IMI-Delhi Organizes Workshop on 'Recent Strikes: Issues & Implications'

IMI-Delhi Organizes Workshop on 'Recent Strikes: Issues & Implications' with FES-India

IMI, Delhi in collaboration with the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (FES-India) organised a one day workshop on August 29 on 'Recent Strikes: Issues & Implications'. A short report by Dr. Pravin Sinha, Advisor (Labour), Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, follows: -

Strike involves stoppage of work as a tool for securing the attention of employers. It arises when bargaining and persuasion by the employer and employees have failed. In many countries, trade unions have a right to strike. In India too, trade unions have an implied right to strike. In fact, strikes are not uncommon in India, however, the adoption of new economic policies aimed at opening the Indian economy have introduced new influencing factors. The issue of strikes secured national attention in 2003 when the Tamil Nadu State Government suspended 170,000 government employees for having gone on strike, and subsequently, the Supreme Court held that the workers did not have the right to strike.

Three recent strikes concerning the Airport Authority of India (AAI), Honda Motorcycles and Scooters India Ltd. (HMSI) and the State Bank of India (SBI) also received a lot of attention. Each of these strikes saw an interplay of interests. It is to understand the issues at stake, the compulsions and the implications in these strikes that the International Management Institute (IMI) in collaboration with the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (FES-India) organized the one-day workshop.

Mr. P. P. Mitra identified lack of dialogue and transparency as the primary cause of the SBI strike. In the case of HMSI strike, according to Prof. D. S. Saini, it was the Japanese management, which was at fault because it disregarded social factors and presumed that Indian workers would not react. In the case of AAI strike, Dr. L. D. Mishra blamed external factors.

These presentations were followed by inputs from trade unionists and employees. Mr. R. A. Mittal of HMSI objected to the notion that trade unions are not sensitive to the interests of the company. He said that it was wrong to conclude that workers, and their representative body worked against the interests of the company. The cases indicated that the management actions were not transparent. The workers had no sense of belonging as they were not integrated into the decision-making process.

Mr. K. J. Thakkar of the BMS raised the issue of the work culture of management and of politicians. He suggested developing a positive mindset to work for the development of a national approach. Mr. Pavan Kumar of SAIL highlighted the constructive role played by trade unions in the revival of SAIL's manufacturing facilities. He emphasized that as the profile of Indian workers is changing, the trade unions need to re-orient themselves to meet emerging challenges. He said that it is important for trade unions to know when to strike. Mr. Rajneesh Kumar of BPCL questioned whether there is a place for strikes in the open global market. He highlighted the importance of confidence building measures.

Dr. P. D. Shenoy, Member - National Consumers Disputes Redressal Commission and former Secretary (Labour) of the Government of India, delivered the valedictory address, drawing on his experience as the Chief Labour Commissioner. Dr. Shenoy said that industrial relations was a difficult area and needed to be undertaken with sensitivity.

The workshop was attended by the HR practioners, trade unionists and students of the Human Resources Management programme at IMI.

Concluded.

Contributed by -
Shivanku Misra,
Cultural Secretary, PGP 2006-08,
IMI, Delhi.

MBA Alumni \| MBA Students \| MBA Aspirants \| MBA Forums