Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Last Date of
Maximum Marks:
100
Attempt all the questions. All the questions are compulsory and
carry equal marks.
Section-A (50 marks)
1.
Industrial Relations Policy of the Government of India has shifted from
regulation, to
protection, to enabling. Terms of reference of the National
commission are set in view of the emerging economic scenario. Trace the
Government Policy formation and paradigm shifts therein over the years.
2.
What are the usual causes of Industrial Disputes in India? Has the
Industrial Relations
Machinery in India served the desired purpose of
prevention and settlement of Industrial disputes over the years? Illustrate
with two instances that may bring about adequacy or otherwise of the
present provisions.
Section-B (50 marks)
Case Study
DHR10
Industrial Relations & Labor Laws
Assignment II
Assignment Code: 2015DHR10B2
Submission: 15th November 2015
Last Date of
Maximum Marks: 100
Attempt all the questions. All the questions are compulsory and
carry equal marks.
Section-A (50 marks)
1.
Indian Labour Legislations have been greatly influenced by ILOs
conventions and recommendations. Elucidate by establishing direct relation
between the conventions /
recommendations by ILO and provisions
contained in any two prominent labour Legislations.
2.
The statutory social security schemes in India cater only to a small
proportion of the population. Even all industrial workers are not covered as
smaller establishments and those drawing salaries exceeding certain limits
are excluded from the benefits of various social security programs. Name
any five prominent social security legislations and
justify
the
above
statement with help of provisions of two of these legislations.
Section-B (50 marks)
Case Study
A joint venture company, Indo-Czech Private Ltd. was established in 2002, to
manufacture auto parts. It established its plant at Noida (UP) on a Plot
allotted by UP State Industrial Area Corporation. Commercial production
commenced in 2005. The same year, the Indian partner purchased an
Industrial Plot developed by Haryana State Industrial Corporation at Manesar,
near Gurgaon, Haryana. The Indian partner planned an industrial unit to
assemble a related product, again with foreign technology from a foreign firm
of a different Nationality. Though there was no violation of the legal
agreement entered into between the Indian Party and the Czech Company
which had established business at Noida, the Czech Company did not
appreciate the move by the Indian partner to go on his own and not involve
them in the business project at Manesar.
The JV with Czech company was doing well and declared its first-time
dividends in 2008, and continued to grow and make profits for the next three
years. Towards the close of 2011, the Czech Company decided to part ways,
and the Indian promoter inducted two of his school friends, on the Board of
Directors who agreed to buy the stock held earlier by the Czech Company, in
equal proportion.The new management made many changes including the
following:
a) They increased the salaries of executives and staff of the Unit to
reduce the gap in the pay structure of the executives and staff of this
Unit and the one run by the promoter director at Manesar, Haryana.
b) They invested 30 Crores for up- gradation of the facilities at the Factory
at Noida.
c) They shifted from 6days working to 7 days working per week t improve
the productivity and enhance the cost effectiveness of the Unit.
The shift from 6 days to 7 days working without any financial gains made
workers resist the change. At this Juncture, Corporate Manager (IR)
intervened and promised the workers that they would be paid for 30 days
instead of 26 days, but Director (HR) and GM (Operations), refused to agree
to this since they were not involved when the corporate manager (HR) made
the commitment.
The promise was not fulfilled which further complicated the problems. The
issues kept on lingering for 6 months. No decision could be taken because of
the difference of opinion among senior executives. In June 2012, the workers
gheraod the GM (Operations) to pressurize management. They succeeded
to the extent that the management agreed to give financial benefits with
retrospective effect of 4 years making it one additional year over and above
3 years of normal agreement. Workers were asked to give a notice of change
which the workers could not give till December, 2012 because of
disagreement among themselves. In the mean time, on recommendations of
GM (Operations) ir was decided to appoint an Assistant Manager (HR). This
appointment took 3-4 months because of discord in opinions of GM
(Operations) and Director (HR). However, Mr. Smart was appointed Assistant
Manager (HR) in October 2012.
Questions