patwardhan (1998)107 analysed how the trade unions see
themselves and concluded that a vast majority of Indian employers are generally
comfortable with unions and that non-unionism is not a priority item on their
agenda. They also found out that external leaders drawn from political parties
have lost their traditional charisma to inspire todays workers.

45

Gani (1991)108 found that workers have shown relatively higher degree of
interest and have positive attitudes towards unions in that they consider unions to
be important and essential aspect of their working lives.
Das (1999)109 observed that the trade unions are exploited for political
purposes and their legitimate functions are completely neglected and through
this door, militancy in trade union arena is brought in.
Jhabvala (2003)110 observed that as production became decentralized, as
the demand for flexible labour grew, and as capital and production moves to
countries and areas where trade unions were weak or non-existent, the power
and effectiveness of trade unions began to decline and weaken.
Bhangoo (2006)111 suggested that the new economic scenario demands
that trade unions must function with alliances and coaliations at national,
regional and global levels to achieve solidarity to mitigate the problems of the
workers of the world.
While analyzing the important reason for the declining influence of trade
unions, Srivastava (2006)112 felt that the profile vis--vis aspirations of new
generation of workforce have changed drastically and there exist a mismatch
between agenda of unions and expectations of new workers. Moreover, the
volatile market, increasing competition and emerging business compulsions have
diluted the needs of unions.
Ghosh (2008)113 noticed a perceptible change in the unions strategy and
approach to labour problems although some pockets of resistance still exist in
certain industries. He pointed out that the unity of the workers brought forward
by the formation of joint forums of major trade unions at different levels has also
contributed to the rise of concern for common and untouched issues of trade
union struggle.
From the above it can be concluded that though considerable efforts have
been made to study some vital aspects of trade unionism, yet some other wider

46

questions have been left out of analysis. A closer and systematic analysis of the
contribution of the outside leaders to the growth of movement and in directing
industrial disputes, within the national concern, still continues to be unexplored.
Workers participation in management
In todays labour relations, workers participation is one of the widely
debated issues. Intensive research has been carried out in the past to examine the
impact of participation on productivity, performance, and job satisfaction,
morale of workers, industrial peace and organizational effectiveness. Underlying
all these studies is the assumption that workers have a desire to participate in
management decision-making and by satisfying that desire organizational
objectives can be effectively achieved to a varying extent.
Research works of Saini (1983)114 and Indira and Harigopal (1985)115,
have shown that participation of workers in various decision-making processes
increases their job satisfaction and decreases their work apathy, reduces
industrial tension and conflict, and works as a positive instrument for the
promotion of productivity and creativity.
Sahus (1981)116 work has pointed out that the majority of the workers
favour the idea of giving them a right to influence the process of management,
particularly in those areas, where their interests are involved.
The studies of Sinha and Sinha (1974)117 have brought to light the
relationship between the workers desire for participation and their background
variables such as education, skill, length of service, interest on job and aspiration
etc.
Very few studies have focused on the attitude of management personnel
towards the workers participation, though some research has tried to elicit the
thinking and belief of the managers about participation. Indira and Harigopal
(1985)118 and Mehta (1977)119 found that the management in general displayed

47

positive attitude towards various dimensions of participative pre- disposition,

indicating thereby, their strong faith in the scheme.
The findings of Warrior(1978)120 and Lal(1984)121 have revealed that in
Indian context, the experience of participative forums are to a great extent
encouraging as most of the schemes of workers participation have functioned
successfully. Joseph (1987)122 concluded that participative management has
failed in India. Sharma (1987)123 was confident that the future of participative
management is bright, but considerable amount of groundwork is necessary.
Mukherjee (1984)124 and Viramani (1978)125 suggested that participative
forums and practices to be effective need favourable attitude among the parties,
sincerity of the purpose, sound trade unionism and industrial relations climate.
Biswas (1994)126 suggested that, for successful working of participative system,
Transactional Analysis Approach will be very useful.
According to Reddy (1990)127, the concept of participation was not
directly linked to the socio-political and economic development of the country.
Mohanan (1999)128 said that the simple launching of new economic policy alone
could not bring about such social, cultural, and economic changes in the required
magnitude to facilitate successful participation of workers in the management.
The worker as a partner of management in joint bodies, is not an equal partner in
reality. He cant be so because he is subordinate to management by the entire
system of responsibility, duty, control, and obligation.
Choudhury (1998)129 suggested that workers participation forums (WPF)
should be under an Integrated Labour Relations Act. (i.e., Industrial Dispute Act
and Trade Union Act combined together).
Workers participation in management has still many vital aspects which
have not been explored completely. The issues that need to be studied include
the attitude and approach of workers and management towards participation,

48

workers commitment to participate, levels of participation desired and the

impact of socio-economic factors on participation.
2.5. Studies about Kerala Industrial Relations
With the highest level of literacy rate in the country and the consequent
high degree of general awareness even among the rural mass, the militant nature
of trade unions and the presence of communist political movement, Kerala
industrial relations has always been an area of interest to social researchers all
over the country. The major contributions in this regard are noted below:
Pillai, (1994)130 while investigating into the industrial strike activities in
Kerala, suggested to separate trade union interest from political interest. He also
suggested for avoiding external leadership to trade unions as this is the means
through which political influence generally gets into trade union activities. He
suggested that management should be more responsive to the needs of the
workers taking into account the latters higher educational and aspirations level.
The study conducted by Nair (1972) 131 revealed that the multiplicity of
unionism and outside leadership in Kerala have in no way reduced the capacity
of the Kerala workers to get good bargains in his industrial life. The study shows
that in Kerala, union movement is a stepping stone to political leadership. In
Kerala the union leadership never subordinates the union interest to political
interest.
According to Nair (1972)132, the age of union movement, instability of
employment, threat to retrenchment and frequent lay-off, leadership conflicts
and political factors were the relevant factors influencing the level of industrial
strike activity in Kerala.
According to George (1993)133, industrial relations in the textile mills of
Kerala showed a consistent tendency towards greater worker involvement in the
management of labour welfare related issues, and though multi-unionism and
politicization of union activities have to a certain extent reduced the bargaining

49

power of the workforce, they are still a force to be reckoned with in maintaining
proper industrial relations.
While examining the collective bargaining experiences in Kerala, Nair
(1982)134 observed that the flexibility and broad minded realism in management
approach, the remarkable degree of trade union unity, and constructive role
played by the State in employment relationship are unique features of industrial
relations in Kerala, that have positively contributed to the growth of a variety of
collective bargaining situations in the State at the plant and industry levels.
Paulsons (1999)135 study revealed that the innumerable labour laws
covering the various facets of industrial relations are full of loopholes, not
comprehensive and not helpful to improve our existing work culture. The study
also showed that though the interest in and inclination of workers towards trade
unions are declining, trade unions can regain their faith through proper remedial
measures.
While studying the industrial relations in Kerala State Electricity Board,
Nair (1993)136 concluded that the nature of industrial relations system depends to
a great deal on the power context. According to him, the intervention of
Government, the style of the management, the degree of unionization, extent of
membership, availability of adequate funds, political ideologies etc. are the
factors which exert great influence on industrial relations.
Remesh (2003)137 described how the bad image of the trade unions among
masses enabled the Government of Kerala to withdraw some of the deserved
rights of the employees including those with full salary and permanency in job.
Thomas (2003)138 found that an indigenous class of entrepreneurs never
emerged in Kerala and the savings mobilized in Kerala have been channeled to
investment in real estate, house construction and some service sector
establishments.

50

Patrick (1995)139 concluded that given the paternalistic and highly

traditional character of Indian management, and the wide availability throughout
the country of less organized and less politicized workers, it follows that Indian
capital would shy away from Kerala.
Gopalakrishnan (2008)140 revealed that political parties have utilized trade
unions in Kerala not as institutions with an independent existence of their own,
but as potential vehicle for power. In the matter of militancy or violence in strike
activity no trade union is distinct from another. He concluded that the
kaleidoscopic view of the Kerala trade union management reveals that though
there are more than 11000 registered trade unions in the State, only 4 to 8
percent of them are submitting returns and whose activities are on the record.
While thinking about Keralas development and failures, Raghavan
(2004)141 observed that the ideological musings of the left wing politics
disfavouring the capitalist development has created an anti-industrial climate in
the state from the very beginning of the formidable stage of its development. He
criticized Kerala society for failing to accomplish the prime truth that one has to
create wealth first before mesmerized by socialist ideals.
Jacob (2005)142 identified the main issues leading to grievances relate to
wages and amenities, service matters, working conditions and disciplinary
actions. The faulty handling of grievances leads to work stoppages and strikes.
He found out that trade union leaders are satisfied with the working of grievance
procedure in Kerala.
Vasanthagopal and Venugopalan (2009)143 compared the involvement of
employees in trade union activities in the public and private enterprises in
Kerala. They found that job security, protection against victimization, and unity
of workers were the major reasons for joining unions. Union participation
appeared to be higher among the employees in the private sector, as compared
with their counterparts in the public sector.

51

2.6 Conclusion
Despite the above studies, no serious attempts have ever been made to
make an up to date assessment of the industrial relations situations in Kerala
especially after the implementation of the new economic policy and the
consequent changing scenario. The present study is mainly intended to make a
thorough scan of industrial relations in Kerala by making a comparative analysis
of public and private enterprises in selected areas of the State. The results of the
study are expected to be of immense use to the administrators, personnel policy
makers, industrial employers, trade union leaders and the community as a whole.
References
1.

Viramani, B. R, Redefining Industrial Relations. Indian Journal of

Industrial Relations. 31 (2), 1995. p. 153-177.

2.

Chellappa, H. V. V and Jhuraney, J. C., Causes of peace in Industrial

Relations. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 18(1), 1982. p. 1-28.

3.

Datta, S. K, Automation and Industrial Relations - Implications for

employment utilizations and employment workforce, Indian Journal of
Industrial Relations, 25(3), 1990. p. 254- 276.

4.

Johri. C. K, Industrialism and Industrial Relations in India - the task ahead.

Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 25(3), 1990. p. 230-242.

5.

Ratnam, Venkata, C. S., Economic reforms and labour- Productivity. 39(3).

1998. p. 373-383.

6.

Nath, Surendra, Developing new perspective on Industrial Relations-Role

of Government. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 31(2), 1995. p. 178192.

7.

Johnnie, Palmer. B, Methodological issues of Dunlops Industrial Relations

System Theory, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations., 27(3), 1992, p.
227-241.

8.

Nayar, Meenakshi, Effectiveness of Industrial Relations System at the

enterprise level, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 21(1), 1985. p. 114.

52
9.

Sharma, Baldev. R and Rajan, Sundara. P. S,Organizational determinants of

labour-management relations in India., Indian Journal of Industrial
Relations, 19(1), 1983. p. 1-16.

10.

Johri C. K, Industrial Relations as regulated by law-some suggestions for

change. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 31(4), 1996. p. 439-449.

11.

Reddy Y. R. K, Industrial Relations in the strategic environment, Indian

Journal of Industrial Relations, 28(1), 1992, p. 49-61.

12.

Ghosh, Somanath, Industrial restructuring and labour relations:emerging

patterns, implications and strategic choices, Indian Journal of Industrial
Relations, 31 (2), 1995. p. 211-230.

13.

Khurana S. K, Industrial Relations in private and public sector industry in

India-A comparative analysis. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations. 7(3),
1972. p. 411-431.

14.

Chander, Devan Subhash,Gandhian Philosophy of Industrial Relations and

its impact on Trade Union-problems and prospects, The Indian Worker,
October 8, 1979. p. 11-25.

15.

Rao, S. N., Industrial Relations As Gandhiji taught us. The Indian Worker,
October 5, 1981. p. 5-8.

16.

Sharma, Baldev. R, H R D and Industrial relations, Indian Journal of

Industrial Relations, 24(2), 1988. p. 238-244.

17.

Pandey, S. N., Role of I R manger in changing industrial scenario; Indian

Journal of Industrial Relations, 34(4), 1999.

18.

Bhatnagar. S. and Sharma P. C. Role and effectiveness of labour welfare

officer in industrial relations, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 19(4),
1984. p. 507-511.

19.

Palo, Susmitha, Nayanthara Podhi and Swetha Panigrahi, Labour standards

in the aftermath of Structural Adjustment Programme: The case of India;
Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 35(3), 2000. p. 381-398.

20.

Leelavathy. D. S; Industrial Relations in India: Challenges and strategies.

Southern Economist, July 15, 2000. p. 17-21.

53
21.

Srivastava, K. B. L., Changing power dynamics in the emerging industrial

relations scenario, Management and labour studies, 26(4), 2001, p. 219227.

22.

Srivasthava, Avinash kumar, Proactive Industrial Relations:-A Framework.

Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 40(2), 2004. p. 266-272.

23.

Karim, Bazla-Industrial Relations in public undertakings in J&K, Indian

Journal of Industrial Relations 7(2), 1972. p. 269-274.

24.

Reetha Mathur, Industrial Relations in public enterprises, Pratheeksha

publtcations, Jaipur, 1986.

25.

De, Nithish, R., An action plan for effective Industrial Relations in the
public sector, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 8(3), 1973.

26.

Patil. B. R., A contemporary Industrial Relations Scenario in India with

reference to Karnataka. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations. 33(3), 1998.

27.

Gani, Abdul., Industrial Relations in J&K, Indian Journal of Industrial

Relations, 26(1), 1990. p. 53-67.

28.

Gardner, D. G, & Pierce. J. L., Self Esteem and Self Efficiency within the
Organizational Context: Group& Organization Management. 23, 1998, p.
48-70.

29.

Mathieu. J. E., Hofmann, D. A, &Farr, J. L, Job Perception-Job Satisfaction

Relations: An Empirical Comparison of Three Competing Theories.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 56, 1993, p. 370387.

30.

Kumara, U. A, & Koichi, F, Employee Satisfaction and Job Climate : An

empirical study of Japanese Manufacturing Employees. Journal of
Business & Psychology, 3, 1989, p. 315-329.

31.

Takalkar, P., & Coovert, M. D, International Replication Note : The

dimensionality of Job Satisfaction in India. Applied Psychology: An
International Review, 43, 1994, p. 415-426.

32.

Porter, L. W., & Lawler, E. E, Managerial Attitudes and Performance.

Homewood, IL, Irwin, 1968.

54
33.

Judge, T. A, Thoresen C. J., Bono, J. E., & Patton, G. K, The Job

Satisfaction Job Performance Relationship : A Quatitative and Qualitative
Review. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 2001, p. 376-407

34.

Miceli, M. P., Justice and Pay System Satisfaction. In R. Cropanzano (Ed).,

Justice in the work place: Approaching fairness in HRM, p. 256-283. Hiles
Dale, NJ: Erlbaum., 1993.

35.

O' Droscoll, M. P., Ilgen, D. R., & Hildreth, K., Time Devoted to Job and
off Job Activities, Inter Role Conflict and Affective Experiences. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 77, 1992, p. 272-279.

36.

Becker, T. E., & Billings, R. S, Profiles of Commitment: An Empirical

Test. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14, 1993, p. 177- 190.

37.

Mukherjee, Indrani, Industrial Workers in a developing society-A

Sociological study; Mittal Publications, New Delhi. 1985.

38.

Kathiresan, K., Perception towards the specific aspects of job satisfaction:

A case study; Indian Labour Journal, 28(6)1987. p.781-786.

39.

Srivasthava, A. K and Vineta Srivasthava, Job Satisfaction-Myth and

Reality; Indian Journal of Labour Economics. 26 (1-2), 1983. p. 7185.

40.

Narchal, Renu, Alagh Harveen and Kishore Rema, Job satisfaction-some

correlates; Productivity, 25(3), 1984. p. 367-370.

41.

Rao, Sarvashwara G. V. and T. Ganguli, Perceived need satisfaction and

importance of supervisory and clerical personnel; Indian Journal of
Psychology; 46, 1971, p. 31-43.

42.

Chathopadyaya, S. N. and Venkiteswara, Aspirations of industrial

personnel, Indian Journal of Psychology, 95(1), 1972, p. 39-52.

43.

Mamta Panda, Industrial relations environment and work culture in public

and private sector organizations:A case study, Indian Journal of Industrial
Relations, 39(4), 2004. p. 465-488.

44.

Srivasthava, S. K; Impact of Labour Welfare on Employee Attitude and Job

Satisfaction. Management and Labour Studies, 29(1), 2004. p. 31-41.

45.

Papola. T. S., Inter-regional variations in manufacturing wages in Indiaindustrial structure and region effects; Indian Journal of Industrial
Relations, 7(3), 1972. p. 355-375.

55
46.

Verma. P., Industrial conflicts in India-A statistical analysis; Vikalpa, 3(3),

1978. p. 119-124.

47.

Mahapathra, R. C., Industrial Relations in public sector in India with

special reference to Rourkela Steel Plant; Indian Journal of Labour
Economics. 12(3-4), 1976-77.

48.

De, N. R. and Suresh Srivasthava, Gheraos in West Bengal, Economic and

Political weekly. 2(49), 1967, p. 2015, 2062, 2099.

49.

Sivaprasad. K. and K. Sreerama Murthy,Industrial Relations in public

sector undertakings-A case study of Bharath Heavy Plates and Vessels;,
Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 14(3-4), 1976-77, p. 104-110.

50.

Gani, Abdul,Labour-Management Relations-A study of Textile Industry in

J&K, Concept Publishing Co; New Delhi, 1991.

51.

Verma, Pramod, Impact of economic growth on Industrial Relations,

Economic Times, April 11, 1972.

52.

Singh, V. B, Climate for Industrial Relations-A Study of Kanpur Cotton

Mills, Allied Publishers Pvt. Ltd; New Delhi, 1968.

53.

Nagaraju, S, Industrial Relations Systems in India; Chugh Publications,

Allahabad, 1981.

54.

Ramanujam, G, Disharmony in industrial relations-Reasons and remedies;

The Indian worker, January 29, 1979. p. 3-5.

55.

Ram Reddy. R, Emerging trends of industrial relations in coal mining

industry, The Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 30(4), 1988. p. 280294.

56.

Mohanan, S, Some aspects of Industrial Relations since New Economic

Policy, Southern Economist, May1, 1999, p. 25-28.

57.

Sudama Singh and Binod Bihari Singh, Some aspects of the emerging
trends of industrial relations in India, Indian Journal of Labour Economics,
30(4), 1998; p. 318-325.

58.

Jacob, K. K., Nature and Magnitude of Industrial Disputes in India: A

Review of the Post Liberalization Period; Southern Economist, October1,
2002, p. 14-16.

56
59.

Mehrotra. B. N., Collective agreements in India, Industrial Relations,

18(3), 1966. p. 102-109.

60.

Rao, Subba. A. V, Collective Bargaining in Indian industries, Indian

Journal of Social Work, 22(2), 1961. p. 81-88.

61.

Guha. S. R, Collective bargaining and voluntary arbitration, Indian Journal

of Social Work; 20(1), 1959. p. 7-13.

62.

Bose, Bires. C, Bipartite negotiations-when, how and why?, Productivity

8(1), 1967. p. 71-76.

63.

Patil. B. R., Conciliation in India-A study into its functioning and

effectiveness; Chugh Publications, Allahabad. 1977.

64.

Shroff. A. D., Conciliation and arbitration in Industrial disputes in IndiaPopular, Mumbai. 1953.

65.

Kumar, Pradip, The working of the conciliation machinery in RajasthanIndian Journal of Industrial Relations 2(1), 1966. p. 34-49.

66.

Singh. V. B., op. cited.

67.

Nagaraju. S., op. cited.

68.

Murthy. B. S, Giri. D. V. and Rath. B. P., Conciliation machinery in OrissaIndian Journal of Industrial Relations 21(4), 1986. p. 428-447.

69.

Ashdhir, Vijay-Industrial Relations in India, Deep and Deep Publishers,

New Delhi. 1987.

70.

Chatterjee. D, Arbitration-Industrial Relations-18, 1966. p. 3-6.

71.

De, Nithish, R., Process consultation for effective Industrial RelationsEconomic Times; May 27, 28. 1977.

72.

Banerjee. R. N., Industrial awards and Industrial Relations in India-New

Age Publications, Calcutta. 1963.

73.

Giri. V. V., Labour problems in the Indian industry-Asia Publishing House,

Mumbai. 1972.

74.

Chowda. V. K., State intervention-a determinant of Industrial Relations in

India-Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 12(4), 1971. p. 70-73.

57
75.

Murty B. S., The role of collective bargaining in industrial relations, The

Indian worker, October, 6, 1980. p. 51-55.

76.

Ratna Sen, Emerging trends of industrial relations, Indian Journal of

Labour Economics, 30(4), 1988; p. 306-314.

77.

Mohanan, S -op. cited.

78.

Mathur. A. S. and Mathur. J. S., Trade Union Movement in India

Chaithanya - Allahabad; 1962.

79.

Padmanabhan. R., Growth of Trade Unions in India-1940-70Indian

Journal of Industrial Relations, 16(1), 1980. p. 125-132.

80.

Nigam, M. S., Trade Union Movement in India-Recent Trends and

emerging patterns-Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 26(4), 1984, p.
419-424.

81.

Ratnam, C. S., Venkata., Trade Union scenario in India-some reflections;

-Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 26 (4), 1984. p. 435-443.

82.

Goel, R. M., White collar unionism in India with special reference to

Madhya Pradesh-Indian Journal of Economics, January, 1968.

83.

James P. A. and Rao, Bhaskara., Unionism in P&T and audit departmentsIndian Journal of Industrial Relations, 7(3), 1972. p. 465-472.

84.

Rao, Madhusudan., Union leadership profile in Vishakapatanam-Indian

Journal of Industrial Relations, 19(4), 1984. p. 502-506.

85.

Seth, N. R. and Jain, S. P-Workers, leaders and politics-A case studyIndian Journal of Industrial Relations-3(3), 1968.

86.

Halder, Ardhendu Sekhar., Our Industrial Relations scenario-Quacks

treating Chronics-Lok Udyog, 19(4), 1985. p. 11-18.

87.

Ashraf, Mohammed Siddique., Political affiliation of Industrial WorkersAn area study-Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 10(2), 1974.

88.

Ramaswamy. E. A., Politics and organized labour in India-Asian survey13, 1973.

89.

Chaudhuri. A. S., Inplant Union leaders in public sector-Background and

attitudes-Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 16(1), 1980; p. 133-142.

58
90.

Foneseca, A., Contribution of the Trade unions to development-Indian

Journal of Industrial Relations, 4(3), 1965.

91.

Pandey. S. M. and Vikram. C. M., Trade Unionism in Delhis building

industry-Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 4(3), 1969. p. 298-321.

92.

Sinha. D and Pai. M. V., Motivational analysis of union membership,

Indian Journal of Social Work, 23 (4), 1963. p. 343-349.

93.

Murty. B. S and Das. R. K., Emerging trends of industrial relations: the

case of collective bargaining practice in Indian steel industry Indian
Journal of Labour Economics, 30(4), 1988; p. 295-305.

94.

Patil, B. R., Contemporary Industrial Relations scenario in India with

reference to Karnataka. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 33(3),
1998.

95.

Sodhi, J. S., New economic policies and their impact on Industrial

Relations, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 29(1), 1993.

96.

Zecharia, John, Comparative Industrial Relations in Japan and India, Indian

Journal of Industrial Relations. 26(1), 1991.

97.

Das, S. R. Mohan, Industrial Relations, The coming decades, Indian

Journal of Industrial Relations, 26(1), 1990.

98.

Sharma, R. Baldev, Managerial Unionism Implications for Industrial

Relations, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 25(4), 1990.

99.

Sodhi J. S., Emerging Trends in Industrial Relations and Human Resources

Management in Indian industries, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations,
30(1), 1999.

100. Sen, Ratna, Industrial Relations-Patterns and Trends, Indian Journal of

Industrial Relations, 32(3), 1997.

101. Mankidy, Jacob, Emerging patterns of Industrial Relations in India,

Management and Labour Studies, 18(4), 1993.

102. Singh, M. K., Industrial Relations in Maharashtra, Indian Journal of

Industrial Relations, p. 549-567.

103. Pandey, B. D., The origin and development of personal function in India-A

case study in TATA steel, Personal Today, July-September; 1998. p. 12-15.

59
104. Chaudhuri K. K, In search of better Industrial Relations, Personnel Today,

October-December 1998. p. 35-36.

105. Varma, K. Madhurendra, Role of management and trade unions in the new

scenario, Personnel Today, October-December 1998. p. 10-14.

106. Rath, Devashish and Misra, Snigdharani, Future of Industrial Relations and

Industrial Relations in the future-The Indian scenario, Vikalpa, 21(4), 1996.

p. 47-54.
107. Rao, E. M and Patwardhan, Vikrant , Indian Trade Unions-on the brink of

extinction?, Personnel Today, July-September 1998. p. 17-25.

108. Gani, Abdul, op. cited.
109. Das, H., Trade Union Activism- Avoidable or Inevitable? Indian Journal of

Industrial Relations, 35(2), 1999. p. 224-236.

110. Jhabavala, Renana, New forms of workers organization: Towards a system

of Representation and voice, Indian Journal of Labour Economics; 46(2),

2003.
111. Bhangoo, Kesar Singh, Trade unions in globalised economy of India,

Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 41(4), 2006. p. 397-405.

112. Srivastava. D. K., Trade union response to declining membership base:

Best practices from Mumbai based Trade unions, Indian Journal of

Industrial Relations, 41(4), 2006. p. 355-374.
113. Ghosh, Biswajith, Economic reforms and trade unionism in India-A Micro

view, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 43(3), 2008. p. 355-384.

114. Saini, Debi. S., Industrial Democracy-Law and challenges in India, Indian

Journal of Industrial Relations; 19(2), 1983. p. 191-2006.

115. Indira.

K. and Harigopal. K, Participative

Management; 23(3), 1985. p. 39-44.

management,

Indian

116. Sahu. B, Relatives of participation-The case of an engineering industry,

Productivity, 22(2), 1981. p. 9-18.

117. Sinha. J. P. B and Sinha, A case of reversal in participation in management,

Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 10(2), 1974. p. 179-189.

118. Indira. K and Harigopal. K, op. cited.

60
119. Mehta, Prayag, Employees motivation and work satisfaction in a public

enterprise, Vikalpa, 11(3), 1977.

120. Warrior.

S. K., Meaningful participation in management-A new

perspective, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 3(4), 1978. p. 445-466.

121. Lal. K. B. , Workers participation in management-The case of Integral

Coach Factory, Perambur , Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 19(4),

1984. p. 454-468.
122. Joseph, Cheriyan, Making of a participatory forum-BHEL experience,

Economic and political weekly, 22 (48), 1987. p. 143-152.

123. Sharma. B, Industrial Democracy-the Indian experience, Indian Journal of

Industrial Relations, 22(3), 1987, p. 254-269.

124. Mukharjee, Surya, The Joint Management Councils in Gujarath- A study

of current practices and performances, Indian Journal of Industrial

Relations, 19(4), 1984. p. 443-453.
125. Viramani. B. R, Workers participation in management, Macmillan, New

Delhi, 1978.
126. Biswas. S. K., Workers participation in management-Industrial Relations

Management, Mathur. B. L. (ed.), Arihant Publishing House, Jaipur; 1994.

127. Reddy, Ram, Industrial Relations in India-A study of Singareni collieries-

Mittal Publications; New Delhi. 1990.

128. Mohanan. S, op. cited.
129. Chaudhari. K. K., op. cited.
130. Pillai, G. C. Gopal, An investigation into Industrial Strike Activities in

Kerala, Ph. D. Thesis, Kerala University; 1994.

131. Nair, Ramachandran, Industrial Relations in Kerala, Sterling Publishing

Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, 1972.

132. Ibid.
133. George, Mathew, Impact of Trade Unionism on Industrial Relations in the

Textile Mills of Kerala; Ph. D. Thesis, University of Kerala, 1993.

134. Nair, K. Ramachandran, Collective bargaining-the Kerala experience,

Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 25 (1-2), 1982. p. 62-71.

61
135. Paulson K. Paul, Industrial Relations in a Private Limited Rubber

Company-A case study; Management and Labour studies, 24(4), 1999. p.

264-269.
136. Nair, Rajendran. V, Industrial Relations and multiple trade unionisms in

KSEB, Ph. D. Thesis, Kerala University, 1993.

137. Babu. P. Ramesh, Changing Consciousness and Image of Kerala Labour in

the 20th century; Labour and development, 9(1), 2003. p. 63-83.

138. Thomas, Jayan Jose, State Policy, industrial Structure and industrialization:

The case of Kerala. Ph. D. Thesis, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development

Research, Mumbai, 2003
139. Patrick, Heller, From class struggle to class compromise: Redistribution

and growth in a South Indian Case, Journal of Development Studies, 31(5),

1995.
140. Gopalakrishnan, M. B. , Labour relations in Kerala-Emerging trends and

patterns; Paper presented in the International seminar of Commerce

Congress, Kottayam, Organised by Commerce Association of Kerala,
December, 2008.
141. Raghavan, V. P, On Keralas development and failures, The Indian

Economic Journal, 51(3-4), 2004. p. 30-39.

142. Jacob, K. K, Grievance Redressal Procedure and Labour-management

relations in State Level Public Enterprises Labour and Development,

11(1), 2005. p. 34-44.
143. Vasanthagopal. R and Venugopalan. KV, Employeesinvolvement in trade

union activities in public and private enterprises: a comparative study.

Southern Economist, 47(17), 2009. p. 21-22.

62

REFERENCE

Viramani, B. R. Redefining Industrial Relations. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations. 31 (2), 1995.PP.153-177.
Chellappa, H.V.V and Jhuraney, J. C. Causes of peace in Industrial Relations. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations,
18(1), 1982.PP.1-28.
3
Datta, S. K. Automation and Industrial Relations - Implications for employment utilizations and employment
workforce, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 25(3), 1990.p p. 254- 276.
4
Johri. C .K. Industrialism and Industrial Relations in India - the task ahead. Indian Journal of Industrial
RelationsVol.25, No.3January, 1990.pp- 230-242.
5
Ratnam, Venkata, C.S. - Economic reforms and labour- Productivity. Vol. 39, No.3, Oct-Dec.1998.pp 373-383.
6
Nath, Surendra-Developing new perspective on Industrial Relations-Role of Government. Indian Journal of Industrial
Relations -VOL.31, No.2, October, 1995.pp178-192.
7
Johnnie, Palmer. B-Methodological issues of Dunlops Industrial Relations System Theory-Indian Journal of
Industrial Relations. -Vol.27, No.3, January, 1992, pp227-241.
8
Nayar, Meenakshi-Effectiveness of Industrial Relations System at the enterprise level- Indian Journal of Industrial
Relations-Vol.21, No.1,July,1985.pp-1-14.
9
Sharma, Baldev .R and Rajan, Sundara. P. S. Organizational determinants of labour-management relations in India. INDIAN JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
-Volume19, No.1, July, 1983.pp 1-16.
10
Johri C.K. Industrial Relations as regulated by law-some suggestions for change. Indian Journal of Industrial
Relations-Vol.31, No.4, April, 1996.pp-439-449.
11
Reddy Y.R.K. Industrial Relations in the strategic environment- Indian Journal of Industrial Relations
-Vol.28,No.1,July 1992,pp 49-61.
12
Ghosh, Somanath,Industrial restructuring and labour relations:emerging patterns,implications and strategic choices,
Indian Journal of Industrial Relations.Vol.31, No.2, 1995 October. pp 211-230.
13
Khurana S.K. Industrial Relations in private and public sector industry in India-A comparative analysis. Indian
Journal of Industrial Relations.Vol.7, No.3, 1972 January. pp 411-431.
14
Chander, Devan Subhash. Gandhian Philosophy of Industrial Relations and its impact on Trade Union-problems and
prospects-The Indian Worker-October 8, 1979.pp 11-25.
15
Rao, S.N.-Industrial Relations As Gandhiji taught us. The Indian Worker, October 5, 1981.pp 5-8.
16
Sharma,Baldev.R, H R D and Industrial relations, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations-Vol.24, No.2, October ,
1988.pp-238 -244.
2

17

Pandey, S. N., Role of I R manger in changing industrial scenario; Indian Journal of Industrial Relations-Vol.34,
No.4, April, 1999.
18

Bhatnagar.S.andSharma P.C.Role and effectiveness of labour welfare officer in industrial relations, ; Indian Journal
of Industrial Relations-Vol.19, No.4, April, 1984.pp-507-511.
19

Palo,Susmitha, . Nayanthara Podhi and Swetha Panigrahi, Labour standards in the aftermath of Structural Adjustment
Programme: The case of India; Indian Journal of Industrial Relations-Vol.35, No.3, January, 2000.pp-381-398.
20

Leelavathy.D.S; Industrial Relations in India: Challenges and strategies. Southern Economist, July 15, 2000; pp-1721.
21

Srivastava, K.B.L., Changing power dynamics in the emerging industrial relations scenario, Management and labour
studies, Volume.26, Number.4, October, 2001, pp.219-227.
22
Srivasthava,Avinash kumar;Proactive Industrial Relations:-A Framework. Indian Journal of Industrial
Relations,Vol.40,No2,October,2004.pp-266-272.
23
Karim, Bazla-Industrial Relations in public undertakings in J&K- Indian Journal of Industrial Relations 7(2), 1972
.PP 269-274.
24
Reetha Mathur Industrial Relations in public enterprises-Pratheeksha publtcations, Jaipur, 1986.
25
De, Nithish, R,- An action plan for effective Industrial Relations in the public sector, Indian Journal of Industrial
Relations, Vol.8,No.3,Jan,1973.
26
Patil. B.R.-A contemporary Industrial Relations Scenario in India with reference to Karnataka. Indian Journal of
Industrial Relations.Vol33, No.3, January, 1998.
27
Gani, Abdul,- Industrial Relations in J&K- Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol.26, No.1, July,1990pp.53-67.
28
Gardner, D. G, & Pierce. J.L., Self Esteem and Self Efficiency within the Organizational Context: Group&
Organization Management.23, 1998, pp 48-70.
29
Mathieu. J. E., Hofmann, D.A,&Farr, J.L. Job Perception-Job Satisfaction Relations: An Empirical Comparison of
Three Competing Theories. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 56, 1993, pp. 370-387.
30
Kumara, U.A, & Koichi, F. Employee Satisfaction and Job Climate : An empirical study of Japanese Manufacturing
Employees. Journal of Business & Psychology, 3, 1989, pp. 315-329.
31
Takalkar, P.,& Coovert, M.D. International Replication Note : The dimensionality of Job Satisfaction in India.
Applied Psychology: An International Review, 43, 1994, pp. 415-426.

32

Porter, L.W., & Lawler, E.E. Managerial Attitudes and Performance. Homewood, IL-Irwin, 1968.
Judge, T.A, Thoresen C.J., Bono, J.E., & Patton, G.K. The Job Satisfaction Job Performance Relationship : A
Quatitative and Qualitative Review. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 2001, pp. 376-407
34
Miceli,M.P. Justice and Pay System Satisfaction. In R. Cropanzano ( Ed)., Justice in the work place: Approaching
fairness in HRM (PP. 256-283). Hiles Dale, NJ: Erlbaum., 1993.
35
O' Droscoll, M.P., Ilgen, D.R., & Hildreth, K. Time Devoted to Job and off Job Activities, Inter Role Conflict and
Affective Experiences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 1992, pp. 272-279.
36
Becker, T.E.,& Billings, R.S. Profiles of Commitment : An Empirical Test. Journal of Organizational Behavior,14,
1993, pp. 177- 190.
37
Mukherjee, Indrani-Industrial Workers in a developing society-A Sociological study; Mittal Publications, New
Delhi.1985.
38
Kathiresan, K.-Perception towards the specific aspects of job satisfaction: A case study; Indian Labour Journal,
28(6)1987.pp781-786.
39
Srivasthava, A.K and Vineta Srivasthava: Job Satisfaction-Myth and Reality; Indian Journal of Labour Economics.
V (1-2), 1983.pp 7185.
40
Narchal, Renu, Alagh Harveen and Kishore Rema: Job satisfaction-some correlates; Productivity-V (3), 1984.PP
367-370.
41
Rao, Sarvashwara G.V. and T. Ganguli-Perceived need satisfaction and importance of supervisory and clerical
personnel; Indian Journal of Psychology; 46, 1971, pp31-43.
42
Chathopadyaya, S. N. and Venkiteswara-Aspirations of industrial personnel-Indian Journal of Psychology95(1)1972,pp 39-52.
43
Mamta Panda,Industrial relations environment and work culture in public and private sector organizations:A case
study, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations-Vol.39,No:4,April,2004.pp. 465-488.
33

44

Srivasthava, S. K; Impact of Labour Welfare on Employee Attitude and Job Satisfaction. Management and Labour
Studies, Vol.29, No.1, February, 2004.pp.31-41.
45
Papola. T.S.-Inter-regional variations in manufacturing wages in India-industrial structure and region effects; Indian
Journal of Industrial Relations;Vol.7,No.3,1972.pp 355-375.
46
Verma. P.-Industrial conflicts in India-A statistical analysis; Vikalpa, Vol.3, No.3, July, 1978.pp 119-124.
47
Mahapathra, R.C.-Industrial Relations in public sector in India with special reference to Rourkela Steel Plant; Indian
Journal of Labour Economics.Vol.12,Nos 3-4,1976-77.
48
De, N.R. and Suresh Srivasthava-Gheraos in West Bengal- Economic and Political weekly. Vol.2, No.49, 1967, pp
2015, 2062, 2099.
49
Sivaprasad. K. and K. Sreerama Murthy-Industrial Relations in public sector undertakings-A case study of Bharath
Heavy Plates and Vessels;-Indian Journal of Labour Economics;XIV (3-4),1976-77, PP 104-110.
50
Gani, Abdul-Labour-Management Relations-A study of Textile Industry in J&K-Concept Publishing Co; New Delhi1991.
51
Verma, Pramod-Impact of economic growth on Industrial Relations-Economic Times-April 11, 1972.
52
Singh, V.B.: Climate for Industrial Relations-A Study of Kanpur Cotton Mills-Allied Publishers Pvt. Ltd; New Delhi1968.
53
Nagaraju, S-Industrial Relations Systems in India; Chugh Publications, Allahabad, 1981.
54
Ramanujam,G, Disharmony in industrial relations-Reasons and remedies; The Indian worker, January 29,1979.pp.35.
55
Ram Reddy.R,Emerging trends of industrial relations in coal mining industry,The Indian Journal of Labour
Economics,Vol.XXX,No.4,Jan,1988.p.280-294.
56
Mohanan, S-Some aspects of Industrial Relations since New Economic Policy-Southern Economist-May1, 1999-pp25-28.
57
Sudama Singh and Binod Bihari Singh, Some aspects of the emerging trends of industrial relations in India, Indian
Journal of Labour Economics-Volume-xxx,No.4, January, 1998; pp.318-325.
58

Jacob, K. K., Nature and Magnitude of Industrial Disputes in India: A Review of the Post Liberalization Period;
Southern Economist, October1, 2002, pp.14-16.
59
Mehrotra .B.N.-Collective agreements in India-Industrial Relations-18(3), 1966. pp 102-109.
60
Rao, Subba. A.V-Collective Bargaining in Indian industries-Indian Journal of Social Work-22(2), 1961. pp 81-88.
61
Guha. S.R-Collective bargaining and voluntary arbitration-Indian Journal of Social Work; 20(1), 1959.pp 7-13.
62
Bose, Bires. C-Bipartite negotiations-when, how and why?-Productivity 8(1), 1967. Pp-71-76.
63
Patil. B.R.-Conciliation in India-A study into its functioning and effectiveness; Chugh Publications, Allahabad.1977.
64
Shroff. A.D.-Conciliation and arbitration in Industrial disputes in India-Popular, Mumbay.1953.
65
Kumar, Pradip-The working of the conciliation machinery in Rajasthan-Indian Journal of Industrial Relations 2(1),
1966.pp 34-49.
66
Singh.V.B.-Op.Cited.
67
Nagaraju.S.-Op.Cited.

68

Murthy.B.S, Giri.D.V.and Rath.B.P.-Conciliation machinery in Orissa-Indian Journal of Industrial Relations 21(4),

1986.pp 428-447.
69
Ashdhir, Vijay-Industrial Relations in India Deep and Deep Publishers, New Delhi.1987.
70
Chatterjee. D-Arbitration-Industrial Relations-18, 1966.pp 3-6.
71
De, Nithish. R-Process consultation for effective Industrial Relations-Economic Times; May 27, 28. 1977.
72
Banerjee.R.N.-Industrial awards and Industrial Relations in India-New Age Publications; Calcutta.1963.
73
Giri.V.V.-Labour problems in the Indian industry-Asia Publishing House, Mumbai.1972.
74
Chowda.V.K.-State intervention-a determinant of Industrial Relations in India-Indian Journal of Labour Economics;
12(4), 1971. pp 70-73.
75
Murty B. S., The role of collective bargaining in industrial relations, The Indian worker,
October,6,1980.pp.51-55.
76
Ratna Sen, Emerging trends of industrial relations, Indian Journal of Labour Economics-Volume-xxx,No.4, January,
1988; pp. 306-314.
77

Mohanan, S -Op. Cited.

Mathur. A. S. and Mathur. J. S. - Trade Union Movement in India Chaithanya - Allahabad; 1962.
79
Padmanabhan. R-Growth of Trade Unions in India-1940-70Indian Journal of Industrial Relations:
16(1)1980.pp.125-132.
80
Nigam, M.S.-Trade Union Movement in India-Recent Trends and emerging patterns-Indian Journal of Labour
Economics- VI(4),1984,pp-419-424.
81
Ratnam, C. S. Venkata-Trade Union scenario in India-some reflections; -Indian Journal of Labour Economics-XXVI
(4), 1984. Pp-435-443.
82
Goel, R.M.-White collar unionism in India with special reference to Madhya Pradesh-Indian Journal of Economics,
January, 1968.
83
James P.A. and Rao, Bhaskara-Unionism in P&T and audit departments-Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 7(3),
1972.pp-465-472.
84
Rao, Madhusudan,-Union leadership profile in Vishakapatanam-Indian Journal of Industrial Relations-19(4)1984.pp502-506.
85
Seth, N. R. and Jain, S.P-Workers, leaders and politics-A case study-Indian Journal of Industrial Relations-3(3),
1968.
86
Halder, Ardhendu Sekhar-Our Industrial Relations scenario-Quacks treating Chronics-Lok Udyog-XIX (4), 1985. PP
11-18.
87
Ashraf, Mohammed Siddique-Political affiliation of Industrial Workers-An area study-Indian Journal of Industrial
Relations-10(2), 1974.
88
Ramaswamy. E. A-Politics and organized labour in India-Asian survey-13, 1973.
89
Chaudhuri. A.S-In plant Union leaders in public sector-Background and attitudes-Indian Journal of Industrial
Relations-16(1), 1980; pp-133-142.
90
Foneseca. A-Contribution of the Trade unions to development-Indian Journal of Industrial Relations-4(3), 1965.
91
Pandey. S. M. and Vikram. C. M.-Trade Unionism in Delhis building industry-Indian Journal of Industrial
Relations-4(3), 1969.pp-298-321.
92
Sinha. D and Pai. M. V. Motivational analysis of union membership-Indian Journal of Social Work-23 (4), 1963.pp343-349.
93
Murty. B.S and Das. R.K., Emerging trends of industrial relations: the case of collective bargaining practice in Indian
steel industry Indian Journal of Labour Economics-Volume-xxx,No.4, January, 1988; pp. 295-305.
78

94

Patil. B.R.-Contemporary Industrial Relations scenario in India with reference to Karnataka.-Indian Journal of
Industrial Relations-Vol.33,No:3,January 1998.
95
Sodhi. J. S. New economic policies and their impact on Industrial Relations-Indian Journal of Industrial RelationsVol.29, No: 1, July, 1993.
96
Zecharia, John-Comparative Industrial Relations in Japan and India-Indian Journal of Industrial Relations.Vol.26,
No.1, April, 1991.
97
Das, S. R. Mohan-Industrial Relations-The coming decades-Indian Journal of Industrial Relations-Vol.26, No.1,
July, 1990.
98
Sharma, R. Baldev-Managerial Unionism Implications for Industrial Relations-Indian Journal of Industrial
Relations-Vol.25, No.4, April, 1990.
99
Sodhi J.S.-Emerging Trends in Industrial Relations and Human Resources Management in Indian industries-Indian
Journal of Industrial Relations-Vol.30, No.1, July, 1999.
100
Sen, Ratna-Industrial Relations-Patterns and Trends-Indian Journal of Industrial Relations-Vol.32, No.3.January,
1997.
101
Mankidy, Jacob-Emerging patterns of Industrial Relations in India-Management and Labour Studies-Vol.18, N0:4,
October, 1993.
102
Singh, M. K. - Industrial Relations in Maharashtra-Indian Journal of Industrial Relations-pp-549-567.

103

Pandey, B.D.-The origin and development of personal function in India-A case study in TATA steel-Personal
Today-July-September; 1998. pp 12-15.
104

Chaudhuri K.K-In search of better Industrial Relations-Personnel Today-October-December 1998.pp-35-36.

Varma, K. Madhurendra-Role of management and trade unions in the new scenario-Personnel Today-OctoberDecember 1998.pp-10-14.
106
Rath, Devashish and Misra, Snigdharani-Future of Industrial Relations and Industrial Relations in the future-The
Indian scenario-Vikalpa ;Vol.21,No.4; October-December 1996. pp -47-54.
107
Rao, E.M and Patwardhan, Vikrant -Indian Trade Unions-on the brink of extinction?- Personnel Today-JulySeptember 1998. pp 17-25.
108
Gani, Abdul- op. cited.
109
Das, H. Trade Union Activism- Avoidable or Inevitable? Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, Volume 35, No.2,
October, 1999. pp. - 224-236.
105

110

Jhabavala, Renana, New forms of workers organization: Towards a system of Representation and voice, Indian
Journal of Labour Economics; 46(2).2003.
111
Bhangoo, Kesar Singh, Trade unions in globalised economy of India, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol.
41, No.4, April, 2006.pp.397-405.
112
Srivastava.D.K.,Trade union response to declining membership base:Best practices from Mumbai based Trade
unions, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, Volume 41, No.4, April, 2006. pp. - 355-374.
113

Ghosh,Biswajith,Economic reforms and trade unionism in India-A Micro view, Indian Journal of Industrial
Relations- Vol.43.No.3,January 2008.pp.355-384 .
114
Saini, Debi. S.-Industrial Democracy-Law and challenges in India-Indian Journal of Industrial Relations; 19(2),
1983. pp 191-2006.
115
Indira. K. and Harigopal.K-Participative management-Indian Management; 23(3), 1985. pp 39-44.
116
Sahu. B-Relatives of participation-The case of an engineering industry-Productivity-22(2)1981.pp 9-18.
117
Sinha. J.P.B and Sinha- A case of reversal in participation in management-Indian Journal of Industrial Relations10(2), 1974. Pp-179-189.
118
Indira.K and Harigopal.K- Op.cited.
119
Mehta, Prayag-Employees motivation and work satisfaction in a public enterprise-Vikalpa-11(3), 1977.
120
Warrior. S. K. - Meaningful participation in management-A new perspective-Indian Journal of Industrial Relations;
3(4), 1978.pp 445-466.
121
Lal. K. B.-Workers participation in management-The case of Integral Coach Factory, Perambur -Indian Journal of
Industrial Relations; 19(4), 1984.pp 454-468.
122
Joseph, Cheriyan-Making of a participatory forum-BHEL experience-Economic and political weekly-XXII (48),
1987. pp 143-152.
123
Sharma. B-Industrial Democracy-the Indian experience-Indian Journal of Industrial Relations-22(3), 1987, pp-254269.
124
Mukharjee, Surya. The Joint Management Councils in Gujarath- A study of current practices and performancesIndian Journal of Industrial Relations; 19(4), 1984. pp 443-453.
125
Viramani. B. R-Workers participation in management-Macmillan, New Delhi, 1978.
126
Biswas.S.K. - Workers participation in management-Industrial Relations Management-Mathur. B.L. (ed.) - Arihant
Publishing House, Jaipur; 1994.
127
Reddy, Ram-Industrial Relations in India-A study of Singareni collieries- Mittal Publications; New Delhi. 1990.
128
Mohanan.S-Op.cited.
129
Chaudhari.K.K. Op.cited.
130
Pillai, G.C. Gopal-An investigation into Industrial Strike Activities in Kerala- Ph .D. Thesis, Kerala University;
1993.
131
Nair, Ramachandran-Industrial Relations in Kerala-Sterling Publishing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi-1972.
132
Ibid.
133
George, Mathew-Impact of Trade Unionism on Industrial Relations in the Textile Mills of Kerala; Ph.D. Thesis,
University of Kerala, 1993.
134
Nair, K. Ramachandran-Collective bargaining-the Kerala experience-Indian Journal of Labour Economics, XXV
(1&2), 1982. PP 62-71.
135
PaulsonK.Paul, Industrial Relations in a Private Limited Rubber Company-A case study;Management and Labour
studies,Volume. 24,Number.4, October,1999.pp .264-269.
136
Nair, Rajendran. V-Industrial Relations and multiple trade unionisms in KSEB- Ph.D. Thesis-Kerala University;
1993.
137

Babu.P.Ramesh;Changing Consciousness and Image of Kerala Labour in the 20th century; Labour and
development,Vol.9,No.1,June,2003.pp.63-83.

138

Thomas, Jayan Jose, State Policy, industrial Structure and industrialization :The case of Kerala .Ph.D. Thesis, Indira
Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai ,2003
139
Patrick, Heller, From class struggle to class compromise: Redistribution and growth in a South Indian Case; Journal
of Development Studies, Volume 31, No.5, June, 1995.
140
Gopalakrishnan,M.B.; Labour relations in Kerala-Emerging trends and patterns; Paper presented in the International
seminar of Commerce Congress, Kottayam, Organised by Commerce Association of Kerala, December,2008.
141
Raghavan,V .P. On Keralas development and failures,The Indian Economic Journal,Volume.51,
Number 3&4.October 2003-March 2004.pp. 30-39.
142
Jacob, K. K; Grievance Redressal Procedure and Labour-management relations in State Level Public Enterprises
Labour and Development,Vol.11.No.1,June 2005.pp.34-44.
143

Vasanthagopal.R and Venugopalan.KV.Employeesinvolvement in trade union activities in public and private

enterprises: a comparative study. Southern Economist,Volume 47,No.17,January1,2009.pp.21-22.