MER PRESENTATION

BHEL , Bangalore – Personnel and

Industrial relations take over issues

PRESENTED BY: ASHISH SINGH 131, PALLABI DUTTA123, SAYAK BISWAS 103,
NISHITA SINGH 225, SREEJIB BISWAS 277
Brief Outline
 1976, BHEL a giant public sector
undertaking took over two industrial units of
the government of Karnataka, REMCO
(CED) and Mysore Porcelains Limited
(EPD)
Brief Outline
 CED was performing well in its business but with
a number of products in its line and low volume,
the company was losing its image in the market
with huge financial loses

 EPD was just breaking even or was making very

negligible profits even though they had 20%
financial and technological collaboration with
NGK insulators ltd., Japan and for the first
quarter they were a monopoly
ISSUES : CED
 After a few decades of rapid expansion CED’s
finances were running thin, so much so that
they could’nt remunerate their own employees.
Having seen this state of Remco the current
union was eager to be taken over by BHEL.
 Poor remuneration led to absenteeism,
pilferage, casual behavior at workplace
 Employee selection became a political agenda
ISSUES : EPD
 Illiterate & aged workforce given into
groupism & casteeism
 Current union leaders were
apprehensive of loosing power and
authority
 Internal squabbling between Union
leaders
THEORIES CONNECTED TO THE
ISSUES:
 Collective Bargaining : Plant Level
Negotiation
 Trade Union Act 1926
ALTERNATIVE 1.
 In the very beginning of the unrest Mr.
Natraj should have been terminated
from his services immediately and Mr.
Hanumanthu should have been
recognized as the new leader as he was
second in lead to Mr. Natraj.
ADVANTAGES
 Terminating the service tenure of Mr. Nataraj
would set an example for future and create an
impression about the management as a strict and
serious authority.

DISADVANTAGES

 Terminating Mr. Nataraj might not be acceptable

among his follower and could create an unrest in
the organization
ALTERNATIVE 2.
 The management could offer Mr.
Hanumanthu an ornamental position just
to satisfy his ego and project him as the
leader.
ADVANTAGES

This act would resist the immediate unrest in the organization

and would also
Help the management in making the leader work for the
organization which would be beneficial for future.

DISADVANTAGES
 Other leaders could come up with the
expectation of having a similar position
in the management and try to form new
groups and bring up new issues.
ALTERNATIVE 3.
 Mr. Hanumanthu should be fired for
creating an unrest in the organization
ADVANTAGE
 Mr. Hanumanthu being an egoistic
person would bring down Mr. Nataraj
along with him, which would result in
both the leaders moving out of their
positions.
Then the new leader could be influenced
by the management to favor them.
DISADVANTAGE
 With the removal of both the prominent
union leaders their could be an unrest
and chaos among the workers.
RECOMMENDATION
 The management could have taken
alternative 1 in the beginning of the
problem
 Alternative 2 in the middle of the
situation
 Alternative 3 as given in the case