The Significance of This Case

The March2014 lockout at TKMLs Bidadi plant, executed by the management in

response to the protesting Labour Union, is to be seen beyond issues of wages and
conditions of work. It is a tale of the tactics through which the employer manipulates
and disciplines the legitimate space of labour to its interest through its unique
systems of labour management strategies and production organisation. The various
means the employers use to weaken workers agency, by creating a public image of
workers struggle and resistance as a violent, anti-industry, and anti-growth move. It
raises serious doubts about the viability of the legitimate space of labour in the
future.

Labour Issues at TKML

There never existed a smooth relationship between workers and the management of
TKML since the establishment of its first plant at Bidadi in 1997. A dispute which
broke out in 2001 due to the companys refusal of the workers demand for a salary
increment led to the formation of The Toyota Kirloskar Motors Employees Trade
Union (TKMEU).

The production system of Toyota, commonly known as TPS (Toyota Production

System) puts tremendous emphasis on efficiency- to achieve a higher level of
production and quality with the use of fewer resources, manpower and energy. It is
also seen that this system of production organisation disciplines labour, subverts the
agency of workers and intensifies work. As Fumio (2006) notes, such factors as strict
managerial control and the deployment of contract workers are essential
prerequisites for the success of TPS. In addition to this each production job is
divided into core and periphery layers along with the fragmentation of a single job
into separate activities which is organised in a group, with the production
performed both inside and outside the mother plant. Also contractual workers are
deployed to meet the additional requirements of production and contingencies.

The flexibility of the production process and the use of the contractual workers lead
to the dilution of the negotiating powers of the workers for their rights and hence
force them to take a rather submissive position in order to protect their jobs. This was
very mush evident in the production organisation of TKML.

The tremendous emphasis on efficiency also means the utmost utilisation of the
resources. Under the TPS completion of a particular piece of work is determined by
production demand without taking into consideration the availability of workers, so
as to minimise the cost of production. This leads to increased workload and work
related stress in the scenario of high production demand. TKML workers interpret
this unique system of Toyota production to be fewer hands, more work and less
pay. A worker puts his experience with the TPS in simple language:

Assume that at first ten members were assigned a job, they decrease the team strength to nine
after one or two months. But they dont compromise with the work load. They pressurise us to
complete that work within the deadline. With huge difficulty we complete that work. Next
time, the company again decreases the team strength from nine to eight and pressurises us to
work hardsame work, same deadline but with less workers in the team

Such was the plight of the workers at TKML, excessive workload and lesser
negotiating power.

The March2014 Lockout

A charter of demand for FY 2014-15 was submitted by The Toyota Kirloskar Motors
Employees Trade Union in July 2013 since the years agreement was to expire on 31st
March 2014. The major demands were an increase of the monthly wage by Rs. 8000
(because of the rising cost of living), a rationalising of cycle time (time available at
each work station to complete the jobs), a five-day working week, housing
facility/allowance and removal of contract employment in production.

Citing decline of sales and loss due to depreciation of the rupee against dollar on import of
auto components as a reason the management did not respond to any of the demands
positively except a salary hike of Rs. 3050. Since it was not even half the amount
demanded by the union and even lower than the previous years increment of Rs.
4000 the union rejected the managements proposal. The other demands of
rationalising the cycle time, a five-day working week and others were out rightly
rejected by the management. Several meetings were held between the management
and the union but it failed each time. Failure of the bipartite meetings (between the
union & the management) led to the union protesting initially in the form of dharnas
and later on through token one-day strikes that were held on 10 th and 28th February
2014. When even the tripartite meetings with the labour department did not lead to
settlement of any of the issues in the charter, lockout was declared on 16th
March2014. As per the management the lockout was a precautionary measure to
ensure safety of machinery, employees and management personnel. However, the union
denied any unrest of such a nature and stated that the lockout was declared to create
fear among the workers and silence our legitimate demands.

The lockout altered the entire negotiation process. The workers feared loss of
employment. As many as 8200 workers (4200 regular workers of TKML & 4000
workers in the supplier firms) were afraid of losing their jobs. Meanwhile the
management initiated a disciplinary action against the protesting workers and
suspended 30 workers on charges of indiscipline and misconduct. On 20th March the
management agreed to lift the lockout under the condition that the workers gave
individual, signed undertakings, which comprised a new set of disciplinary rules in
addition to the existing ones. The union rejected this proposal and asserted that the
lockout be lifted unconditionally and consequently announced a relay hunger strike
from 2nd April2014. Consequently the management lifted the lockout without
demanding good conduct undertakings and also withdrew the suspensions.