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 EFFECTIVENE

S 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 o
ur 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 conse
nting to be our guide. She had been a great source of encouragement and inspire
d 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 Depa
rtment, Department of Management studies for giving constant encouragement
We express our hearty thanks to Mr.D.Umamaheswaran, Senior Personnel Officer, Lu
cas –TVS Ltd., who provided valuable guidance throughout the project in his busy s
chedule.
We thank our Management, Department Staffs, and Our Parents for their support an
d 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 me
chanism being followed.
The sample size is 35 and the population size is 140.
The tools used for the study are Percentage method and Correlation.
The study infers that most of employees are highly satisfied with the mechanism
being followed.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
i
LIST OF CHARTS
ii

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE NO.

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

APPENDICES
ANNEXURE I
40
ANNEXURE II
41

LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Table name Page No:
1.1 List of products manufactured 2
1.2 Clients 3
5.1 Distribution of respondents regarding temporary relief 17
5.2 Distribution of respondents based on age 18
5.3 Distribution of respondents towards supervisors’ level of skill 19
5.4 Distribution of respondents towards awareness of committees 20
5.5 Distribution of respondents towards decision given 21
5.6 Distribution of respondents towards the informal channel 22
5.7 Distribution of respondents towards real basis of identification of thei
r grievance 23
5.8 Distribution of respondents towards mechanism followed resolves grievanc
e or not 24
5.9 Distribution of respondents towards importance given to discussion and c
onference 25
5.10 Distribution of respondents regarding whom they redress for grievance
26
5.11 Distribution of respondents based on qualification 28
5.12 Distribution of respondents regarding awareness of various committees
29
5.13 Distribution of respondents regarding regular follow up 31
5.14 Distribution of respondents regarding supervisors’ authority 32
5.15 Correlation between Feel about decision and Real basis identified.
33
5.16 Values for correlation 33
5.17 Correlation between Discussion and Conference And Supervisor’s Skill level
34
5.18 Values for correlation
34

LIST OF CHARTS

Chart No:
Chart Name
Page No:
5.1 Distribution of respondents regarding temporary relief 17
5.2 Distribution of respondents based on age 18
5.3 Distribution of respondents towards supervisors’ level of skill 19
5.4 Distribution of respondents towards awareness of committees 20
5.5 Distribution of respondents towards decision given 21
5.6 Distribution of respondents towards the informal channel 22
5.7 Distribution of respondents towards real basis of identification of thei
r grievance 23
5.8 Distribution of respondents towards mechanism followed resolves grievanc
e or not 24
5.9 Distribution of respondents towards importance given to discussion and c
onference 25
5.10 Distribution of respondents regarding whom they redress for grievance
27
5.11 Distribution of respondents based on qualification 28
5.12 Distribution of respondents regarding awareness of various committees
30
5.13 Distribution of respondents regarding regular follow up 31
5.14 Distribution of respondents regarding supervisors’ authority 32
CHAPTER I
1.1 PROFILE OF THE COMPANY
Lucas - TVS was set up in 1961 as a joint venture of Lucas Industries plc., UK a
nd T V Sundaram Iyengar & Sons (TVS), India, to manufacture Automotive Electrica
l 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 Varit
y Corporation of the US in September 1996. The company designs, manufactures and
supplies advanced technology systems, products and services to the world s auto
motive, 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 grow
th over the last three decades.TVS is one of India s twenty large industrial hou
ses 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 reac
hes out to all segments of the automotive industry such as passenger cars, comme
rcial vehicles, tractors, jeeps, two-wheelers and off-highway vehicles as well a
s for stationary and marine applications. With the automobile industry in India
currently undergoing phenomenal changes, Lucas-TVS, with its excellent facilitie
s, is fully equipped to meet the challenges of tomorrow.
PRODUCTS
Lucas-TVS manufactures the most comprehensive range of auto electrical component
s 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 strin
gent, Lucas-TVS has ensured that each of its products is manufactured to meet gl
obal standards
LIST OF PRODUCTS MANUFACTURED
Lucas-TVS Product Range for Indian Market Lucas-TVS Product Range for US/E
uropean Market
Starter Motor
Starter Motor
Alternator
Alternator
Headlamp
Small Motor
14W Wiper Motor
WindShield Wiper Motor (GM Range)
LRW Products
Small Motor
Wiper Motor
Blower Motor
Fan Motor Dynamo Regulator
Dynamo Regulator
Dynamo
Dynamo
Auto Electricals
Ignition Coil
Distributor
Diesel fuel injection

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

DIVISIONS
Lucas TVS has grown hand in hand with the automobile industry in the country. Th
e 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 h
as 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 Aw
ard for the year 2004. This was announced by the Deming Prize Committee of Japan
ese 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 p
rompt and timely manner.
2. The grievance mechanism acts as a foundation for a harmonious and health
y relationship between employee and employer.
3. The grievance mechanism ensures a fair and just treatment of employee’s co
ncerns and prompt resolution of grievances without discrimination, coercion, res
traint or reprisal against any employee who may submit or be involved in a griev
ance.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
GRIEVANCE
Grievance is any discontent or dissatisfaction that affects organizational perfo
rmance. As such it can be stated or unvoiced, written or oral, legitimate or rid
iculous. If the dissatisfaction of employees’ goes unattended or the conditions ca
using it are not corrected, the irritation is likely to increase and lead to unf
avorable attitude towards the management and unhealthy relations in the organiza
tion.
The formal mechanism for dealing with such worker’s dissatisfaction is called grie
vance procedure. All companies whether unionized or not should have established
and known grievance methods of processing grievances. The primary value of griev
ance procedure is that it can assist in minimizing discontent and dissatisfactio
n that may have adverse effects upon co-operation and productivity. A grievance
procedure is necessary in large organization which has numerous personnel and ma
ny levels with the result that the manager is unable to keep a check on each ind
ividual, 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 s
teward.
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 grieva
nces. Variations may result from such factors as organizational or decision-maki
ng structures or size of the plant or company. Large organizations do tend to ha
ve 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 cert
ain degree of success in resolving disputes between the labour and the managemen
t. The labour union generally takes initiative to go for arbitration. When the u
nion so decides, it notifies the management. At this point, the union and compan
y 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 incl
uded 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 i
s 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 c
opy to the grievant.
Grievance materials should be maintained in a separate file from either personne
l files or records.

Articles related to grievance

 Measures of supervisory behaviors and supervisor’s knowledge of the collec
tive agreement should, intuitively, be related to the occurrence of grievable ev
ents, but there has been no theory advanced to explain grievable events. Kliener
, Nigkelsburg and Pilarski implicitly assumed that supervisor monitoring of emp
loyees 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 th
at 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 expe
ctancy theory could play in differentiating grievants and nongrievants. Although
not a complete test of expectancy theory, Lewin and Boroff did include the empl
oyees perceived effectiveness of the grievance procedure as an explanatory varia
ble. Surprisingly, this was not significantly related to grievance filing. Furth
er research focusing on expectancy theory and grievance filing that more fully d
evelops 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 ar
e formally filed by employees, the initiation of a grievance can come from emplo
yees or stewards. Complaining to the shop stewards is the employees’ role in the g
rievance initiation process. Both of these studies found the work group with emp
loyees who complained to the stewards more frequently had grievance rates. Emplo
yees’ complaining to their stewards is a precursor to grievance filing. The measu
re of consideration and structure were significantly related to frequency of emp
loyee complaints in Bemmels and the steward’s assessment of the supervisors’ knowled
ge of the collective agreement was negatively related to complaints.
Lewin and Peterson found a positive relationship with grievance procedure struct
ure and grievance rates. They also found higher grievance rates under procedures
that include provisions for expedited grievance handling. It was found that pr
ovisions allowing oral presentation of grievances was related to lower rates of
written grievances, and screening of potential grievances was related to lower r
ates of written grievance, and screening of potential grievances by a committee
or other union officials was associated with lower grievance rates. The number o
f steps in the grievance procedure and the length of time allowed for filing a g
rievance 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 m
easures reflecting the operation of the grievance procedure. They argued that su
bjective evaluations are the preferred method for evaluating grievance procedure
effectiveness. Effectiveness was difficult to interpret from measures reflectin
g the operation of grievance procedures such as grievance rates, settlement leve
ls and arbitration rates since it was not clear what the optimal magnitudes migh
t be for these measures. Furthermore the purpose of grievance procedure is to re
solve disputes about the interpretation and application of collective agreements
. Grievance procedures exist for the benefit of the employees, employers and uni
ons. 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 proce
dures have been found to relate to union commitment, employer commitment and dua
l commitment. Employer commitment has found to be negatively related to absentee
ism and turnover and union commitment has found to have a positive relationship
with union participation and with shop steward behavior in the grievance procedu
re. 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, nationa
l origin, age, veteran status, or handicapped.
Grievance corresponding rules violation was an employees’ interpretation of applic
ation of policies and procedures governing personnel policies, department work r
ules, unsafe or unhealthy working conditions, or other policies or procedures of
a working nature.
Disciplinary actions are the category least classified as a grievance. Legalisti
c 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 wer
e the open door policy, step-review method, peer-review also called the grievanc
e committee or roundtable, ombudsman and hearing officer. In the public sector s
tudy. The predominant method of grievance adjudication was the step-review metho
d used either singularly or in combination with a peer-review committee. The ste
p-review method had characteristics similar to the grievance / arbitration proce
dures 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 co
rrection 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 me

chanism.
2. To identify whether the grievance handling system leads to a favorable a
ttitude towards the management
3. To identify that the grievance handling system leads to a mutual underst
anding between workers and the management
4. To know the level of satisfaction towards the grievance handling procedu
re 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 acti
on. The research has been defined as “A careful investigation or enquiry especiall
y 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 ar
e the ways of obtaining information useful for assessing explanation.
TYPES OF RESEARCH
The type of research used in this project is descriptive in nature. Desc
riptive research is essentially a fact finding related largely to the present, a
bstracting generations by cross sectional study of the current situation .The de
scriptive 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 eco
nomic surveys and job and activity analysis.
DESCRIPTIVE RESEARCH AIMS
• To portray the characteristics of a particular individual situation or group(wit
h or without specific initial hypothesis about the nature of this characteristic
s).
• To determine the frequency with which something occurs or with which it is assoc
iated with something else( usually , but not always ,with a specific initial hyp
othesis).
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 sec
ond limitation is associated whether the statistical techniques dominate. The de
sire to over emphasis central tendencies and to fact in terms of Average, Correl
ation, Means and dispersion may not always be either welcome. This limitation ar
ises because statistics which is partly a descriptive tool of analysis can aid b
ut 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 th
e 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. I
t does not tell anything about cause and effect relationship. Correlation is des
cribd 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 sha
ll 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 c
orrelation between variables. When r = 0, it means no relationship between varia
bles.
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 Griev
ance 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 qu
estionnaire.
Secondary Data
Secondary data are collected from books and internet.
Research design
Research design is the specification of the method and procedure for acq
uiring the information needed to solve the problem.
The research design followed for this research study is descriptive research des
ign where we find a solution to an existing problem. The problem of this study i
s to find the effectiveness of Grievance Handling at Lucas- TVS Limited.
Sample Design
Sample Element : Employees at Lucas- TVS Limited.
Sample Size : 35 samples
Sample Test : Percentage Method & Correlation
Sample Media : Questionnaire
Sampling Method : Simple Random Sampling

CHAPTER V
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
Distribution of respondents regarding Temporary relief
Table: 5.1

Sl. No.
Temporary relief
No. of respondents
Percentage
1
Yes
19
54.3
2
No
16
45.7
Total
35
100
Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 54.3% of respondents state that they ar
e being provided with temporary relief and 45.7% stating they are not being prov
ided relief.

Distribution of respondents regarding Tempor

ary relief
Chart No: 5.1

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 ag
e group 19-25 and 82.9% are between the age group 26-30.

Distribution of respondents based on age

Chart No: 5.2

Distribution of respondents towards supervisors’ level of skill

Table: 5.3

Sl.No. Supervisor possess necessary skill

Frequency
Percentage

1
very highly skilled
32
91.4

2
moderately skilled
3
8.6
Total
35
100

Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 91.4% of respondents state that their s
upervisor 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

Distribution of respondents towards awareness of committees

Table: 5.4

Sl.No
Awareness of committees
Frequency
Percentage
1
yes
35
100.0
Total
35
100
Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 100% of respondents are aware of the va
rious committees that are framed for redressing their grievance.
Distribution of respondents towards awareness of committees
Chart No: 5.4

Distribution of respondents towards decision given

Table: 5.5
Sl.No. Decision given is satisfactory or not Frequency Percentage
1
Highly satisfactory
31
88.6
2
Moderately satisfactory
4
11.4
Total
35
100
Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 88.6% of respondents are highly satisfi
ed towards the decision given by the management and 11.4% of respondents are mod
erately satisfied towards the decision.
Distribution of respondents towards decision given

Chart No: 5.5

Distribution of respondents towards the informal channel

Table: 5.6

Sl.No Informal channel No. of respondents Percentage

1
co worker
23
65.7

2
peer
12
34.3
Total
35
100

Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 65.7% of respondents communicate to the
ir co-workers and 34.3% of respondents communicate to their peer.
Distribution of respondents towards the informal channel
Chart No: 5.6

Distribution of respondents towards real basis of identification of their grieva

nce
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 tha
t real basis is identified and 22.9% of respondents agree that real basis is ide
ntified.

Distribution of respondents towards real basis of identification of their grieva

nce
Chart No: 5.7

Distribution of respondents towards mechanism followed resolves grievance or not

Table: 5.8

Sl.No.
Mechanism resolves grievance or not
No. of respondents
Percentage
1
yes
34
97.1
2
no
1
2.9
Total
35
100
Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 97.1% of respondents agree that mechani
sm resolves grievance and 2.9% of respondents disagree that mechanism does not r
esolve grievance.

Distribution of respondents towards mechanism followed resolves grievance or not

Chart No: 5.8

Distribution of respondents towards importance given to discussion and conferenc

e

Table: 5.9

Sl.No.
Discussion and conference
No. of respondents
Percentage
1
strongly agree
29
82.9
2
agree
6
17.1
Total
35
100
Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 82.9% of respondents strongly agree tha
t discussion and conference is facilitated and 17.1% of respondents agree that d
iscussion and conference is facilitated.
Distribution of respondents towards importance given to discussion and conferenc
e
Chart No: 5.9

Distribution of respondents regarding whom they redress for grievance

TABLE NO: 5.10
Sl.No. Whom do you redress Frequency Percentage
1 office bearers 4 11.4
2 committee members 16 45.7
3
hr 3 8.6
4
mangers 2 5.7
5
union members 7 20.0
6
counselor 1 2.9
7
friends 1 2.9
8
co workers 1 2.9
Total
35
100

Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 11.4% of respondents communicate grieva
nces 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 throu
gh friends and 2.9 through co workers.

Distribution of respondents regarding whom they redress for grievance

Chart No: 5.10

Distribution of respondents based on qualification

Table: 5.11

Sl.No. Qualification Frequency Percentage

1
higher secondary
31
88.6
2
diploma
1
2.9
3
under graduate
3
8.6
Total
35
100

Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 88.6% of respondents are qualified up t
o higher secondary, 2.9% of respondents are diploma and 8.6% are under graduate.
Distribution of respondents based on qualification

Chart No: 5.11

Distribution of respondents regarding awareness of various committees

Table: 5.12

Sl.No. Various committees

Frequency
Percentage
1 canteen,sga 1 2.9
2 Sga,tei, transport 4 11.4
3 transport,welfare,sga 6 17.1
4 transport, safety, canteen 4 11.4
5 safety,transport,sga 4 11.4
6 canteen,tei,safety,transport 3 8.6
7 tei,sga,canteen,transport 9 25.7
8 transport, welfare, safety 2 5.7
9 tei,sga,transport,welfare 2 5.7
Total
35
100
Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 2.9% of respondents are aware of cantee
n-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,transpo
rt,sga ,8.6% of respondents are aware of canteen,tei,safety,transport,25.7% of r
espondents are aware tei,sga,canteen,transport,5.7% of respondents are aware tra
nsport, welfare, safety and 5.7% of respondents are aware of tei,sga,transport,w
elfare.

Distribution of respondents regarding awareness of various committees

Chart No: 5.12

Distribution of respondents regarding regular follow up

Table: 5.13

Sl.No.
Regular follow-up
No. of respondents
Percentage
1
Yes
35
100.0
Total
35
100

Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 100% of respondents have agreed that th
ere is regular follow up to ensure right decision is given.
Distribution of respondents regarding regular follow up
Chart No: 5.13

Distribution of respondents regarding supervisors’ authority

Table: 5.14
Sl.No Supervisor has given
authority No. of respondents Percentage

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 su
pervisor is given authority.
Distribution of respondents regarding supervisors’ authority
Chart No: 5.14

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
Feel about decision given
highly satisfactory
25
6
31
moderately satisfactory
2
2
4
Total
27
8
35

Table: 5.16
Values for correlation
∑x2 ∑y2 ∑xy
180.5 364.5 256.5

∑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
ANALYSIS USING CORRELATION
To know whether there is correlation between discussion and conference and super
visor has skill
Let X be Discussion and conference.
Let Y be Supervisor has skill.
Table: 5.17

supervisor has skill Total

very highly skilled moderately skilled

discussion and conference
strongly agree
28
1
29

agree
4
2
6

Total
32
3
35

Table: 5.18
Values for correlation
∑x2 ∑y2 ∑xy
420.5 264.5 333.5

∑xy
r = ______________
√ (∑x2 * ∑y2 )

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 re
lief 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 tha
t 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 inform
al channel.
7. 77.1% of respondents strongly agree that real basis of there is identifi
ed.
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 fa
cilitated rather than executive authority.
10. 45.7% of respondents’ immediately redress their grievance through committe
e members.
11. 88.6% of respondents are qualified up to higher secondary.
12. 25.7% of respondents are aware of tei, sga, canteen, transport committee
s available.
13. 100% of respondents have agreed that there is regular follow up to ensur
e right decision is given.
14. 100% of respondents have agreed that supervisor is given authority to ta
ke action necessary to resolve the problem.
15. When there is deviation in the real basis identification it will be refl
ected in the level of satisfaction regarding decision given.
6.2 SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Job descriptions, responsibilities should be as clear as possible. Every
one should be informed of company’s goals and expectation including what is expect
ed from each individual.
2. Informal counseling helps to address and manage grievances in the workpl
ace.
3. Conflict management in the organization will be helpful to reduce the nu
mber of grievance rates.
4. Open door policy can be used. The barriers that exist between the variou
s categories are to some extent broken by personal contact and mutual understand
ing.
5. Suggestion boxes can be installed. This brings the problem or conflict o
f interest to light.
6. Accident rates, Requests for transfers, Resignations, and disciplinary c
ases should be analyzed since they reveal the general patterns that are not appa
rent.
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 producti
vity.

CHAPTER VII
CONCLUSION

The study reveals that the Grievance handling mechanism is satisfactory. The org
anization is recognizing the importance of satisfying the employees and retainin
g them. Further improvements can be made so that all members are highly satisfie
d 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- HI

LL.
2. Arun monappa and Saiyadain, Mirza S., Personnel management, TATA McGraw-
HILL.
3. Flippo, Edwin B., Personnel management, McGRAW-HILL International Public
ations.

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 availab
le

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 w
hich
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 mutu
al 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 rath
er 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 u
p 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 probl
em?
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 skill
s 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 th
e problem?
i.Has given authority[ ]
ii.Does not have authority[ ]
31. Are proper records maintained on each grievance?
i.Yes[ ]
ii.No[ ]