It was the year 1997. I was doing my
post-graduation (Masters) in management from the institute which is affiliated
to Pune University. The situation was not that good. Our batch was the second
batch of the management college. Our senior batch was almost ready for
placement, however there were very few companies visiting our campus. It was
the era of slowdown because of Asian financial crisis. Companies were shutting
down their shops. The militant left union known for their adamant attitude was
making a lot of noise on the issues of wage agreement. Industries over the
district in different industrial areas were struggling with top line,
profitability and at other side with the non-cooperation from the union
resulting in poor productivity. Few local industrialists were more much in
trouble. The other union which was affiliated to the right-wing political party
was blackmailing industries and few union leaders were demanding ransom from
industries. Few industries were shifting to neighbouring states.
The situation was the same everywhere in the
state. Few years back the government had come with the idea of establishing
industrial belts in different regions. The idea was good, but the progress was
slow. The infrastructure required for the industries was not that good in those
delocalised regions. However few industries choose to be there to get the tax
and other benefits. The new industries became the cash cows for local mafias.
The environment was not that conducive for industries.
Strikes, go slow and agitations were common.
This took me in 1982 where the great Bombay textile strike was called by mill
workers of Mumbai under the leadership of Datta Samant. We all know the debacle
of this strike. It is said that this strike was the big conspiracy against the
poor mill workers by union leaders, political leaders and mill owners. This
strike was spontaneous, and workers went to Mr. Samant demanded him to lead the
strike, discarding established unions that time. Main demands were for more
bonus and increase in wages. This strike lasted almost 19 months with the
involvement of almost 0.25 million mill workers resulting in permanent closure
of textile mills and pushing almost billions of people in poverty and hardship.
Mr. Samant was a successful union leader dealing with employers for wage
increase earlier. His militant style got popular and he established his
credibility among the workmen. Because of his success, mill workers demanded
him to be the leader and lead the strike. However, Samant was not ready for
that. He agreed finally when workmen were too pushy and were not ready to leave
his home. Very soon other leftist union supported Mr. Samant While fighting for
greater pay and better conditions for the workers, Samant and his allies also
sought to capitalize and establish their power on the trade union scene in
Mumbai. The government got scared because if this strike would have been
successful, it would have had an impact on port and dock workers and other big
establishments in the region. The then congress government in state and center
didn’t want the influence of Samant. We don’t know what cooked behind the scene
but Samant tried to encash the situation but could not do it as Mill Owners
Association and government refused to budge the pressure of union in spite of economic
losses.
The situation in 1997 was different. Union had
lost its glory but because of the economic conflict, few unions were trying to
establish their power. Industrial relations became better compared to 1982, but
the mindset shift was required.
It was the hot summer of 1996. As a part of the
project assignment, we had to visit industries and work there for a few days.
College had given us the recommendation letter. Contacting industries and
relevant officers was an ongoing struggle. Today the world is so fast with the
internet and mobile. That time, we had landlines and that’s also in a few
homes. There was no other option. We had to travel to an industrial area,
convince the security officer or the guard of the company and request him to
allow us to speak with the relevant officer. It was like company to company
marketing of your resume for the project work. Me along with my 3 friends were
visiting industries daily and finally we got something.
That was my first experience to see the factory
inside. It was a big electrical manufacturing company. We could enter the
factory and meet the Personnel manager of the factory. He had a big cabin. He
invited us inside, listened to us patiently. Finally, he allowed us to work
with him on the project.
During the two months, we spent time with blue
collar workmen, understanding their psyche. I also spoke with union leaders,
worked with them on the shopfloor. I drafted disciplinary action letters, show
cause notices, for the manager. During the span of two months, I realised one
thing and that was, "missed human connection". There was a gap between white
collar and blue-collar workmen. It was always “we” and “they”. Workmen were not
willing to learn new things and managers were not taking them in confidence.
There were separate canteens, separate washrooms, separate locker rooms. During
the briefing session, I asked the question to the manager who was assigned to
us as a project supervisor by the company, “It seems that we are focusing more
on discipline, implementation of agreement clauses, but why don’t we focus on
their skilling and reskilling, training and development and other human
resource factors? Why don't we establish some mechanism to listen to them? Why
don’t we establish connections without involving unions?” He laughed and
replied, “It’s about the attitude from both sides, workmen and management. We
can just try to bring that change. Unfortunately, both parties are not willing
to do that.”
Today we have made a lot of progress in
Industrial Relations. Unions are changing and they are not that extreme. There
are “old school” and “new school” thoughts. One goes by the guidebook, rules
and regulations, this thought is strong in managing any types of unions by any
means. Another school of thought thinks about the human angle in industrial
relations, understands different perspectives, challenges workmen on their
purpose but equally is strong managing them in a balanced way. Both are right
in their ways.
I was not aware that time what is there for me
after submitting the project to the company and my professor. But yes, that
day, I was clear which school of thought, I wanted to follow.
Please read the print replica of my latest book written for leaders on amazon kindle, Vitality in Human Resource: Adding human dimensions in HR processes
(Opinions are purely personal & does not represent my organization)
(Income from books is donated to the Janseva foundation which works for orphans, street children & abandoned elders)
