THE DISPUTE AT GRAZIANO TRASMISSIONI

- a Chronology event
ASSIGNMENT- The Dispute at Graziano Trasmissioni – a Chronology
1 Event

Introduction about the Company:

Graziano Trasmissioni is a multinational company producing gears for
automobiles. It has 35 plants the world over. This former Italian multinational
company has now been taken over by a US multinational. The gears and
transmission belts produced by the workers of this company are part of many of
the automobiles and heavy vehicles seen on the highways of the world.

Reason for Dispute:

In this Case, the workers faced unimaginable repression and Victimization
when they started their efforts to register a trade union in the factory. It is
interesting to note that it were not the workers who initiated or created the
disputes on any issue. They tried to form the union and this was the only act from
their side. The Management provoked them by its highly unjust actions and they
reacted against it to throw some of workers out of their jobs. This chronology of
incidence leads to the CEO of the Greater Noida plant of this Company had died
in the course of a workers agitation.

Chronology Event of the Dispute:

The very first dispute arose because the employers were in the habit of
making deductions from the wages on false pretexts.

2/3 December 2007 - The first protest of the workers started over a demand for a
rise in wages and against deductions of wages by the employers on the grounds
that the entry card was not properly punched. It was claimed that this was due to
a technical fault in the punching system, while subsequent punchings in the rest
of the day were duly recorded, yet the employers in order to harass the workmen
deducted from the wages anyway, on this false pretext. The workers protested.

Getting wind of the workers being organized, striving to form a union, three
workers were barred by the employers from entering the premises and one, Manoj
Kumar, was sacked. Management refused to recognize the union, while the
authorities at Kanpur kept the application of the workers pending in collusion
with the employers.
1|Page
ASSIGNMENT- The Dispute at Graziano Trasmissioni – a Chronology
1 Event

4 December 2007 - Protesting against the high-handedness of the employers, 100

more workers were locked out by passing a notice of lockout outside the gate.

7 December 2007 - A settlement was reached between the parties, only to be

repudiated by the employers later on. The workers' protest continued.

AITUC, the Trade Union Front of the CPI, to which the workers remain affiliated,
agrees with management to restore normalcy first and then negotiate, which the
workers reject. After this AITUC abandons the workers.

24 January 2008 - In the face of the struggle of the workers, the employers are
forced to enter into a written settlement with them, in the presence of DLC, Noida
etc. Five elected representatives participate on behalf of the workers, among them.
A homogenous wage revision is agreed .

February 2008 - However, immediately after this settlement, the employers

brought in 400 workers under the local contractors. These contractors, with a force
of 400 at their disposal, started to bully the workers. Since June 2008, these 400
workers started to reside inside the factory premises. The said contractors had also
gathered iron rods, sticks and other weapons inside the premises, to terrorize the
workers and obviously to deal with the agitating workers, if need be. Apart from
this a whole battalion of armed goons in the name of 'security' was also employed
under the contractor. It thus became clear that the employers were planning to
throw out the permanent workers and wanted to replace them with these contract
workers.

May 2008 - Seeking to provoke a dispute with the workers, the employers refused
to employ five worker trainees/apprentices and expelled them from the premises
on the pretext that they handled the job of ‘settling' machine without instructions.
It is pointed out that no such written instructions for the ‘settling' job were given
to any of the workers. The same was part of ordinary job duties. The workers thus
insisted that from then onwards instructions for ‘settling' jobs be issued in writing.
The workers also demanded that the five workers be taken back on job.

Instead of taking the five workers onto the rolls, the employers suspended 27 more
workers. The employers had intentionally switched off the reverse exhaust fans
inside the workshop, which resulted in a huge increase in indoor temperature. To
ensure that no workman could even take a breath during duty hours, CCTV
cameras were installed, and any violators were immediately ousted.

2|Page
ASSIGNMENT- The Dispute at Graziano Trasmissioni – a Chronology
1 Event

The workers protested the aforesaid unfair labour practices and made complaints
to the concerned authorities but without any result. The authorities acted hand in
hand with the employers. The workers also demanded 3 shifts of 8 hours instead
of two of 12 hours each. But it was as if everything was falling on the deaf ears of
employers and competent authorities.

30-31 May 2008 - A totally false police complaint was lodged by the employers
against the workers for affray, and 30 more of them were locked out. The workers
would only be released after depositing personal bonds of Rs.1,00,000/- (One
Lakh) each, with the SDM NOIDA, which is a very unusual and extremely high
amount.

19 June 2008 - Instead of paying any heed to the legitimate grievances of the
workers, and in order to harass and terrorize the workers, 35 more of them were
locked out. With this a total of 97 workers had been ousted, while 192 of the
permanent workers continued inside. By this time the workers had affiliated to the
CITU, the Trade Union Front of the CPI(M), which agreed to the proposal of the
employers that first of all normalcy should be restored and protests outside the
gate be ended, and then after one month the employers would consider reinstating
the workers. The workers did not agree to this and thus CITU also abandoned the
workers. However, the protest of the workers continued.

1 July 2008 - A meeting between the employers and HMS took place in the DLC
office, in which Sirohi agreed to normal working on 2nd, 3rd and 4th July, 2008.

2 July 2008 - The employers instead of complying, locked out the remaining 192
workmen. The workers are forced to resume their protest. Dharna [sort of a hunger
strike] in the DLC office for 7 days, 3 days before the DM office, a march on-foot
from Surajpur Chowk to the DM office and finally a dharna on the Italian embassy
is organized, but the entire machinery remains totally insensitive towards the
cause of the workers.

Several times the dispute is negotiated at the DLC office or the police station, but
only to be repudiated by the employers on one or other pretext or intrigue.

13 July 2008 - The workers present themselves at the factory pursuant to the
settlement and to show their bona fide attitude. The next meeting is fixed at the
DLC office for 16.7.2008.

3|Page
ASSIGNMENT- The Dispute at Graziano Trasmissioni – a Chronology
1 Event

16 July 2008 - Of the 27 suspended workers the employers only reinstate 12, while
they terminate the services of 15 workers. This was apparently a device to divide
and crush the workers, one by one. 55 more were notified that they would be
reinstated, but were locked out the very next day on the pretext of coming late at
9 am instead of 6 am. The employers also obtained an injunction form the Court
preventing workers from agitating within 300 metres of the Factory premises.

The Labour Commissioner came to Ghaziabad from Kanpur. The workers met him
and complained about the partial and callous attitude of the DLC, Noida. The
Commissioner entrusted the matter to the DLC, Ghaziabad.

4 September 2008 - A meeting of the parties in DLC office, Ghaziabad took place.

16 September 2008 - Another meeting in DLC, Ghaziabad office between

employers and HMS took place. None of the elected representatives of the
workmen was present in the meeting. It was agreed that the workers would tender
an apology. The DLC, Noida directed the workers to tender an apology on or
before 22.9.2008.

18 September 2008 - The workers go to tender their apology but the employers tell
them that they would call the workers on 22.9.2008. The DLC refuses to take the
apology in his office.

On September 22, 2008 - as the dharna continued outside, there was a clash inside
between the contract workers and the management over the terrible working and
living conditions. These workers were obviously exhausted having to live their
lives inside the factory premises like prisoners. During the course of this clash, the
CEO jumped from the first floor and sustained fatal injuries. The workers outside
continued their dharna, unaware of was going on inside. They were arrested by
the police. Police arrested over 200 workers. 76 were charged under Sections 302
and 307. 74 were charged under 107, 116 and 151. Many workers spent long
periods in jail before being bailed out, and two, Rajendra and Mahendra Singh,
who were leading the dharna on that day, still remain in jail. During the whole
course of the court proceedings, the management and police conspired to lay false
charges on the workers and fix them.

On October 24, 2008 - The management dismissed all the regular workers. After the
incident, the contract workers were also dismissed.

4|Page
ASSIGNMENT- The Dispute at Graziano Trasmissioni – a Chronology
1 Event

Four years later, the workers of Graziano are determined to carry on their struggle
for justice. This important struggle deserves the full support of the entire working
class.
Impact on the Employees:
It is interesting to note that the workers of Graziano were associated with
three national trade unions during the different phases of struggle, i.e., with the
AITUC in first phase, with CITU for a short period and finally with the HMS in
the last phase. Despite their efforts and help from these national trade unions, the
Graziano workers were unsuccessful in getting their union registered with the
labour department.

Impact on the Government:

The reaction of the state government to this case was to punish all the workers of
the region. After the incident the state government took following steps:

1. Set-up of two new police circles for Noida urban area, including one
industrial police circle; appointment of a Special Circle officer, Industries to
provide security to Industrialists and a special force was raised for that; the
launch of a special helpline to solve the problems of employers within two
hours; and bulk arm licenses to be given to private security at industries in
SEZs.
2. Issue of two GOs by the state government, one for Greater Noida and the
other for Noida directing that the powers of the Labour commissioner of UP
for these two industrial areas now be vested in the CEO of Noida.
Relinquishing of the post of Deputy Labour Commisioner (DLC) and as per
the order, assigning the Assistant Labour Commissioners (ALCs) to work
directly under these two CEOs of Noida.
3. Establishment of a Quick Reaction Team and Industrial relations committee
comprising of CEOs of Noida and Greater Noida authorities and senior
district police officers to look into the problems of industrialists, including
labour disputes.

Impact on the Management & Company:

5|Page
ASSIGNMENT- The Dispute at Graziano Trasmissioni – a Chronology
1 Event

The Company had obtained the injunction order from the honorable court
that the striking employees should stay beyond 300 meters away from the factory
boundary. The Management condemn for the attack. This is no means a regular
labour conflict but is truly criminal action said from their point of view.

Conclusion:
A multi-level analysis shows that there was an environment in which extreme
socio-economic inequality was manifest in workforce. At the second level, the
management interfered with workers’ right to association and negotiation, leading
to counter measures by the unions. At the third level, as the unions began
obstructing the companies’ plans, managers reacted aggressively, leading to an
unusual escalation of disputes and disruptions, which should have signalled to
management that trouble was on its way. But, instead of considering these chains
of reactions as warning signs, the companies continued to ignore the causes.

6|Page