CHAPTER I

GREIVANCE

Dissatisfaction is any state or feeling of discontent. Dissatisfaction orally made known by one
employee to another is a complaint. A complaint becomes a grievance when brought to the notice of the
management.
According to Fillip, The term would include any discontent and dissatisfaction that affects
organizational performance. It can either stated or unvoiced, written or oral, legitimate or ridiculous.
1. A complaint is a discontent that has not assumed importance.
2. A complaint becomes grievance when the employee feels that injustice has been
committed.

GRIEVANCE HANDING

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

can be stated or unvoiced, written or oral, legitimate or ridiculous. If the dissatisfaction of employees
goes unattended or the conditions causing it are not corrected, the irritation is likely to increase and lead
to unfavorable attitude towards the management and unhealthy relations in the organization.

The formal mechanism for dealing with such workers dissatisfaction is called grievance
procedure. All companies whether unionized or not should have established and known grievance
methods of processing grievances. The primary value of grievance procedure is that it can assist in
minimizing discontent and dissatisfaction that may have adverse effects upon co-operation and
productivity. A grievance procedure is necessary in large organization which has numerous personnel and
many levels with the result that the manager is unable to keep a check on each individual, or be involved
in every aspect of working of the small organization.
1

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

According to Bemmels, Reshef and Stratton-Devine included the shop stewards assessment of
how frequently employees approach them with complaints. Although most grievances are formally filed
by employees, the initiation of a grievance can come from employees or stewards. Complaining to the
shop stewards is the employees role in the grievance initiation process. Both of these studies found the
work group with employees who complained to the stewards more frequently had grievance rates.
Employees complaining to their stewards is a precursor to grievance filing.

The measure of

consideration and structure were significantly related to frequency of employee complaints in Bemmels
and the stewards assessment of the supervisors knowledge of the collective agreement was negatively
related to complaints.

According to Lewin and Peterson found a positive relationship with grievance procedure
structure and grievance rates. They also found higher grievance rates under procedures that include
provisions for expedited grievance handling. It was found that provisions allowing oral presentation of
grievances was related to lower rates of written grievances, and screening of potential grievances was
related to lower rates of written grievance, and screening of potential grievances by a committee or other
union officials was associated with lower grievance rates. The number of steps in the grievance procedure
and the length of time allowed for filing a grievance were not related to grievance rates.
2

According to Lewin and Peterson argued that evaluations of grievance procedure effectiveness
should include subjective evaluations by the participants as well as objective measures reflecting the
operation of the grievance procedure. They argued that subjective evaluations are the preferred method
for evaluating grievance procedure effectiveness. Effectiveness was difficult to interpret from measures
reflecting the operation of grievance procedures such as grievance rates, settlement levels and arbitration
rates since it was not clear what the optimal magnitudes might be for these measures. Furthermore the
purpose of grievance procedure is to resolve disputes about the interpretation and application of collective
agreements. Grievance procedures exist for the benefit of the employees, employers and unions. If the
parties were satisfied with the operation of the grievance procedure, it seems to more important than
attaining some predetermined optimal magnitude of grievance filing or when, where, and how grievances
are being resolved.

What is grievance procedure?

Depending on the organization the grievance procedure will differ. This is usually a process
undertaken by organist somebody .It usually undertaken as a result of action or gesture that has offended a
person or persons. It is usually a serious procedure and in some organization can result in termination of
contract; however this is entirely down to the severity of the offence committed. For more information of
your organizations grievance procedures please contact your Human Resources representative or your
local union representative.

The grievance procedure is the method by which a grievance is filed and carried through different
steps to an ultimate decision. The following are the features of a grievance procedure:

a. It should be demonstrably fair: The attitude of Supervisors is important here. All

Supervisors should accept the employees right of appeal as long as no bypassing is involved. In a
unionized concern, Supervisors should also accept the employees right to be represented, if they so desire,
by a union official.
b. The provisions should be clear cut: No grievance procedure can be expected to work
satisfactorily unless there are definite provision, consistently adhered to, determining what is to be done,
when any by them. For example, every employee should know i) to whom complains are to be addressed,
ii) in what form (oral or written), iii) what restrictions and, iv) how long a complainant should expect to
wait before finding out what action has been taken or planned in connection with his complains.
c. It should be simple: The grievance procedure should be sufficiently simple so that it can
easily and quickly be explained to each new employee before s/he begins working for the organization
and so that it can be readily understood even by a person who has had relatively little formal education.
d. It should function promptly: Prompt action is not only desirable from the complainants
point of view; it is also in managements interest. Under delay can be costly in the growth and spread of
employee dissatisfaction. While an employee is waiting to see that, if anything, management will do
about his complaint; his dissatisfaction is apt to loom large in his mind.

Handling Grievances: Concept and Procedure

A grievance is any dissatisfaction or feeling, of injustice having connection with ones

employment situation which is brought to the attention of management. Speaking broadly, a grievance is
any dissatisfaction that adversely affects organizational relations and productivity. Though it is presumed
that a grievance has an adverse affect upon performance, some types of dissatisfaction may be sources of
good.
4

In the opinion of Indian National Commission of Labor, complaints affecting one or more
individual workers in respect to wage payment, overtime allowances, leave, transfer, promotion, seniority,
work assignments and discharge constitute grievances. The definition does not separate the subject matter
from the undesirable attitude of the aggrieved. The definition must be accepted to mean anything activity,
policy, executive or practice in the organization as a source of a grievance. The reference of expressed
grievance does not imply the exclusion of an unexpressed grievance. The definition does not imply any
judgment about injustice, unfairness, rationality or emotionality of the grievance. It implies respect for the
opinion of the aggrieved.
A grievance can be any discontent or dissatisfaction whether expressed or not and whether valid
or not, arising out of anything connected with the organization that an employee thinks, believes or even
feels is unfair, unjust or inequitable. In short, grievance is a state of dissatisfaction, expressed or
unexpressed, written or unwritten, justified or unjustified having

The usual steps in grievance procedure are

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

Grievance procedure Handling Process

Purpose

Exit Criteria
Entry Criteria

Exit
ExitCriteria
Criteria

& Output

Purpose
o

This documents deals with all the processes to be followed in order to deal with any kind of
grievances faced by any Employee.

This is very important from the organizational point of view as grievance leads to stress and may
lower the productivity of the candidate as well as hamper the work of the organization.

Entry Criteria
o

Grievance Form

Exit Criteria
o

All grievances should be taken care within two days.

Output
o

Grievance Form

Decision documents

Training area.
6

Arbitration

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

Articles related to grievance

Measures of supervisory behaviors and supervisors knowledge of the collective agreement

should, intuitively, be related to the occurrence of givable events, but there has been no theory advanced
to explain givable events. Kliener , Nigkelsburg and Pilarski implicitly assumed that supervisor
monitoring of employees will increase the number of grievable events, but a theoretical basis or rationale
for this assumed relationship is not discussed.
Grievant were less satisfied with their jobs, had poorer attitudes toward their line supervisors, had greater
feelings of pay inequity, had stronger beliefs that workers should participate in decision-making, were
less satisfied with their unions, and more active in their unions. The lower satisfaction with the union
among grievant may be due to dissatisfaction with the processing of grievances. Grievant were younger
and had less education than non grievant.

Grievance could be classified into 4 basic types

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

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

Grievance corresponding rules violation was an employees interpretation of application of

policies and procedures governing personnel policies, department work rules, unsafe or unhealthy
working conditions, or other policies or procedures of a working nature.

Disciplinary actions are the category least classified as a grievance. Legalistic approach was used
to handle such cases. With the possibility of adverse legal action arising from unjust discipline, separate
systems are often established in discipline cases to ensure the employees complete due process rights.

Guidelines processing

When processing grievances, there are several important guidelines to consider:

Check the grievant title and employment status to determine if he / she are included in a union
eligible classification.

Note the supervisors respondent obligation under the grievance procedure.

Review the requested solution to the grievance. Determine if the relief sought is beyond a
supervisors authority to grant.

Review all policies or other information related to the grievance.

Conduct a thorough investigation of the allegations.

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

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

Procedure Description
Table-1

S.No

Process Step

Responsibility

Periodicity/Time Lines

Work Products

Grievance Reporting

Employee/Superior

Need based

Grievance Form

Decision

COO/HR/Employee

Within two business days

Decision
Document/Training
Area identification

Table-2
10

Sl.No

Document

Form

Responsibility

Grievance Form

Hard Copy

Concerned
Employee/Superior

Decision
Document

Hard Copy

Name of the person

who will be
responsible for
updating

Expected Service
time

HR

Need based

CEO/COO/HR
HR

Within two business

days

Important Note Description

All timelines missed both from the employees and any departments would be reported to the
defaulters superior through the Monthly/Quarterly Status Reports. All affected groups must adhere to the
timelines as defined in the process to ensure compliance.

Benefits of having Grievance procedure:

The grievance procedure provides a means for identifying practices, procedures, and
administrative policies that are causing employee complaints so that changes can be considered.

They reduce costly employment suits.

A grievance procedure allows managers to establish a uniform labour policy.

A grievance system can be a reliable mechanism to learn of, and resolve employee dissatisfaction.
It can produce early settlements to disputes or provide for correction of contested employment
issues.
11

Grievances and Grievances Handling

1. Grievances or conflicting thoughts are part of industrial life.
2. It is essential to bring this conflict to the surface.
3. All conflicts cannot be eliminated but their exposure will contribute towards their reduction.
4. Such exposures lead to adjustments and further improved organizational effectiveness.

Method of Bringing Conflict to Surface

1. Grievance procedure
2. Direct observation
3. Suggestion boxes
4. Personal counselor
5. Exit interviews
6. Miscellaneous channels

Characteristics of Grievances
(i)

It may be unvoiced or expressly stated.

(ii)

It may be written or oral.

(iii)

It may be valid, legitimate or untrue or false.

(iv)

It may relate to the organizational work.

(v)

An employee may feel an injustice has been done.

(vi)

It may affect the performance or work.

Grievances generally give rise to unhappiness, frustration, indifference, discontent, poor morale,
and poor efficiency THAT IS CHANGE IN ATTITUDE, PERCEPTION AND BEHAVIOR.

Types of Grievances
12

Visible grievances
An employee may feel that there has been an infringement of his rights.
Grievances exist in the minds of individuals.

Hidden grievances
Grievances may be concerning employment, working conditions, change of service
conditions, biased approach, non-application of principle of natural justice, workloads and work
norms.

Basic Element of Grievance Procedure

Existence of sound channel.

The procedure should be simple, definite and prompt.

It should be clearly defined.

Helpful attitude of management.

Fact-oriented system.

Respect for decisions.

Adequate publicity.

Periodic Review.

Steps in Handling Grievances

1. Receive and define the nature of dissatisfaction.
13

(a) Manner and attitude when complaint is received

(b) Assessment must be made that the complaint is presented fairly.
(c) Statement and issues must not be pre-judged.
(d) Proper time and attention is given.
2. Get the facts
(a) Facts be separated from impressions and opinions.
(b) Consult the policies.
(c) Consult the records.
3. Analyze and decide.
1. Apply the answer.
2. Follow-up

Need for Grievance Procedure

Identification and analysis of grievances, nature nod causes.

Helps at formulating and implementing the policies and programmes.
It is problem solving, dispute-settling mechanism.
Strengthen good industrial relationship.
It detects the flaws in working conditions and helps to take corrective measures.
Build good morale, maintains code of discipline.
Brings uniformity in handling grievances.
It develops faith of employees.
Reduces personality conflicts.
It acts as a pressure valve.
14

 Provides judicial protection to the employees.

Provides avenues to present the problems

Principles of Handling Grievances

A principle is a basic rule which, if followed is likely to lead to desirable results. It is not an
absolutely certain road to success because laws of human behavior are nonexistent. However, principles
do work most of the time and that is why it is so helpful to discover principles and then rely upon them. In
the field of handling grievances, a number of principles have been discovered by trial and error and these
are as follows:
Principles of interviewing: In handling grievances, a considerable amount of time must be spent
talking to employees, gathering information from them. Such talks are to be more effective, should follow
definite patterns and adhere to some well-tested rules.
Place the employees at ease: To begin with every effort should be exerted to make the employee
who has a grievance, feel at keep the employee sense. As good a way as any to attain a relaxed is to
encourage and allow the employee to talk completely and fully about these troubles.
Encourage talk: Another principle of good interviewing is to allow the worker to tell his story
and retell it. In this way, the employee will not only get out the whole complaint but will tend to call off in
doing so.
Select a favorable location: In addition, discussion or interviews should be held wherever
possible under the best conditions. By this is meant a quiet and secluded spot where the conversation
cannot be overhead. If possible, it should also be out of right.

15

Hear the case fully: The interviewer should seek to keep his views and opinions entirely to
himself until the story has been told and the time has come for some expression. He will, therefore, have
to keep quiet. Even though he discovers or decides upon his solution or answer immediately, he remains
silent until the employee is fully heard.
Reach a definite closure: When the interview is coming to its conclusion, the supervisor must be
prepared to state his positions clearly, accurately and without any attitude of ill feeling or disregard for the
employee. In stating his/her position, s/he needs not to be prepared to give a final and definite answer. If
such an answer is possible, that is well and good. If a final answer is not available, the aggrieved
employee should be told specifically what other steps must be, and are going to be taken and why.
Moreover, a definite time for another meeting should be set; it possible, in this way, the employees will
more likely feel that the management is fairly and courageously seeking a solution.

Role of Supervisor in Grievance Handling

Ordinarily, the supervisor should be accorded the first opportunity to handle grievances.
Employees should be required to present their grievances to their Supervisors. Unless this rule is
stabilized and enforced, supervisors will soon lose face with employees and become unimportant cogs in
the organization.
On paper supervisory role is the first step in the grievance procedure. In practice, the HR
department answers all grievances. This could be done in number of ways. In one way the supervisor
might actually give to the worker, but it would be an answer that obtains as a result of prior discussions or
consultations with the HR Department.
The greatest opportunity of the settlement of a grievance lies in the initial step of the procedure.
The higher the discontent rises, though the organization, the more difficulty it is to resolve. As a result,
16

the supervisor should always be given the authority to settle grievances. They are in the best position to
make a full investigation of the facts of the problems. They can collect written data and examine records
as well as interview employees to compel a full account of the acts and history surrounding a case.
Grievances tend to be settled most expeditiously and to the satisfaction of all parties concerned in those
Organizations where the front line Supervisors play an important role

17

Grievance Redressed System

Enables the parties to resolve differences in peaceful, orderly and expeditious manner. Enables the
parties to investigate and discuss the problem.
Open-door policy
Step ladder type
Grievance handling committee

Dos in Handing Grievances

Investigate and handle each case carefully

Talk to the employee.
Enforce the time limit.
Visit the work area or place of grievance.
Determine witnesses.
Examine records.
Examine witnesses.
Evaluate grievance.
Permit full hearing.
Identify the relief an employee is expecting.
Command the respect of all.
All discussions privately
Keep superiors informed.
Ensure proper productivity.
Stick to labor agreements.
18

 Connection with employment situation.

Things to Remember in Grievance Handling

Few aspects are essential to remember during a grievance handling procedure.

Receive the Grievance well: Pay full attention to the aggrieved, do not interrupt him/her, ask
questions, tell him/her to repeat his problem, repeat the essentials in your own words, and assure him/her
of prompt action.
Get the facts: Check every angle, check existing rules/procedures, check organization practices,
and examine employee records.
Take Action: Make correction if organization is wrong, maintain your decision, if right explain
your position, and pass all facts to next step or level
Follow-up: Make sure that action was carried out, correct potential grievances, and maintain an
atmosphere promoting the highest morale.

Guidelines for Grievance Handling

With a view to make a grievance handling procedure successful following guidelines are
suggested: put the employee at ease, listen with sincere interest, discuss - do not argue, get the story
straight, get all the facts, consider the employees viewpoint, be willing to admit mistakes, dont pass the
buck, give the benefit of doubt, use authority judiciously, avoid snap judgment, time your decision, how
to say no, save the face of complainer, take prompt action, and dont let it happen twice.
19

A grievance is any dissatisfaction or feeling, of injustice having connection with ones

employment situation which is brought to the attention of management. Speaking broadly, a grievance is
any dissatisfaction that adversely affects organizational relations and productivity. Though it is presumed
that a grievance has an adverse affect upon performance, some types of dissatisfaction may be sources of
good.
In the opinion of Indian National Commission of Labor, complaints affecting one or more
individual workers in respect to wage payment, overtime allowances, leave, transfer, promotion, seniority,
work assignments and discharge constitute grievances. The definition does not separate the subject matter
from the undesirable attitude of the aggrieved. The definition must be accepted to mean anything activity,
policy, executive or practice in the organization as a source of a grievance. The reference of expressed
grievance does not imply the exclusion of an unexpressed grievance. The definition does not imply any
judgment about injustice, unfairness, rationality or emotionality of the grievance. It implies respect for the
opinion of the aggrieved.
A grievance can be any discontent or dissatisfaction whether expressed or not and whether valid
or not, arising out of anything connected with the organization that an employee thinks, believes or even
feels is unfair, unjust or inequitable. In short, grievance is a state of dissatisfaction, expressed or
unexpressed, written or unwritten, justified or unjustified having connection with employment situation.

Benefits of Grievance Procedure

All employee complaints and dissatisfactions are in actual practice not settled satisfactorily being
the first level supervisors. There may be many reasons for this - the supervisors may lack the necessary
human relations skill to deal effectively with his people. He may lack the authority to take the action. In
such a situation, the employee must be able to appeal his case to some higher official.

20

The social organization of a factory is very much like a complicated machine in the shop. Both
need constant attention and frequent adjustment. Grievances, which are expressed, are symptoms, which
should be carefully studies by management to determine the real causes of human machine breakdown.
They signal to management that part of its human relations is not functioning properly and needs
adjustment.
Another benefit of grievance system is that they help to catch and solve problems before they
become serious. If problems are allowed to accumulate unsolved, their quantity may get so great that they
have enough pressure to blow the lid off the whole shop.
A grievance handling system serves as an outlet for employee frustrations, discontents and gripes
like a pressure release value on a steam boiler. Employees do not have to keep their frustrations bottled up
until eventually discontent causes explosion.
The existence of an effective grievance procedure reduces like hood of arbitrary action by
Supervisors because the Supervisors know that the employees are able to protect such behavior and make
protests heard by higher management. The very fact that employees have a right to be heard and are
actually heard helps to improve morale. In view of all these, every organization should have a clear cut
procedure for grievance handling.

Guidelines for Grievance Handling

With a view to make a grievance handling procedure successful following guidelines are
suggested: put the employee at ease, listen with sincere interest, discuss - do not argue, get the story
straight, get all the facts, consider the employees viewpoint, be willing to admit mistakes, dont pass the
buck, give the benefit of doubt, use authority judiciously, avoid snap judgment, time your decision, how
to say no, save the face of complainer, take prompt action, and dont let it happen twice.

21

CHAPTER II
PROFILE OF THE ORGANISATION
INTRODUCTION
The Murugappa group is today an industry leader in many fields and enjoys a high
degree of credibility in he market place. Started 100 years ago as a small family run
business in indigenous financing, the group is currently INR52,000 million (USD 1
BILLION) corporate with diversified interests in abrasives, engineering, farm inputs,
plantations, sugar, bio products, chemicals, nutraceuticals.
The group is also the first and only business group in Asia to have been awarded
the IMD DISTINGUSHED FAMILY BUSINESS AWARD by the internationally famous
management development institute located in Lausanne, Switzerland. With a current
turnover of 1billion dollars, their presence in spread across 12 states in India in the form
of 42 manufacturing units out of which 21 are recipients of the ISO 9000 certification.
Right through its one hundred years of evolution, the group has maintained
transparency in its activities and enjoys and EXCELLENCY REPUTATION for high
ethical standards in whatever business it is in. with nearly half its turnover from agro
based products, the group is also known to be very environment conscious and eco
friendly.
The Murugappa group with a turnover of 5,000 cores is spread across 12 states in
India with 42 manufacturing units. With a workforce of over 22,500 employee it has
interests in diverse business groups and twenty one of its units are recipients of ISO 9000
Certification.

22

The Murugappa group is well known corporate with diverse business activities.
The groups business interests are in the following :

Abrasives Building
Material
Engineering
Farm Inputs
Financial Services
Food processing
Marketing Services
Plantations
Sugar, Bio Products & Chemicals
As a pioneer, the group enjoys leadership status in the home market in most of

these businesses. The group is organized into 27 strategic business units (Subs) spanning
several unit companies.
The groups values and beliefs are firmly rooted in the philosophy enunciated by
the Arthashastra, the ancient Indian treatise on economic and political wisdom.
The fundamental principal of economical activity IS that no man you transact
with will lose; then you shall not.
Established in the year 1788, parry is presently engaged in a wide galaxy of
diversified activates. It became a member of the Murugappa group in the year 1981 and
thereafter the story has been one of tumaround and of steady growth.
The company has been a pioneer in many fields, including setting up of Indias
first chemical fertilizer plant at Ennore, Sugar plant at Nellikuppam and sanitary ware
plant at Ranipet E.I.D. Parry (India) Ltd.

23

The history of Parrys IS a saga of growth and dynamism spanning over two
centuries. Established in the year 1788, today Parry is engaged in a wide galaxy of
diversified activities.
It became a member of the Murugappa group in the year 1981 and thereafter story
has been one of turnaround and of steady growth. E.I.D. Parry has evolved into one of
the largest business groups in a wide-range of products that can be broadly dived into
following three groups:
Building Materials group - Ceramic Sanitary were Sugar, Bio Products &
Chemicals Sugar, Alcohol, Power Organic Manure and Chemicals.
Sugar
The history of the Indian Sugar Industry has been closely linked with that of
Parrys. Parry set up the first Sugar Factory in 1842 at Bandipalayam and currently has
one of its units established at Nellikuppam, Cuddalore District, Tamilnadu.
E.I.D. Parry (India) Limitted, is a pioneer in the manufacture of plantation white
sugar from sugarcane.
India has been known as the original home of sugar and sugarcane.

Indian

mythology supports he above fact as it contains legends showing the origin of sugarcane.
The Inidan sugar industry banks on the sweet tooth of the countrys citizens as sweets and
savories favor every occasion. Almost 75% of the sugar available in the open market is
consumed by bulk consumers like bakeries, candy makers, sweet makers and soft drink
manufactures. Greater urbanization and rising standard of living have sparked of a rising
trend in usage of sugar. Some of the pertinent facts relating to the Indian sugar industry
can be encapsulated in the following

24

 Tamil Nadu is recognized as one of the leading sugar producing states in the
country with a share of about 10% in the overall sugar production.
As of 2001 02 there were 37 factories operation in the state
The quantum of sugar produced by a mill is determined by the factors like daily
crushing, duration of rushing season and percentage of sugar recovery from the
cane crushed.
Sugar prices in the country can be classified into two broad categories at the user
end as FREE MARKET PRICES and prices of sugar through public distribution
system. The substantial Increase in the volume of free international trade in sugar
presents and excellent opportunity to the Indian sugar industry to embark on a
regular plan for sugar exports.
The only cloud on the horizon IS the restrictive sugar policy along with unstable
sugar production pattern makes it an erratic trader on the world market.
SUGAR DIVISION:
The history of the Indian sugar Industry has been closely linked with that of
Parrys. Parry set up the first sugar factory in 1842 at Bandipalayam, which is now at
Nellikuppam. E.I.D Parry (India) Limited, which comes under 3900 crores Murugappa
group companies, are pioneers in the manufacture of plantation white sugar from sugar
from sugarcane. The integrated sugar complex, situated in cuddalore district, today has
crushing capacity of 5,000 MT of cane per day. It is one of the largest and technically
efficient sugar plants in India.
With factories at Nellikuppam, pugalur pettaathalai and Pudukottai,, Parrys has
developed about 60,000 acres of land under cane cultivation. For the first time in India
crop insurance for Sugarcane, was introduced at Nellikuppam. All these three factories
are a testimony to our commitment to the socio economic development and
contributing to the welfare of the farming community. Various beliefs of parry. The
Corporate commitment to this belief had led to the establishment of effective ecology and
environmental management system.
25

Nellikuppam Sugar Unit

This unit is located near Cuddalore in Tamil Nadu. Geographically this unit is
located in the coastal belt @ 15 KM form Bay of Bengal. The crushing capacity of the
plant is 5000 TCD. Total No. employed in this unit is around 555. This has three
manufacturing facility for production of sugar, Alcohol and Power. Apart from the above
the press mud is also used to produce organic manure.
Department

Process
Engineering
Distillery
Cane Office
Co Generation
Human Resources
Finance
Research And Development
System

Refinery
The sugar refinery unit was started in the year 2004 with modernized DCS system
for controlling and monitoring the sugar refinery operation. The technology is supplied
by TLPD and DCS system supplied by THL. Production capacity of the refinery plant is
120 MT per day. The unit also facility to manufacture value added production like cube
sugar, pouch sugar etc.,
Distillery
The Distillery unit which was started in the year 1848, occupies the proud seat as
one of the oldest distilleries with modern continuous type fermentation system with the
production capacity of 45 Kilo Litres of Alcohol per day (Rectified Spiri).
26

Co Generation
Sugar mills have a potential of generating power in excess of their requirement
and with a change in Government policy for purchase of surplus power form sugar mills,
there is a rethinking of upgrading the energy system in the sugar plant and installing
energy efficient equipment. This has led to the establishment of a biogases based Co
Generation plant at Nellikuppam of 24.5 MV Capacity commissioned in may 1997, and
put to regular operation since August 1997. After fulfilling captive consumption, the
surplus power is being exported to TNEB and also wheeled to our group company.
ISO Record
ISO 9001 & 14001, now they are trying to get ISO 18001.
ISO 9001 2000 accreditation obtained for corporate affect of Chennai as well as
two units at Nellikuppam & Pettavathalai.

27

OBJECTIVES OF THE COMPANY

Improve and optimize crushing from the present 30 I.t to 36 I.t
Increase the sugar recovery from the present 9.50% to 9.65%.
Improve the average cane yield from the present 38 tons per acres to 40 tons per
acre.
Expansion of Nellikuppam Distillery to produce 165 liters (55 KLPD) of
Denutured spirit / Ethanol, and establishment of Distillery in Pudukottai to use the
molasses of Pudukottati, Pettavaithalai and Pugular to produce 180 lac litre (60
KLPD) of multi products viz. rectified Spirit? Extra Neutral Alcohol / Ethanol.
Totaling to a production of 345 lac liters (115 KLPD) of multi products frok
these two Distilleries.
Establishment of 20 MW Cogen Power Plant in Pugalur and thus increase he
cogen power production capacity to 43 MW including Nellikuppam.
Production of a portfolio of value added sugars to the extent of 10 % of total sugar
produced. Established branded offering in the consideration set of consumers.
Expand institutional sales to 25% of our free market sale quanity.
Offer management consultancy services to other factories to augment revenue.
Reduce fixed cost and improve the manpower productivity through automation,
outsourcing, elimination and re engineering.

28

HUMAN RESOURCE DEPARTMENT

Initiatives

Annual Communication day started

Employees honored with long Services awards
Welfare amenities were revisited.
Concept of Performance Incentive Scheme introduced.
Productivity Linked Bonus Scheme arrived with Unions
WOBF & Benevolent Fund Scheme launched.
Training
Learning Centre & Skill centre established

Kinds of training initiatives :

Attitudinal / Behavioral
Skill / Technical
Safety, Healthy & Environment
Training based on business needs
Attitudinal / Behavioral ISW on interaction with HODS
Skill / Technical Functional Heads thro Skill Matrix
Safety, Health & Environment Head of SHE
Preparation of Training calendar on identified needs
Trg. Calendar period Apr to Mar
Progammes through external as well as internal faculty.

29

CHAPTER - III
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

To clarify the nature and causes of the grievance (Q. NO: 6)

To find out their grievance facing and sharing (Q. NO: 7,8,9,13)
To investigate and handle each case carefully (Q. NO: 10,11,14,15)
To examine the grievance handling procedure followed (Q. NO: 12,16,18)
To take appropriate actions and ensure that promises are kept (Q. NO:17,19)
To obtain, where possible, a speedy resolution to the problem (Q. NO:20,21)
To find out the grievance redress is the part of job satisfaction (Q. NO: 22

30

CHAPTER IV
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Review of the related literature, besides, allowing the researcher to acquaint with current
knowledge in the field serves the following specific purposes. The review of related literature enables the
researcher to define the limits of the field. It helps the researcher to delimit and define the research
problem.
1. The knowledge of related literature, brings the researcher up to date on the work which others
have done and thus to state the objectives clearly and concisely.
2. By reviewing the related literature the researcher can avoid unfruitful and useless problem areas.
With a view to delineate the trends of research in specified areas, an attempt made in this chapter
to review the available literature on emotional competency to provide an exact view for the present study.
The following reviews are supported for the present study.

Thomas and Kilmann (1974) labeled this style as collaborating mode. Collaborating mode refers
to the ability of manager to work with his or her employee to find a solution that fully satisfies the
concerns of both. Collaborating between two persons might take the form of exploring a disagreement to
learn from each others insight, with the goal of resolving some condition that would otherwise have them
competing for resources, or confronting and trying to find a creative solution to an interpersonal problem.

Obliging styles involves low concern for self. An obliging person attempts to emphasize
commonalities to satisfy the concern of the other party (Rahim & Magner, 1995). Thomas and Kilmann
(1974) named this style as accommodating mode. To Thomas and Kilmann (1974) individual performing
31

accommodating style neglects his or her own concerns to satisfy the concerns of the other person. In
accommodating style, managers might take the form of selfless generosity or charity, obeying another
persons needs and prefer to yield anothers point of view.

McCrae and John (1992) also agree that Five-factor model is the best dimension to describe
personality. Five-factor model refers to five basic factors in human personality namely extraversion,
neuroticism, openness, agreeableness and conscientiousness (Pervin & John, 2001). A study by John and
Sanjay (1999) supported the reliability of Big-Five in measuring individuals personality. They indicated
that these five dimensions have represented personality at the broadest level of abstraction. Each
dimension summarized a large number of distinct and more specific defining personality characteristics.
In TDA, five dimensions of personality that being measured are extraversion, agreeableness,
conscientiousness, emotional stability and imagination.
Bean, (1994) a study conducted on

Issues of grievances are normally associated with

dissatisfaction among employees which related to working procedure, working facilities confusions on
provisions stated in companys policy (Ayadurai, 1996) and the violation of provisions in terms and
conditions of employment stated in collective agreement (Salamon, 2000). In resolving grievances,
aggrieved employees will file their dissatisfaction through grievance procedure and their immediate
managers or supervisors are responsible to take action within period given. This procedure is important to
deny the construction of employees dispute (Rose, 2004). Settling grievances as near as its origin is
important in order to deny the construction of employees disputes. Therefore, immediate supervisors are
responsible to settle the grievance as they are the nearest personnel that represent managerial team. The
argument on the vital role played by supervisors in managing employees grievances paralleled that of
past studies. Study made by Rollinson, et.al (1996) has identified that complaints are quite common and
only extends to taking-up a matter informally with a supervisor. As maintained by Catlett and Brown
32

(1990), there are a number of decisions making points in the grievance handling process that potentially
involve the supervisor.

Rahim & Magner, (1995) In compromising, this style involves moderate concern for self as well
as the other party involved in conflict. It is associated with give-and-take or sharing whereby both parties
give up something to make a mutually acceptable decision. Compromising style also refers to splitting the
difference, exchanging concessions or seeking a quick middle-ground position (Thomas & Kilmann,
1974).

Dominating style involves high concern for self and low concern for the other party involved in
the conflict. It has been identified with a win-lose orientation or with forcing behavior to win position
(Rahim & Magner, 1995). Thomas and Kilmann (1974) portrayed dominating style as power-oriented
mode or competing style. A dominating manager always stands up with his or her rights, defending a
position that his or her opinion is correct and simply trying to win.

Avoiding style is associated with low concern for self as well as for the other party involved in
conflict. It has been associated with withdrawal, passing-the-buck, sidestepping or see no evil, hear no
evil, speak no evil situations (Rahim & Magner, 1995). Avoiding might take the form of diplomatically
sidestepping an issue, postponing an issue until a better time or simply withdrawing from a threatening
situation (Thomas & Kilmann, 1974).

Clark (1988) identified that correlation coefficients showed strong relationship between attitude
toward the grievance procedure and attitude of the supervisors. Labig and Greer (1988) denote that a high
number of grievances in a unit or subunit can be indicative of many factors, including both effective and
33

ineffective supervisory performance. Bemmels and Reshef (1991) mentioned that in a specific work
group, many grievances are in response to specific behaviors by the supervisors. Hence, this present
research has targeted supervisors as unit of analysis. According to Clark (1988) and Bemmels and Reshef
(1991) supervisors behavior and personal attitudes may affect their styles in handling grievance through
grievance procedure. Thus, this study tends to evaluate the effect of personality on the selection of
appropriate grievance handling styles among immediate supervisors.
DCruz, (1999) Grievance is a matter raised by employee to express dissatisfaction with
management behavior and is an attempt to bring out changes. Grievance involves an individuals claiming
that he or she has suffered or been wronged, often because of the actions or decisions made by the
manager acting on behalf of the organization (Anderson & Gunderson, 1982). A substantiated grievance is
a signal that a managers behavior was in error or manager has breach workers right (Meyer, 1994).
Often in organizations, the grievance arises because of lack of clarity in the explicit companys rules
(Hook, et. al, 1996). Noe, Hollenbeck, Gerhart & Wright, (2003) pointed out that too many grievances
may indicate a problem but so may too few. According to them, a very low grievance rate may suggest a
fear of filing a grievance, a belief that the grievance procedure is not effective or a belief that
representation is not adequate.
Umesh C. Patnaik's (2002) study on "Quality of Work Life in Public Sector Banks: An Empirical
Study" examined how far the satisfaction of human needs, according to the priority given, acted as
motivational factor in determining the quality of work life, and also in which type of needs of bank
employees were highly dissatisfied. Material needs, career success needs social needs, security needs, and
esteem needs were assessed in relation to jobs and work places of the executives and non - executives of
different public sector banks in Berhampur City.
Robbins, (2005) Personality can be defined as the sum total of ways in which an individual reacts
and interacts with others. To Pervin and John (2001), personality represents those characteristics of the
34

person that account for consistent patterns of feeling, thinking and behaving. Personality may represent a
persons value judgment. A person may have a good personality or bad personality according to his or her
belief, culture and surrounding environment. In handling grievances, supervisors may use different styles
of resolution according to their perception and understanding on grievance issues referred to them. They
too may resolve grievances in a bad and good way, due to their personality. According to Blake and
Mouton (1968) personality is one of the factors that influence managerial styles. As stated by Robbins
(2005), individual consideration on certain issue is based on their personality which rooted by heredity
(for example gender, muscle reflexes and energy level), environment (for example culture that form
individual personality) and situation. In general individual traits are manifest in his behavior (McCrae &
John, 1992). Blake, Mouton, Barnes, & Greiner, (1964) showed that managers traits play a vital role in
the process of making decision. Individuals traits become fundamental in describing his personality
(Pervin & John, 2001) which affects the consistency of patterns in the way individuals behave, feel and
think (William, Jr. & Davis, 1996). This research has utilized Big-Five model. Robbins (2005) stated that
many researches have supported the Big-Five model as five basic dimensions encompass human
personality.

Holt & Devore, (2005) Styles in handling employees conflicts may give an impact in industrial
relation culture. A unitary organization is more centralize (Rose, 2004). As a result, avoidance and
dominating styles may be utilized in resolving grievances (Green, 1987). On the other hand, a bilateral
organization which is more decentralizing (Rose, 2004) may employ compromising, integrating or
obliging styles when confronting with employees grievances (Rahim, 1983). Rahims (1983) study has
constructed independent scales to measure five styles in handling conflict namely integrating, obliging,
compromising, dominating and avoiding.
Gibbons, (2007) Gibbons concluded that the statutory procedures led to employers adopting
formal processes rather than seeking informal resolution of disputes (see also Chartered Institute of
35

Personnel and Development, 2007). Moreover, both employers and employees sought advice from third
parties at an early stage, encouraging defensive attitudes and making it increasingly difficult for parties to
avoid legal proceedings. For small employers the emphasis on procedure and written communication was
counter cultural and only served to exacerbate conflict and escalate disputes. Consequently, the Review
recommended the repeal of the statutory dispute resolution procedures, the production of clear, simple,
non prescriptive guidelines for employers and employees in relation to grievances, discipline and
dismissal, and the promotion of workplace mediation. Significantly there was no discussion within the
review of either the right to accompaniment or the role of employee representatives within workplace
dispute resolution save for an exhortation to trade unions and employee organisations to support and
promote mediation.

In responding to Gibbons the government (Department of Trade and Industry, 2007) argued that
the central theme of legislation in this area was to encourage employees and employers to resolve
disputes in the workplace and initiated consultations as to how dispute resolution could be facilitated. In
particular it invited responses on the possible repeal of the dispute resolution regulations. Employers
organisations broadly supported the conclusions of the Gibbons Review and the call for the repeal of
statutory dismissal and grievance procedures. The TUC argued that statutory procedures had provided
important safeguards for employees, particularly those in smaller organisations (TUC, 2007). Furthermore
it suggested that if the dispute resolution regulations were to be repealed, it was important to strengthen
the role of trade unions in resolving employment disputes through: removing the small firms exclusion in
the statutory trade union recognition legislation; and providing a statutory right of representation (as
opposed to accompaniment) within grievance and disciplinary proceedings. Acas, responding to the
consultation, also stressed the key role played by workplace representatives in avoiding and resolving
workplace disputes and highlighted the need for improved training for both union representatives and
managers.
36

BERR, (2008) the Government accepted the main recommendations of the Gibbons Review and,
in the Employment Bill 2007-8, proposed the repeal of the statutory dispute resolution procedures. In
addition it concluded that related changes to the law regarding procedural unfairness in dismissal cases
should revert to that established by Polkey v AE Dayton Services, whereby failure to follow an internal
disciplinary procedure would render a dismissal unfair even if it could be shown that it would have made
no difference to the outcome. The government also responded to calls for a new short, non-prescriptive
statutory Acas Code of Practice on Discipline and Grievance backed by more detailed non-statutory
guidance. Importantly, the government proposed to increase the influence of the Code by allowing
tribunals to adjust tribunal awards by up to 25% if either party acts unreasonably in not complying with
its provisions. More broadly, the government signaled an intention to work with representative
organisations in promoting the early resolution of disputes.

Mirroring the Review, the governments response to the consultations made no mention of the
right to accompaniment or the role of employee representatives within workplace processes of dispute
resolution. Neither the proposals made by the TUC regarding strengthening the role of representation nor
the comments of Acas in relation to importance of suitably trained workplace representatives were
mentioned.

The Gibbons Review and the proposed repeal of the Dispute Resolution Regulations arguably
mark a return to a more voluntaristic approach to workplace discipline and grievance. In particular, it
represents an admission that the juridification of workplace procedures undermines important informal
processes that have traditionally facilitated the effective handling of individual workplace conflict.
However, despite the implied promotion of more informal paths to resolving disputes, the role of
37

employee representatives within such informal processes has been almost completely overlooked within
the policy debate.

38

CHAPTER - V

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

RESEARCH

Research is a process in which the researcher wishes to find out the end result for a given
problem and thus the solution helps in future course of action. The research has been defined as A
careful investigation or enquiry especially through search for new fact in any branch of knowledge.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The procedure using, which researchers go about their work of describing, explaining and
predicting phenomena, is called Methodology. Methods compromise the procedures used for generating,
collecting, and evaluating data. Methods are the ways of obtaining information useful for assessing
explanation.

TYPES OF RESEARCH

The type of research used in this project is descriptive in nature. Descriptive research is
essentially a fact finding related largely to the present, abstracting generations by cross sectional study of
39

the current situation .The descriptive methods are extensively used in the physical and natural science, for
instance when physics measures, biology classifies, zoology dissects and geology studies the rock. But its
use in social science is more common, as in socio economic surveys and job and activity analysis.

DESCRIPTIVE RESEARCH AIMS

To portray the characteristics of a particular individual situation or group(with or without specific

initial hypothesis about the nature of this characteristics).

To determine the frequency with which something occurs or with which it is associated with
something else (usually, but not always, with a specific initial hypothesis).
The descriptive method has certain limitation; one is that the research may make description itself

an end itself. Research is essentially creative and demands the discovery of facts on order to lead a
solution of the problem. A second limitation is associated whether the statistical techniques dominate. The
desire to over emphasis central tendencies and to fact in terms of Average, Correlation, Means and
dispersion may not always be either welcome. This limitation arises because statistics which is partly a
descriptive tool of analysis can aid but not always explain causal relation.

DESIGN OF DESCRIPTIVE STUDIES:

Descriptive studies aim at portraying accurately the characteristics of a particular group or

solution. One may undertake a descriptive study about the work in the factory, health and welfare. A
descriptive study may be concerned with the right to strike, capital punishment, prohibition etc:

40

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.

Data collection method

Data was collected using Questionnaire. This method is quite popular in case of big enquires. Private
individuals, research workers, private and public organizations and even government are adopting it. A
questionnaire consists of a number of question involves both specific and general question related to
Grievance Handling.

Sources of data

The two sources of data collection are namely

Primary and

Secondary.

Primary Data:

41

Primary data are fresh data collected through survey from the employees using questionnaire.

Secondary Data
Secondary data are collected from books and internet.

Research design
Research design is the specification of the method and procedure for acquiring the information
needed to solve the problem.

The research design followed for this research study is descriptive research design where we find
a solution to an existing problem. The problem of this study is to find the effectiveness of Grievance
Handling at Lucas- TVS Limited.

Sample Design
Sample Element

A STUDY ON EMPLOYEE GRIEVANCE

HANDLINGS IN E.I.D PARRY (INDIA) LID NALLIKUPPAM.

Sample Size

100 samples

Sample Test

Percentage Method & Correlation

Sample Media

Questionnaire

Sampling Method

Simple Random Sampling

Description of statistical tools used

42

Percentage method

Chi test

Anova

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

Chi-Square Test
The Chi-square test whether we are given a set of observed frequencies obtained under
some experiment and we want to test if the experimental result support a particular hypothesis or
theory.
The steps involved chi-square tests are as follows:
1.

Observed frequencies O are tabulated.

2.

Expected frequencies E are calculated.

3.

The difference between observed and expected frequencies are obtained

and square of these difference are tabulated (O-E )2.

4.

The values of (O-E )2 obtained in step 3 are divided by the respective

expected frequency and the total (O-E )2 / E is obtained.

5.

The calculated of X2 is compared with the table value of X2 for given

degree at a certain level of significance (generally 5% or 1% level selected).

By degrees of freedom we mean the number of classes to which the value can be assigned
arbitrarily if at the 5% or 1% level of significance the calculated value of X 2, the difference
between theory and observation is considered to be significant. On the other hand, the calculated
value of X2 is not considered as significant i.e., it is regarded as due to fluctuations of sampling
and hence ignored.
43

One-way ANOVA
The One-Way ANOVA procedure produces a one-way analysis of variance for a
quantitative dependent variable by a single factor (independent) variable. Analysis of variance is
used to test the hypothesis that several means are equal. This technique is an extension of the
two-sample test.

In addition to determining that differences exist among the means, you may want to know
which means differ. There are two types of tests for comparing means: a priori contrasts and post
hoc tests. Contrasts are tests set up before running the experiment, and post hoc tests are run after
the experiment has been conducted. You can also test for trends across categories.

44

CHAPTER VI
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

Table-1
Gender

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Male

86

86

Female

14

14

Total

100

100

Inference:

Primary data computed

Above table shows distribution of employees on the basis of their gender, the table consist of
gender opinion for male and female, the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 86 % percent
of employees are male and 14% percent of employees are female. Therefore it is concluded from
the table at majority of employees are 86%male.

45

Chart-1
Gender

46

Table-2

Age

Inference:

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Below 25

12

12.0

26 - 30

18

18.0

31 -35

31

31.0

36 - 40

10

10.0

Above 41

29

29.0

Total

100

100

Primary data computed

Result inferred that distribution of employees on the basis of their age, the table consist of
age group, the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 12 % percent of employees are
Below 25years age, 30 % percent of respondents are 26 - 30 years age groups and 18 %
percent of employees are 31 -35, 10 % percent of employees are 36 - 40age 30 % percent
of respondents are Above 41 years age groups the age groups. Therefore it is concluded
from the table at majority of employees are 31- 35 years 31 % age groups.

47

Chart-2

Age

48

Table-3
Marital Status

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Single

84

84

Married

16

16

Total

100

100

Inference:

Primary data computed

Above table shows distribution of employees on the basis of their married status, the table
consist of married status opinion for married and unmarried, the table reveals that out of 100
respondents, 86 % percent of employees are married and 14 % percent of employees are
unmarried. Therefore it is concluded from the table at majority of employees are 84% married.

49

Chart-2
Marital Status

50

Table-4

Educational Qualification

Inference:

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Higher secondary

8.0

Diploma

62

62.0

Under graduate

7.0

Post graduate

8.0

Others

18

18.0

Total

100

100

Primary data computed

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their Educational Qualification, the
table consist of experience, the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 8% percent of
employees are below Higher secondary, 62% percent of employees are Diploma, 27% percent of
the under graduate, 8% Post graduate percent of employees are 18% percent of the others.
Therefore it is concluded that the table at majority of employees are Diploma 62% groups.

Chart-4
Educational Qualification
51

52

Table-5
Length of Service

Inference:

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Below 5 yrs

0.0

6 - 10 yrs

47

47.0

11 - 15 yrs

14

14.0

16- 20yrs

31

31.0

Above21yrs

8.0

Total

100

100

Primary data computed

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their Service, the table consist of , the
table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 0% percent of employees are Below 5 yrs, 47% percent
of employees are 6 - 10 yrs, 14 % percent of the 11 - 15 yrs, 31% 16- 20yrs percent of employees
are 8 % percent of the others. Therefore it is concluded that the table at majority of employees are
6 - 10 yrs 47%.

53

Chart-5
Length of Service

54

Table-6
Monthly Income

Inference:

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Below 5000

10

10.0

5001 - 7000

12

12.0

7001 - 10000

48

48.0

11000 -15000

18

18.0

Above 16000

12

12.0

Total

100

100

Primary data computed

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their Monthly Income the table
consist of, the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 10% percent of employees responds are
Below 5000, 12% percent of employees are responds 5001 - 7000, 48 % percent responds of
employees the 7001 - 10000, 18 % percent responds of employees are 11000 -15000, 12 %
percent responds of the employees are Above 16000. Therefore it is concluded that the table at
majority of 48 % percent responds of the employees Monthly Income 7001 10000.

55

Chart-6
Monthly Income

56

Table-7
Kindly mention the most grievance prone subjects in your organization.

Inference:

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Wage and salary

28

28.0

Working condition

36

36.0

Promotion

20

20.0

Discipline

10

10.0

Others

6.0

Total

100

100

Primary data computed

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their organization. the table consist
of, the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 28% percent of employees responds are wage
and salary, 36% percent of employees are responds working condition, 20% percent responds of
employees the promotion, 10 % percent responds of employees are discipline, 6 % percent
responds of the employees are others. Therefore it is concluded that the table at majority of 36%
percent responds of the employees organization.

57

Chart-7
Kindly mention the most grievance prone subjects in your organization.

58

Table-8
For how long are you facing the grievance.

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Less than 6 months

72

72.0

More than 6 months

24

24.0

100

100

Total

Inference:

Primary data computed

Above table shows distribution of employees on the basis of their grievance. Status, the table
consists of grievance status opinion for long are you facing and, the table reveals that out of 100
respondents, 72 % percent responds of employees less than 6 months are 24 % percent responds
of employees are more than 6 months. Therefore it is concluded from the table at majority of
employees are 72% less than 6 months

59

Chart-8
For how long are you facing the grievance

60

Table-9
Do you keep grievances to yourself.

Inference:

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Always

32

32.0

Sometimes

22

22.0

Never

30

30.0

Others

16

16.0

Total

100

100

Primary data computed

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their grievances to yourself the table
consist of, the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 32% percent of employees responds are
always, 22% percent of employees are responds sometimes, 30% percent responds of employees
the never, 16 % percent responds of employees are others, Therefore it is concluded that the table
at majority of always 32% percent responds of the employees keep grievances to yourself.

61

Chart-9
Do you keep grievances to yourself.

62

Table-10
Do you share grievances with your colleague.

Inference:

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Always

25

30.0

Sometimes

27

22.0

Never

32

32.0

Others

16

16.0

Total

100

100

Primary data computed

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their grievances to yourself
the table consist of, the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 25% percent of
employees responds are always, 27% percent of employees are responds sometimes, 32%
percent responds of employees the never, 16 % percent responds of employees are others,
Therefore it is concluded that the table at majority of always 32% percent responds of the
Never.

63

Chart-10
Do you share grievances with your colleague.

64

Table-11
Do you directly go and discuss your grievance with immediate superior when a grievance arises.

Inference:

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Always

30

30.0

Sometimes

36

36.0

Never

18

18.0

Others

16

16.0

Total

100

100

Primary data computed

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their with immediate
superior when a grievance arises the table consist of, the table reveals that out of 100
respondents, 30% percent of employees responds are always, 36% percent of employees
are responds sometimes, 18% percent responds of employees the never, 16 % percent
responds of employees are others, Therefore it is concluded that the table at majority of
36% sometimes percent responds of the employees immediate superior when a grievance
arises.

65

Chart-11

Do you directly go and discuss your grievance with immediate superior when a grievance arises.

66

Table-12
Does your immediate superior respond to your grievance in specify time limit.

Inference:

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Yes

66

66.0

No

34

34.0

Total

100

100

Primary data computed

Above table shows distribution of employees on the basis of their your grievance in
specify time limit, the table consist of superior opinion for specify time limit, the table
reveals that out of 100 respondents, 66 % percent of employees are yes and 34% percent
of employees are no. Therefore it is concluded from the table at majority of employees
are 66 % yes.

67

Chart-12

Does your immediate superior respond to your grievance in specify time limit.

68

Table-13
How far you satisfied with the grievance handling procedure followed in your
organization?

Inference:

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Highly satisfied

25

25.0

Satisfied

40

40.0

Neutral

20

20.0

Dissatisfied

7.0

Highly dissatisfied

8.0

Total

100

100

Primary data computed

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their grievance handling
procedure, the table consist of the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 25% percent
of employees respondents are highly satisfied, 40% percent of employees respondents are
satisfied, 20% percent of employee respondents the neutral, 7 % percent of employees
respondents are dissatisfied, 8 % percent employee respondents of the highly dissatisfied.
Therefore it is concluded that the table at majority of employees are Satisfied 40%.

69

Chart-13
How far you satisfied with the grievance handling procedure followed in your
organization?

70

Table-14
Do you feel open to share your grievance.

Inference:

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Yes

86

86.0

No

14

14.0

Total

100

100

Primary data computed

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their open to share your
grievance, the table consist of the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 86 % percent
of employees respondents are yes, 14 % percent of employees respondents are no
,Therefore it is concluded that the table at majority of employees are yes 86%.

71

Chart-14
Do you feel open to share your grievance.

72

Table-15

Does your higher authority listen when your grievance is presented.

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Listens patiently

34

34.0

Shouts to you

44

44.0

14

14.0

Others

8.0

Total

100

100

Does not listen at all

Inference:

Primary data computed

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their higher authority listen when
your grievance is presented, the table consist of experience, the table reveals that out of 100
respondents, 34% percent of employees respondents are listens patiently, 44% percent of
employees respondents are shouts to you, 14%percentofemployee respondents the does not
listen at all, 8 % percent of employees respondents are Others,. Therefore it is concluded that
the table at majority of employees are Shouts to you 44%.

73

Chart-15

Does your higher authority listen when your grievance is presented.

74

Table-16

Does management gather all relevant facts about the grievance.

Inference:

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Yes

75

75.0

No

25

25.0

Total

100

100

Primary data computed

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their management gather all
relevant facts about the grievance., the table consist of the table reveals that out of 100
respondents, 75 % percent of employees respondents are yes, 25 % percent of employees
respondents are no ,Therefore it is concluded that the table at majority of employees are
yes 75%.

75

Chart-16

Does management gather all relevant facts about the grievance.

76

Table-17

Is the grievance handling procedure explained to you.

Inference:

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Yes

82

82.0

No

18

18.0

Total

100

100

Primary data computed

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their handling procedure
explained to you, the table consist of the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 82 %
percent of employees respondents are yes, 18 % percent of employees respondents are no
,Therefore it is concluded that the table at majority of employees are yes 82 %.

77

Chart-17
Is the grievance handling procedure explained to you.

78

Table-18
Are you satisfied with the management decision regarding your grievance

Inference:

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Strongly agree

21

21.0

Agree

39

39.0

Neutral

25

25.0

Disagree

7.0

Strongly disagree

6.0

Total

100

100

Primary data computed

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their management decision
regarding your grievance is presented, the table consist of the table reveals that out of 100
respondents, 21% percent of employees respondents are strongly agree, 39% percent of
employees respondents are agree, 25% percent of employee respondents the neutral, 7%
percent of employees respondents are disagree, 6 % percent of employees respondents are
strongly disagree. Therefore it is concluded that the table at majority of employees are agree
to you 44%.

79

Chart-18
Are you satisfied with the management decision regarding your grievance

80

Table-19
Do you feel that present grievance handling policy of your organization is effective.

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

34

34.0

28

28.0

22

22.0

10

10.0

06

6.0

100

100

Strongly agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Total

Inference:

Primary data computed

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their present grievance handling
policy of your organization presented, the table consist of the table reveals that out of 100
respondents, 34% percent of employees respondents are strongly agree, 28 % percent of
employees respondents are agree, 22 % percent of employee respondents the neutral, 10 %
percent of employees respondents are disagree, 6 % percent of employees respondents are
strongly disagree. Therefore it is concluded that the table at majority of employees are
strongly agree34%

81

Chart-19

Do you feel that present grievance handling policy of your organization is effective.

82

Table-20
Are proper records maintained on each grievance.

Inference:

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Yes

78

78.0

No

22

22.0

Total

100

100

Primary data computed

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their proper records
maintained on each grievance, the table consist of the table reveals that out of 100
respondents, 86 % percent of employees respondents are yes, 78 % percent of employees
respondents are no ,Therefore it is concluded that the table at majority of employees are
yes 78%.

83

Chart-20
Are proper records maintained on each grievance.

84

Table-21
Do you feel that the supervisor possesses necessary human relation skills in terms of
understanding your problem.

Inference:

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Very highly skilled

36

36.0

Moderately skilled

33

33.0

Not skilled

13

13.0

Others

18

18.0

Total

100

100

Primary data computed

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their supervisor possesses
necessary human relation skills in terms of understanding your problem presented, the
table consist of the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 36 % percent of employees
respondents are very highly skilled, 33 % percent of employees respondents are
moderately skilled, 13 %percent of employee respondents the does not skilled, 18 %
percent of employees respondents are others,. Therefore it is concluded that the table at
majority of employees are very highly skilled 36%.

85

Chart-21
Do you feel that the supervisor possesses necessary human relation skills in terms of
understanding your problem.

86

Table-22

How much time management taken to redress your grievance.

Particulars

Inference:

Frequency

Percentage

Less than 1 month

81

81.0

More than 1 month

6.0

Pending

13

13.0

Total

100

100

Primary data computed

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their time management taken to
redress your grievance presented, the table consist of the table reveals that out of 100
respondents, 81 % percent of employees respondents are less than 1 month, 6 % percent of
employees respondents are more than 1 month, 13 %percent of employee respondents the does
Pending, 18 % percent of employees respondents are others,. Therefore it is concluded that the
table at majority of employees are Less than 1 month 81%.

87

Chart-22
How much time management taken to redress your grievance.

88

Table-23

Grievance redressed is one of the major components of job satisfaction.

Inference:

Particulars

Frequency

Percentage

Strongly agree

27

27

Agree

41

41

Neutral

17

17

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Total

100

100

Primary data computed

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their major components of job
satisfaction presented, the table consist of the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 27%
percent of employees respondents are strongly agree, 41 % percent of employees respondents
are agree, 17 % percent of employee respondents the neutral, 7 % percent of employees
respondents are disagree, 68% percent of employees respondents are strongly disagree.
Therefore it is concluded that the table at majority of employees are strongly agree 41%

89

Chart-23
Grievance redressed is one of the major components of job satisfaction.

90

Table-24

Showing the chi-square test for behavior of employees on the basis of gender

Gender
SA

SD

Male

50

24

Female

10

Total

10

56

24

DF

Sig.

72.15

0.01

Inference: Primary data computed* 1% Significant level

Ho: There is a significant association between behavior of employee on the basis of gender
The result reveals that the Chi-square value is (72.15), which is significant at 0.01 levels.
So, the stated hypothesis is accepted. It is concluded that there is an association between
respondents opinion about appraisal helps to change behavior employees on the basis of gender.

91

Table-25

Showing the chi-square test for satisfaction about present Length of Service.

Total
Highly
dissatisfied

Length of Service

Highly
satisfied

Satisfied

Below 5 yrs

20

10

17

47

10

14

15

10

10

31

Above21yrs

Total

47

24

31

100

6 - 10 yrs
11 - 15 yrs
16- 20yrs

Uncertain Dissatisfied

Calculated Chi-Square Value

Degrees of Freedom

Level of Significant

38.80

12

0.01

Inference: Primary data computed* 1% Significant level

Hy: There is an association between opinion about training and development and Length of
Service.
The result reveals that the calculated chi-square value (38.80), which is significant at 0.01
levels. Hence the stated hypothesis is accepted. So it is concluded that there is an association
between opinions about present 6 - 10 yrs Length of Service.

Table-26
Showing the chi-square test for satisfaction about present Monthly Income

92

Total
Highly
dissatisfied

Monthly Income

Highly
satisfied

Satisfied

Below 5000

10

10

7001 - 10000

12

12

5001 - 7000

39

48

11000 -15000

13

18

Above 16000

12

12

Total

31

42

13

14

100

Uncertain Dissatisfied

Calculated Chi-Square Value

Degrees of Freedom

Level of Significant

212.57

0.01

Hy: There is an association between opinion about training and development Monthly Income.
The result reveals that the calculated chi-square value (212.57), which is significant at
0.01 levels. Hence the stated hypothesis is accepted. So it is concluded that there is an
association between opinions about present 5001 - 7000 Monthly Income.

93

Table - 27
Showing One-way ANOVA for Grievance Handling on the basis of educational
qualification.
Educational
Qualification

Mean

SD

Higher secondary

57.00

0.00

62

66.82

9.27

Under graduate

55.00

0.00

Post graduate

59.00

0.00

Others

18

70.40

1.55

Total

100

65.12

8.66

Diploma

F-value

LS

9.63

0.001
(Significant)

Hy: There is a significant difference among various groups of grievance and their handling on
the basis of their educational qualification.

Above table showing the one-way ANOVA of grievance handling on the basis of their educational
qualification. The calculated F-value (9.63), is significant at 0.01 level. Hence the stated hypothesis is
accepted. Therefore, high qualified groups have high motivation compare the other education groups.

The result infers that there is a significant difference among various groups of employees and
their grievance handling on the basis of their Diploma educational qualification

94

Table 28
Showing One-way ANOVA for Grievance Handling on the basis of Service.

Length of Service

Mean

SD

Below 5 yrs

47

65.38

8.58

11 - 15 yrs

14

61.00

11.42

16- 20yrs

31

68.68

6.26

Above21yrs

57.00

0.00

100

65.12

8.66

6 - 10 yrs

Total

F-value

LS

5.93

0.001
(Significant)

Inference: Primary data computed* 1% Significant level

Hy: There is a significant difference among various groups of grievance and their handling on
the basis of their Service.

Above table showing the one-way ANOVA of grievance handling l factors on the basis of their
services. The calculated F-value (5.93), is significant at 0.01 level. Hence the stated hypothesis is
accepted. Therefore, 6-10 years experience groups have high c handling compare the other groups.

The result infers that there is a significant difference among various groups of employees and
their grievance handling on the basis of their6 - 10 yrs Length of Service

95

CHAPTER - VII
FINDINGS, SUGGESTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Above table shows distribution of employees on the basis of their gender, the table consist of
gender opinion for male and female, the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 86 % percent
of employees are male and 14% percent of employees are female. Therefore it is concluded from
the table at majority of employees are 86%male.

Result inferred that distribution of employees on the basis of their age, the table consist of age
group, the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 12 % percent of employees are Below
25years age, 30 % percent of respondents are 26 - 30 years age groups and 18 % percent of
employees are 31 -35, 10 % percent of employees are 36 - 40age 30 % percent of respondents are
Above 41 years age groups the age groups. Therefore it is concluded from the table at majority of
employees are 31- 35 years 31 % age groups.

Above table shows distribution of employees on the basis of their married status, the table
consist of married status opinion for married and unmarried, the table reveals that out of 100
respondents, 86 % percent of employees are married and 14 % percent of

employees are

unmarried. Therefore it is concluded from the table at majority of employees are 84% married.

96

 Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their Educational Qualification, the
table consist of experience, the table reveals that out of 100 respondents,

8% percent of

employees are below Higher secondary, 62% percent of employees are Diploma, 27% percent of
the under graduate, 8% Post graduate percent of employees are 18% percent of the others.
Therefore it is concluded that the table at majority of employees are Diploma 62% groups.

.Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their Service, the table consist of ,
the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 0% percent of employees are Below 5 yrs, 47%
percent of employees are 6 - 10 yrs, 14 % percent of the 11 - 15 yrs, 31% 16- 20yrs percent of
employees are 8 % percent of the others. Therefore it is concluded that the table at majority of
employees are 6 - 10 yrs 47%.

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their Monthly Income

the table

consist of, the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 12% percent of employees responds are
Below 5000, 22% percent of employees are responds 5001 - 7000, 26% percent responds of
employees the 7001 - 10000, 24 % percent responds of employees are 11000 -15000, 16 %
percent responds of the employees are Above 16000. Therefore it is concluded that the table at
majority of 26% percent responds of the employees Monthly Income 7001 10000.

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their Monthly Income

the table

consist of, the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 10% percent of employees responds are
Below 5000, 12% percent of employees are responds 5001 - 7000, 48 % percent responds of
employees the 7001 - 10000, 18 % percent responds of employees are 11000 -15000, 12 %
percent responds of the employees are Above 16000. Therefore it is concluded that the table at
majority of 48 % percent responds of the employees Monthly Income 7001 10000.
97

Above table shows distribution of employees on the basis of their grievance. Status, the table
consists of grievance status opinion for long are you facing and, the table reveals that out of 100
respondents, 72 % percent responds of employees less than 6 months are 24 % percent responds
of

employees are more than 6 months. Therefore it is concluded from the table at majority of

employees are 72% less than 6 months

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their grievances to yourself the table
consist of, the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 32% percent of employees responds are
always, 22% percent of employees are responds sometimes, 30% percent responds of employees
the never, 16 % percent responds of employees are others, Therefore it is concluded that the table
at majority of always 32% percent responds of the employees keep grievances to yourself.

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their grievances to yourself the table
consist of, the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 25% percent of employees responds are
always, 27% percent of employees are responds sometimes, 32% percent responds of employees
the never, 16 % percent responds of employees are others, Therefore it is concluded that the table
at majority of always 32% percent responds of the Never.

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their with immediate superior when a
grievance arises the table consist of, the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 30% percent of
employees responds are always, 36% percent of employees are responds sometimes, 18% percent
responds of employees the never, 16 % percent responds of employees are others, Therefore it is
concluded that the table at majority of 36% sometimes percent responds of the employees
immediate superior when a grievance arises.

Above table shows distribution of employees on the basis of their your grievance in specify time
limit, the table consist of superior opinion for specify time limit, the table reveals that out of 100
98

respondents, 66 % percent of employees are yes and 34% percent of employees are no. Therefore
it is concluded from the table at majority of employees are 66 % yes.

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their grievance handling procedure,
the table consist of the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 25 % percent of employees
respondents are highly satisfied, 40% percent of employees respondents are satisfied, 20%
percent of employee respondents the neutral, 7 % percent of employees respondents are
dissatisfied, 8 % percent employee respondents of the highly dissatisfied. Therefore it is
concluded that the table at majority of employees are Satisfied 40%.

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their open to share your grievance,
the table consist of the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 86 % percent of employees
respondents are yes, 14 % percent of employees respondents are no ,Therefore it is concluded that
the table at majority of employees are yes 86%.

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their higher authority listen when
your grievance is presented, the table consist of experience, the table reveals that out of 100
respondents, 34% percent of employees respondents are listens patiently, 44% percent of
employees respondents are shouts to you, 14%percentofemployee respondents the does not listen
at all, 8 % percent of employees respondents are Others,. Therefore it is concluded that the table
at majority of employees are Shouts to you 44%.

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their management gather all relevant
facts about the grievance., the table consist of the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 75 %

99

percent of employees respondents are yes, 25 % percent of employees respondents are no

,Therefore it is concluded that the table at majority of employees are yes 75%.

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their handling procedure explained to
you, the table consist of the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 82 % percent of employees
respondents are yes, 18 % percent of employees respondents are no ,Therefore it is concluded that
the table at majority of employees are yes 82 %.

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their management decision regarding
your grievance is presented, the table consist of the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 21 %
percent of employees respondents are strongly agree, 39% percent of employees respondents are
agree, 25% percent of employee respondents the neutral, 7% percent of employees respondents
are disagree, 6 % percent of employees respondents are strongly disagree. Therefore it is
concluded that the table at majority of employees are agree to you 44%.

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their present grievance handling
policy of your organization presented, the table consist of the table reveals that out of 100
respondents, 34% percent of employees respondents are strongly agree, 28 % percent of
employees respondents are agree, 22 % percent of employee respondents the neutral, 10 %
percent of employees respondents are disagree, 6 % percent of employees respondents are
strongly disagree. Therefore it is concluded that the table at majority of employees are strongly
agree34%

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their proper records maintained on
each grievance, the table consist of the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 86 % percent of
100

employees respondents are yes, 78 % percent of employees respondents are no ,Therefore it is

concluded that the table at majority of employees are yes 78%.

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their supervisor possesses
necessary human relation skills in terms of understanding your problem presented, the
table consist of the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 36 % percent of employees
respondents are very highly skilled, 33 % percent of employees respondents are
moderately skilled, 13 %percent of employee respondents the does not skilled, 18 %
percent of employees respondents are others,. Therefore it is concluded that the table at
majority of employees are very highly skilled 36%.
Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their time management taken to
redress your grievance presented, the table consist of the table reveals that out of 100
respondents, 81 % percent of employees respondents are less than 1 month, 6 % percent of
employees respondents are more than 1 month, 13 %percent of employee respondents the does
Pending, 18 % percent of employees respondents are others,. Therefore it is concluded that the
table at majority of employees are Less than 1 month 81%.

Result reveals that distribution of employees on the basis of their major components of job
satisfaction presented, the table consist of the table reveals that out of 100 respondents, 27%
percent of employees respondents are strongly agree, 41 % percent of employees respondents are
agree, 17 % percent of employee respondents the neutral, 7 % percent of employees respondents
are disagree, 68% percent of employees respondents are strongly disagree. Therefore it is
concluded that the table at majority of employees are strongly agree 41%.

101

 The result reveals that the calculated chi-square value (38.80), which is significant at 0.01
levels. Hence the stated hypothesis is accepted. So it is concluded that there is an
association between opinions about present

6 - 10 yrs Length of Service.

The result reveals that the calculated chi-square value (212.57), which is significant at
0.01 levels. Hence the stated hypothesis is accepted. So it is concluded that there is an
association between opinions about present 5001 - 7000

Monthly Income.

The result infers that there is a significant difference among various groups of employees and
their grievance handling on the basis of their Diploma educational qualification

Above table showing the one-way ANOVA of grievance handling l factors on the basis of their
services. The calculated F-value (5.93), is significant at 0.01 level. Hence the stated hypothesis is
accepted. Therefore, 6-10 years experience groups have high c handling compare the other
groups.

102

SUGGESTIONS

Grievances handling is the basic need for all employees. If it is fulfilled, the employees
can get satisfaction in their job and their performance will be improved. The researcher suggested
from the research work that the grievance handling is in these industries is somewhat satisfied. Only
few of the employees are not satisfied present condition grievance handling procedure followed in
your organization. The open to share your grievance provided to the staffs are not satisfied optimum
level. The higher authority listen when your grievance is presented should be improved by arranging
items supplied by private catering handling procedure followed in your organization. The
organization can take steps to improve allowances and major components of job satisfaction the
industries have to concentrate the grievances job improvement by giving handling and periodical
incentives in time.

103

CONCLUSION

The present study aimed to know the grievances handling level among the employees in
GRIEVANCE HANDLING `IN E.I.D PARRY (INDIA) LID NALLIKUPPAM. The research was framed
by using questionnaire and objectives related with the study. The questionnaire method is used to collect
the data. The size of the sample is 100 and it was collected randomly. After collecting the data analyzed
by using standardized statistical package called SPSS. The statistical tools such as ANOVA, t-test and
Chi-square were applied. From the analysis, it is found that majority of the employees opinion is they
were satisfied with the grievances handling provided by the organization and the superiors are also
encouraged by giving proper guidance and assistance to their job.

104

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aswathappa, K., Human Resource and Personnel Management,
Tata McGraw Hill Publications, New Delhi,
Biswanth Ghosh, Personnel Management and Industrial Relations,
World Press Private Limited, 1987.
Memoria

C.B.

and

S.V.

Gankar,

Principles

of

Personnel

Management, Bomabay Himalaya Publishing House, Bombay, 2002.

Nair and Mrs. Latha Nair, Personnel Management and Industiral
relations, S.C hand and Company Limited, New Delhi, 2001.
Subbarao,

C.,

Personnel

Management

Human

Resource

Management, Bombay Himalaya Publications, Bombay, 2002.

Tripathi, Personnel Management and Industrial relations, Sulthan
chand & sons, New Delhi,

Human resource management - l.m.prasad

Personnel/human resource management - p.subba rao

o v.s.p. rao

Personnel management

- c.b.mamoria

Personnel management and industrial relationship - p.c.tripati

105

Research methodology c.r.kothari

Statistical methods s.p.gupta

106

A STUDY ON EMPLOYEE GRIEVANCE HANDLING `IN E.I.D PARRY (INDIA) LID

NALLIKUPPAM
1. Name

(Optional)

2. Gender

3. Age

4. Marital Status

5. Educational Qualification

Male
Below 25
31 -35
Above 41

[ ]

Female

[ ]

[ ]
[ ]
[ ]

26 - 30
36 - 40

[ ]
[ ]

[ ]

Single

Higher secondary

Under graduate

[ ]

Diploma

[ ]

Post graduate

[ ]

: Below 5 yrs

[ ]

6 - 10 yrs

11 - 15 yrs

[ ]

16- 20yrs

[ ]

[ ]

[ ]

Above21yrs
7. Monthly Income

[ ]

[ ]

Others

6. Length of Service

Married

Below 5000

[ ]

5001 - 7000

[ ]

7001 - 10000

[ ]

11000 -15000

[ ]

[ ]

Above 16000

8. Kindly mention the most grievance prone subjects in your organization?

Wage and salary

[ ] Working condition

[ ]

Discipline

[ ]

[ ]

Others

9. For how long are you facing the grievance?

107

Promotion

[ ]

Less than 6 months

[ ]

More than 6 months

[ ]

10. Do you keep grievances to yourself?

Always

[ ]

Others

[ ]

Sometimes

[ ]

Never

[ ]

[ ]

Never

[ ]

11. Do you share grievance with your colleague?

Always

[ ]

Others

[ ]

Sometimes

12. Do you directly go and discuss your grievance with immediate superior when a grievance
arises?
Always

[ ]

Others

[ ]

Sometimes

[ ]

Never

[ ]

13. Does your immediate superior respond to your grievance in specify time limit?
Yes

[ ]

No

[ ]

14. How far you satisfied with the grievance handling procedure followed in your
organization?
Highly satisfied

[ ]

Satisfied

[ ]

Dissatisfied

[ ]

Highly dissatisfied

[ ]

Neutral

[ ]

15. Do you feel open to share your grievance?

Yes

[ ]

No

[ ]

16. Does your higher authority listen when your grievance is presented?
Listens patiently

[ ]

Others

[ ]

Shouts to you

[ ]

Does not listen at all [ ]

17. Does management gather all relevant facts about the grievance?
Yes

[ ]

No

[ ]
108

18. Is the grievance handling procedure explained to you?

Yes

[ ]

No

[ ]

19. Are you satisfied with the management decision regarding your grievance?
Strongly agree

[ ] Agree

[ ]

Disagree

[ ]

[ ]

Strongly disagree

Neutral

[ ]

20. Do you feel that present grievance handling policy of your organization is effective?
Strongly agree

[ ] Agree

[ ]

Disagree

[ ]

[ ]

Strongly disagree

Neutral

[ ]

21. Are proper records maintained on each grievance?

Yes

[ ]

No

[ ]

22. Do you feel that the supervisor possesses necessary human relation skills in terms of
understanding your problem?
Very highly skilled

[ ]

Moderately skilled

[ ]

Not skilled

[ ]

Others

[ ]

23. How much time management taken to redress your grievance?

Less than 1 month [ ]
Pending

More than 1 month

[ ]

[ ]

24. Grievance redressed is one of the major components of job satisfaction.

Strongly agree

[ ] Agree

[ ]

Disagree

[ ]

[ ]

Strongly disagree

109

Neutral

[ ]