A

PROJECT REPORT
ON
EMPLOYEE GRIEVANCE HANDELING
AT
LUCAS TVS LIMITED, Hyderabad
Submitted for the partial fulfillment for the award of degree of
BACHELORS OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION (BBA)
(2016-2019)

Submitted by
P.SAIKRISHNA
(Redg no :16064)

Under the esteemed guidance of

Mr.RAKESH SHARMA

Department of commerce and management

Dr. NARAYANA COLLEGE OF COMMERCE,
Kukatpally
(Affiliated to Osmania university) HYDERABAD
1|Page
 DECLARATION
I here by declare that this project titled “Employee grievance handling at LUCAS
TVS Ltd” being submitted is a bonafide work carried out by me for the award of
degree of Bachelor of Business Administration (BBA) from Dr.Narayana College
of commerce, Kukatpally affiliated to O.U. Hyderabad, Under the guidance of Mr.
Rakesh Sharma, Vice - Principal, Dr.Narayana College of Commerce, for the
Academic year 2016-19 and it is not submitted to any other University or
Institution for the award of any degree / diploma certificate or published any time
before.

(P.SAIKRISHNA)

Regd no : 16064

2|Page
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the Project Report titled “effectiveness of employee grievance
handling management” being submitted by Mr.P.Saikrihna in partial fulfilment for
the award of the degree of Bachelors of Business Administration (BBA) from
Dr.Narayana College of commerce, Kukatpally affiliated to O.U. Hyderabad, is a
record of bonafide work carried out by her under my guidance and supervision,
.This has not been submitted to any other University or Institution for the award of
any degree/diploma/certificate.

( Rakesh Sharma . A, MBA)

VICE PRINCIPAL
Dr. NARAYANA COLLEGE OF COMMERCE
Kukatpally

(Dr.John Moses,Mcom,Ph.D)
PRINCIPAL
Dr.Narayana College of commerce
Kukatpally
Hyderabad

3|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
It is great pleasure to take the opportunity to acknowledge and express my
gratitude to all those who helped me throughout my project first of all I
would like to take this opportunity to thank our beloved Dr.S.L.Narayana,
Chairman of Dr Narayana College of Commerce affiliated to Osmania
University for having allotted project work as a part of BBA course.

I also Express my sincere thanks to Dr John Moses, Principal ,Dr

Narayana Degree College of Commerce, for giving me permission for
taking up my project work.

I also Convey my gratitude to Mr.Rakesh Sharma Vice-Principal ,Dr

Narayana Degree College of Commerce, for giving me permission for
taking up my project work.

Finally I would also like to thank all the staff members in the Department
of Management , Dr Narayana Degree College of Commerce ,for their
support during the project.

Mr.D.Umamaheswaran, Senior Personnel Officer, Lucas –TVS Ltd.,

who provided valuable guidance throughout the project in his busy
schedule.

4|Page
We thank our Management, Department Staffs, and Our Parents for their
support and above all to God for showering his blessing upon us.
A special word of thanks to all those we have failed to acknowledge.

P.SAIKRISHNA

5|Page
 ABSTRACT

 This study focuses on Effectiveness of Grievance Handling

 Mechanism at Lucas-TVS Limited, Puducherry.
 Grievance is any kind of dissatisfaction with regard to pay,
promotion, suspension, working condition etc.

The objective of the study is to find the effectiveness of grievance

handling mechanism being followed.

 The sample size is 35 and the population size is 140

 The tools used for the study are Percentage method and Correlation
 The study infers that most of employees are highly satisfied with
the mechanism being followed.

6|Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE NO.

I INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 9
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY 19-20
RESEARCH OF THE STUDY 21-27
SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE 28
STUDY
II REVIEW OF LITERATURE
III INDUSTRIAL PROFILE 29-33
IV COMPANY PROFILE 34-41
V DATA ANALYSIS AND 42-61
INTERPRETATION
VI FINDINGS OF THE STUDY 62
SUGGESTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS
63-65
CONCLUSION 66
ANNEXURE I
ANNEXURE II

7|Page
 CHAPTER-1

INTRODUCTION

8|Page
INTRODUCTION FOR THE STUDY

1. The aim of the study is to find whether the grievance handling

mechanism ensures that employee’s problems are recognized and
appropriately reviewed in a prompt and timely manner.
2. The grievance mechanism acts as a foundation for a harmonious
and healthy relationship between employee and employer.
3. The grievance mechanism ensures a fair and just treatment of
employee’s concerns and prompt resolution of grievances without
discrimination, coercion, restraint or reprisal against any employee
who may submit or be involved in a grievance.

9|Page
Objectives of the Study

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE
To study the effectiveness of grievance handling mechanism.

SECONDARY OBJECTIVE

1. To identify whether the employees are aware of the grievance

handling mechanism.
2. To identify whether the grievance handling system leads to a
favorable attitude towards the management
3. To identify that the grievance handling system leads to a mutual
understanding between workers and the management
4. To know the level of satisfaction towards the grievance handling
procedure of the organization
5. To identify the factors influencing the effectiveness of the
grievance handling in the organization

10 | P a g e
 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 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
11 | P a g e
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
12 | P a g e
may be concerned with the right to strike, capital
punishment, prohibition etc:

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.

Description of statistical tools used

 Percentage method
 Correlation

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

13 | P a g e
CORRELATION

Correlation analysis deals with the association between two or more

variables. It does not tell anything about cause and effect relationship.
Correlation is described or classified in several different ways. Three of
the most important ways of classifying correlation are :

1. Positive and Negative

2. Simple, Multiple and Partial
3. Linear and Non-Linear

Karl Pearson’s method is popularly known as Pearson’s coefficient of

correlation. It is denoted by the symbol ‘r’.

∑xy
Formula for Karl Pearson’s coefficient r =

√∑x2 * ∑y2

The value of the coefficient of correlation as obtained by the above

formula shall always lie between +1 and -1. When r = 1, it means

14 | P a g e
 there is perfect positive correlation between variables. When r = -1, it
means there is perfect negative correlation between variables. When r
= 0, it means no relationship between variables.

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 & secondary.

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

Secondary Data
Secondary data are collected from books and internet.

15 | P a g e
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 : Employees at Lucas- TVS

Limited. Sample Size : 35 samples
Sample Test : Percentage Method & Correlation
Sample Media : Questionnaire
Sampling Method : Simple Random Sampling

16 | P a g e
Limitations of the study
 The sample size was restricted to 100

 Personal interview was not allowed.

SCOPE FOR THE STUDY

 The project throws light on need for Grievance handling

mechanism and this study facilitates the management for further
improvement on the same.

 This study will be useful when similar kind of research is

undertaken.

17 | P a g e
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF
LITERATURE

18 | P a g e
 GRIEVANCE

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 worker’s

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.

The usual steps in grievance procedure are

1. Conference among the aggrieved employee, the supervisor, and the

union steward.

19 | P a g e
 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.

ARBITRATION
Arbitration is a procedure in which a neutral third-party study 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 labor and the management. The labor 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.

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

20 | P a g e
  Check the grieving’s title and employment status to determine if he
/ she are included in a union eligible classification.
 Note the supervisor’s respondent obligation under the grievance
procedure.
 Review the requested solution to the grievance. Determine if the
relief sought is beyond a supervisor’s 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.

articles related to grievance:

Measures of supervisory behaviors and supervisor’s knowledge of

the collective agreement should, intuitively, be related to the occurrence
of grievable events, but there has been no theory advanced to explain
grievable events. Kleene , Nickelsburg and Pilar ski 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.

21 | P a g e
 Grievants 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. Grievants were more
younger and had less education than nongrievants.

Gordon and Miller, Allen and Keavney and Klass note the
important role that expectancy theory could play in differentiating
grievants and nongrievants. 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.

Bemmels, Reshef and Stratton-Devine included the shop steward’s

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

22 | P a g e
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 Bemols and
the steward’s assessment of the supervisors’ knowledge of the collective
agreement was negatively related to complaints.
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.
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

23 | P a g e
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.
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.

24 | P a g e
 Grievance could be classified into 4 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.
Five types of grievance systems were typically noted in the
literature. They were the open-door policy, step-review method, peer-
review also called the grievance committee or roundtable, ombudsman
and hearing officer. In the public-sector study. The predominant method
of grievance adjudication was the step-review method used either
singularly or in combination with a peer-review committee. The step-
review method had characteristics similar to the grievance / arbitration
procedures found in union contracts.

25 | P a g e
The step-review method has a preestablished set of steps for reviewing
employee complaints by succeeding higher levels of agency personnel.

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
labor 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.

26 | P a g e
 CHAPTER III

INDUSTRY PROFILE

27 | P a g e
Lucas TVS was established in 1962 as Joint Venture between Lucas Plc.
UK and TVS Group, India. Lucas started operations in India from 1930
as Lucas Indian Service for providing warranty and aftersales service to
many of the imported vehicles which carried Lucas parts.
Initially with Starters, Dynamos and
Distributor products, Lucas TVS, over the years, commenced providing
complete system solutions in Auto Electricals, specialized motors for Air
Compressors, Stop - Start systems, Engine Cooling modules, Ignition
products, Diesel Fuel Injection systems etc.

Lucas TVS develops and integrates their products in the

vehicles and equipment, from the design stage onwards and carries out
application engineering, development, manufacturing and service.
The company developed innovative products,
manufacturing systems and processes, which had brought growth in
business and this could result in Lucas TVS being one of the few
companies in the World to be awarded the Deming Application Prize and
the Deming Grand Prize, by Union of Japanese Scientists & Engineers
and setting benchmarks in the industry.
Lucas TVS relies on investing in both people
and infrastructure. Lucas TVS has established R&D and Product Proving
and Reliability testing facilities, which have been recognized by the
Government of India – Dept. of Science & Technology.

28 | P a g e
n the year 2001 Lucas TVS became a wholly owned company of TVS
Group, as Lucas the parent company ceased to exist worldwide. While
this might have created a technological challenge, Lucas TVS recognized
this as an opportunity and exploited successfully; today 75% of revenues
are from products engineered and developed locally by Lucas TVS.
Lucas TVS is currently supplying to over 90% of automotive
manufacturers in India and also exporting to North America and Europe.

29 | P a g e
Lucas TVS products find applications in Two/Three Wheelers,
Passenger Cars, Commercial Vehicles, Tractors & Stationery Engines.
Through export partners, Lucas TVS products are also integrated into
some of the top global brands like Audi, Mercedes-Benz, BMW,
Porsche, Rolls Royce, etc.
While Starters and Alternators form the backbone of
products, Lucas TVS established new benchmarks, focusing on higher
efficiency at lighter weight and costs, being the present focus of
automotive industry – e.g. the new SGM25 starter for 1.2L gasoline
vehicles, high efficiency alternators (around 78% at lower speeds) to
cater to the increased power requirements of gadgets and gizmos used in
the vehicles, 150A Bus Alternator for the new luxury buses to run the air
conditioners, onboard entertainment and electronics and 180A bus
alternators for battery less option. This contributes to the Govt. of India
‘Make in India’ challenge.
Lucas TVS has developed Stop-Start Systems,
Integral Starter Generators, Emission Control products like Urea Pumps
and Brushless Motor Technologies, to take care of the growing need of
environmental strategies of India.
Lucas TVS has identified the need in the consumer
industry, with synergy developed by Lucas TVS over the years and is
working with some of the leading consumer product manufacturers in
India to provide energy saving solutions using Brushless Motors and

30 | P a g e
Integrated Controls to meet the strict Energy Star Requirements of their
products – e.g. motors in refrigerators, air conditioners, air handling as
well as basic high efficiency home fans, pumping solutions etc
Based on the capabilities and
commitment to support the society, Lucas TVS has been selected by the
Government of India to partner with the prestigious Indian Institute of
Technology Madras in the next generation rural electrification pilot
projects from the infant stage itself.
TECHNOLOGY-

31 | P a g e
 CHAPTER IV

COMPANY PROFILE

32 | P a g e
Lucas - TVS was set up in 1961 as a joint venture of Lucas Industries
plc., UK and T V Sundaram Iyengar & Sons (TVS), India, to
manufacture Automotive Electrical Systems. One of the top ten
automotive component suppliers in the world, Lucas Varity was formed
by the merger of the Lucas Industries of the UK and the Varity
Corporation of the US in September 1996. The company designs,
manufactures and supplies advanced technology systems, products and
services to the world's automotive, after market, diesel engine and
aerospace industries.
The combination of these two well-known groups has resulted in the
establishment of a vibrant company, which has had a successful track
record of sustained growth over the last three decades. TVS is one of
India's twenty large industrial houses with twenty-five manufacturing
companies and a turnover in excess of US$ 1.3 billion. The turnover of
Lucas-TVS and its divisions is US$ 233 million during 2003-2004.
Incorporating the strengths of Lucas UK and the TVS Group, Lucas TVS
has emerged as one of the foremost leaders in the automotive industry
today. Lucas TVS reaches out to all segments of the automotive industry
such as passenger cars, commercial vehicles, tractors, jeeps, two-
wheelers and off-highway vehicles as well as for stationary and marine
applications. With the automobile industry in India currently

33 | P a g e
undergoing phenomenal changes, Lucas-TVS, with its excellent
facilities, is fully equipped to meet the challenges of tomorrow.

PRODUCTS: Lucas-TVS manufactures the most comprehensive

range of auto electrical components in the country. A range which
continues to set standards in the industry. The products are designed to
meet the demands of vehicle manufacturers both in India and worldwide.
With the emission standards in India becoming increasingly stringent,
Lucas-TVS has ensured that each of its products is manufactured to meet
global standards

LIST OF PRODUCTS MANUFACTURED

Lucas-TVS Product Range for Indian Lucas-TVS Product Range for

Market US/European Market
Starter Motor Starter Motor
Alternator Alternator
Headlamp Small Motor
14W Wiper Motor
Windshield Wiper Motor (GM Range)
LRW Products
Small Motor Dynamo Regulator
Wiper Motor
Blower Motor
Fan Motor
Dynamo Regulator Dynamo
Dynamo Auto Electricals
Ignition Coil

34 | P a g e
CLIENTS

INTERNATIONAL
CUSTOMER
COLLABORATOR
Cars
Maruti Udyog Suzuki, Japan
Hindustan Motors Isuzu, Japan. Mitsubishi, Japan
TATA Engineering and
Locomotive Company
General Motors, India General Motors, USA
Ford India Ford, UK
Daewoo Motors Co., India Daewoo, Korea
Ind Auto Fiat, Italy
Hyundai Motors, India Hyundai Motors, Korea
Tractors
Mahindra & Mahindra
International Harvester Corporation,
UK

Tractors and Farm Equipment’s

Massey Ferguson, UK
(TAFE)
Escorts Urus, Poland. Ford, UK
HMT Zeter, Czechoslovakia
Eicher Tractors Good Earth, Germany
Punjab Tractors
Gujarat Tractors Zeter, Czechoslovakia

35 | P a g e
DIVISIONS

Lucas TVS has grown hand in hand with the automobile industry in the
country. The company's policies have recognized the need to respond
effectively to changing customer needs, helping to propel it to a position
of leadership. The company has raised its standards on quality,
productivity, reliability and flexibility by channeling its interests.
At present, there are five divisions:
1. Auto Electricals L-TVS
2. Fuel Injection Equipment (FIE) - DTVS
3. Electronic Ignition Systems (INEL)
4. Automotive Lighting (IJL)
5. After Market Operations (LIS)

ACHIEVEMENTS
Lucas-TVS, a TVS group company, has bagged the prestigious Deming
Application Award for the year 2004. This was announced by the
Deming Prize Committee of Japanese Union of Scientists and Engineers
(JUSE).

36 | P a g e
TECHNOLOGY- MANUFACTURING:
Products are manufactured using state-of-the-art facilities
organized in Product Units, Modules, Nagore Cells and Assembly Cells,
and incorporating Quick Change Tooling, Pooka Yoke and Chaka Chaka
(Load-switch-Walk). The condition of machines is monitored and
maintained by TPM techniques and the schedule adherence is monitored
by DRM (Daily Routine Management) while Process & Product Quality
are ensured by strict adherence to LTVS Quality System Procedures.
Continuous Improvements or Made through SGAs, task forces and QITs
using Cross Functional Teams. The Manufacturing processes are
competently backed up by an advanced Tool Room and an inhouse SPM/
Process Plant manufacturing facility. The entire organization is firmly
entrenched in the change process and committed to CIP (Continuous
Improvement Programme).

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT:

Lucas-TVS, believes that quality begins and ends with the customer.
This means identifying customer needs and comprehensively meeting
them. For the company, quality is not just conformance to drawings or
specifications but ensuring customer satisfaction and further Customer
Delight. This belief forms the basis of its approach to Total Quality
Management (TQM). Quality Assurance methods like Advanced
Product Quality Planning, Statistical Process Control Techniques,

37 | P a g e
Effective Tool Management System, Process Capability Improvements,
Preventive Maintenance, Producer Control and Small Group Activities
form the backbone of the system approach adopted.
In its continuous pursuit of both technological as well
as methodological excellence, Lucas-TVS has scripted yet another new
dimension to manufacturing by not only adopting the Cellular
Manufacturing System / JIT but also extending the same to its Suppliers.
By the implementation of this system components from its suppliers are
delivered on a pull basis with First-In First-Out concept supported by
simple visual controls and supplied to the line on an hourly basis with
KANBAN system.

38 | P a g e
39 | P a g e
 CHAPTER V

DATA
ANALYSIS

AND
INTERPRETATION

40 | P a g e
 Distribution of respondents regarding Temporary relief

Table

Sl. No. Temporary No. of Percentage

relief respondents

1 Yes 19 54.3

2 No 16 45.7

Total 35 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 54.3% of respondent’s state

that they are being provided with temporary relief and 45.7% stating they
are not being provided relief.

Distribution of respondents regarding Temporary relief

Chart

temporary relief
60

50

40

30

20

10

0
yes no

temporary relief

41 | P a g e
 Distribution of respondents based on age

Table

Sl.No. Age Frequency Percentage

1 19-25 6 17.1

2 26-30 29 82.9

Total 35 100

Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 17.1% of respondents are between
the age group 19-25 and 82.9% are between the age group 26-30.

Distribution of respondents based on age

Chart

age
19-25

26-30

42 | P a g e
Distribution of respondents towards supervisors’ level of skill
Table

Supervisor
Sl.No. possess necessary Frequency Percentage
skill

1 very highly skilled 32 91.4

2 moderately skilled 3 8.6

Total 35 100

Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 91.4% of respondent’s state
that their supervisor are highly skilled and 8.6% state that their
supervisor is moderately skilled.

Distribution of respondents towards supervisors’ level of skill

Chart

supervisor has skill

100

80

60

40

20

0
very highly skilled moderately skilled

supervisor has skill

43 | P a g e
Distribution of respondents towards awareness of committees
Table

Sl.No Awareness Frequency Percentag

of e
committees

1 yes 35 100.0

Total 35 100
Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 100% of respondents are
aware of the various committees that are framed for redressing their
grievance.

Distribution of respondents towards awareness of committees

Chart

various committee
120

100

80

60

40

20

0
yes

various committee

44 | P a g e
 Distribution of respondents towards decision given

Table

Sl.No. Decision Frequency Percentage

given is
satisfactory
or not

1 Highly
satisfactory 31 88.6

2 Moderately 4 11.4
satisfactory

Total 35 100

Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 88.6% of respondents are
highly satisfied towards the decision given by the management and
11.4% of respondents are moderately satisfied towards the decision.

Distribution of respondents towards decision given

Chart No: 8.5

feel about decision given

100

80

60

40

20

0
highly satisfactory moderately satisfact

feel about decision given

45 | P a g e
 Distribution of respondents towards the informal channel
Table

Sl.No Informal No. of respondents Percentage

channel

1 co worker 23 65.7

2 peer 12 34.3

Total 35 100

Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 65.7% of respondents
communicate to their co-workers and 34.3% of respondents
communicate to their peer.

Distribution of respondents towards the informal channel

Chart

informal channel
70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
co w orker peer

informal channel

46 | P a g e
 Distribution of respondents towards real basis of identification of
their grievance
Table

Sl.No. Real basis Frequency Percentage

1 strongly
agree 27 77.1

2 agree 8 22.9

Total 35 100

Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 77.1% of respondents strongly
agree that real basis is identified and 22.9% of respondents agree that
real basis is identified.
Distribution of respondents towards real basis of identification of
their grievance
Chart

real basis identified

agree

strongly agree

47 | P a g e
Distribution of respondents towards mechanism followed resolves
grievance or not
Table

Sl.No. Mechanism No. of Percentag

resolves respondents e
grievance or
not

1 yes 34 97.1

2 no 1 2.9

Total 35 100

Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 97.1% of respondents agree that
mechanism resolves grievance and 2.9% of respondents disagree that
mechanism does not resolve grievance.

Distribution of respondents towards mechanism followed resolves

grievance or not
Chart

mechanism resolves grievance

no

yes

48 | P a g e
Distribution of respondents towards importance given to discussion
and conference
Table

Sl.No. Discussion and No. of Percentage

conference respondents
1 strongly agree 29 82.9

2 agree 6 17.1

Total 35 100

Inference
From the above table it is inferred that 82.9% of respondents strongly
agree that discussion and conference is facilitated and 17.1% of
respondents agree that discussion and conference is facilitated.

Distribution of respondents towards importance given to discussion

and conference
Chart

discussion and conference

100

80

60

40

20

0
strongly agree agree

discussion and conference

49 | P a g e
Distribution of respondents regarding whom they redress for
grievance
TABLE

Sl.No. Whom do Frequency Percentage

you redress
1 office 4 11.4
bearers
2 committee 16 45.7
members
3 3 8.6
hr
4 2 5.7
mangers
5 7 20.0
union
members
6 1 2.9
counselor
7 1 2.9
friends
8 1 2.9
co workers

Total 35 100

Inference:

From the above table it is inferred that 11.4% of respondents

communicate grievances through office bearers, 45.7% through
committee members, 8.6% through HR, 5.7 through managers, 20%
through union members, 2.9 through counselor, 2.9 through friends and
2.9 through coworkers.

50 | P a g e
 Distribution of respondents regarding whom they redress for
grievance
Chart

to whom to redress

co w orkers

friends

counsellor offiece bearers

union members

mangers
committee members

hr

51 | P a g e
 Distribution of respondents based on qualification
Table

Sl.No. Qualification Frequency Percentage

1 higher 31 88.6
secondary

2 Diploma 1 2.9

3 under graduate 3 8.6

Total 35 100

Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 88.6% of respondents are
qualified up to higher secondary, 2.9% of respondents are diploma and
8.6% are under graduate.

Distribution of respondents based on qualification

Chart

qualification

under graduate

diploma

higher secondary

52 | P a g e
 Distribution of respondents regarding awareness of various
committees

Table

Various
Sl.No. committees Frequency Percentage
canteen,sga 1 2.9
1
Sga,tei, 4 11.4
2 transport
transport,wel 6 17.1
3 fare,sga
4 transport, 4 11.4
safety,
canteen
5 safety,transp 4 11.4
ort,sga
6 canteen,tei,sa 3 8.6
fety,transport
7 tei,sga,cantee 9 25.7
n,transport
8 transport, 2 5.7
welfare,
safety
9 tei,sga,transp 2 5.7
ort,welfare

Total 35 100

Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 2.9% of respondents are aware of
canteen-sga committee,11.4% of respondents are aware of sga-tei-
transport committee,17.1% of respondents are aware of transport-
welfare-sga,11.4% t of respondents are aware transport, safety, canteen
,11.4% of respondents are aware safety,transport,sga ,8.6% of
respondents are aware of canteen,tei,safety,transport,25.7% of

53 | P a g e
respondents are aware tei,sga,canteen,transport,5.7% of respondents are
aware transport, welfare, safety and 5.7% of respondents are aware of
tei,sga,transport,welfare.
Distribution of respondents regarding awareness of various
3committees
Chart

available comit

tei,sga,transport,w e canteen,sga

transport,w elfare, s sga,tei, transport

transport,w elfare,sg
tei,sga,canteen,tran

transport,safety, ca
canteen,tei,safety,t
safety,transport,sga

Distribution of respondents regarding regular follow up

Table

Sl.No. Regular No. of Percentag

follow-up respondents e

1 Yes 35 100.0

Total 35 100

54 | P a g e
Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 100% of respondents have agreed
that there is regular follow up to ensure right decision is given.

Distribution of respondents regarding regular follow up

Chart

regular follow up
120

100

80

60

40

20

0
yes

regular follow up

Distribution of respondents regarding supervisors’ authority

Table

Sl.No Supervisor has given No. of Percentag

authority respondents e

Valid Has given authority 35 100.0

Total 35 100

55 | P a g e
Inference:
From the above table it is inferred that 100% of respondents have agreed
that supervisor is given authority.

Distribution of respondents regarding supervisors’ authority

Chart

supervisor given authority

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
has given authority

supervisor given authority

56 | P a g e
 CHAPTER VI

FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

57 | P a g e
FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

1. 54.3% of respondent’s state that they are being provided with

temporary relief until final decision is taken.
2. 82.9% of the respondents are between the age group 26-30.
3. 91.4% of respondents state that their supervisors are highly skilled
that is the supervisors possess necessary human relation skills.
4. 100% of respondents are aware of the various committees that are
framed for redressing their grievance.
5. 88.6% of respondents are highly satisfied towards the decision
given by the management.
6. 65.7% of respondents communicate to their co-workers. It is their
informal channel.
7. 77.1% of respondents strongly agree that real basis of there is
identified.
8. 97.1% of respondents agree that mechanism being followed
resolves their grievance.
9. 82.9% of respondents strongly agree that discussion and conference
is facilitated rather than executive authority.
10. 45.7% of respondents’ immediately redress their grievance
through committee members.
11. 88.6% of respondents are qualified up to higher secondary.
12. 25.7% of respondents are aware of tei, sga, canteen, transport
committees available.
58 | P a g e
13. 100% of respondents have agreed that there is regular follow
up to ensure right decision is given.
14. 100% of respondents have agreed that supervisor is given
authority to take action necessary to resolve the problem.
15. When there is deviation in the real basis identification it will
be reflected in the level of satisfaction regarding decision given.

59 | P a g e
 SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Job descriptions, responsibilities should be as clear as possible.

Everyone should be informed of company’s goals and expectation
including what is expected from each individual.

2. Informal counseling helps to address and manage grievances in the

workplace.

3. Conflict management in the organization will be helpful to reduce

the number of grievance rates.

4. Open door policy can be used. The barriers that exist between the
various categories are to some extent broken by personal contact
and mutual understanding.

5. Suggestion boxes can be installed. This brings the problem or

conflict of interest to light.

6. Accident rates, Requests for transfers, Resignations, and

disciplinary cases should be analyzed since they reveal the general
patterns that are not apparent.

7. Temporary relief can be provided so that the delay does not

increase his frustration and anxiety and thereby not affecting his /
her morale and productivity.

60 | P a g e
 CONCLUSION

The study reveals that the Grievance handling mechanism is satisfactory.

The organization is recognizing the importance of satisfying the
employees and retaining them. Further improvements can be made so
that all members are highly satisfied with the procedure. The suggestions
and recommendations when implemented will still more benefit the
organization.

61 | P a g e
 ANNEXURE I

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Aswathappa, K., Human resource and Personnel management,

TATA McGraw- HILL.
2. Arun monappa and Saiyadain, Mirza S., Personnel management,
TATA McGraw- HILL.
3. Flippo, Edwin B., Personnel management, McGraw-Hill
International Publications.

WEB SITE

1. www.citehr.com
2. www.findatricles.com

62 | P a g e
 ANNEXURE II

QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Name:
2. Gender:
i. Male [ ]
ii. Female[ ]
3. Age:
i.19-25 [ ]
ii.26-30 [ ]
iii.31 and above[ ]
4. Educational qualification:
I. Higher secondary[ ]
ii. Diploma [ ]
iii. Under graduate [ ]
iv.Post graduate [ ]
5. Marital status:
I. Married [ ]
ii.Unmarried[ ]
6. Are you aware of the various committees that redress the
grievance?
I. Yes[ ]
ii. No[ ]
63 | P a g e
7. If yes for above question kindly list out the various committees
available
I yes[ ]
Ii no[ ]
8. Are you aware of the members of the various committees?
i.Yes[ ]
ii.No[ ]
9. Are you aware of the weekly/monthly meetings of the various
committees which are being held?
I. Yes[ ]
ii.No[ ]
10. .In case the grievance has to be immediately redressed to
whom do you
communicate?
11. Is there any informal channel to redress your grievance such
as
i. Co-worker[ ]
ii. Peer[ ]
iii. If others,please specify( )

i. Is the sincere basis of your problem identified?

iStrongly agree[ ]
ii.Agree[ ]

64 | P a g e
 iii.Disagree[ ]
iv.Strongly disagree[ ]
ii. Does your higher authority listen when your grievance is
presented?
i. Listens patiently[ ]
ii.Shouts at you[ ]
iii.Does not listen at all[ ]
iii. Is importance given to what is right rather than who is right?
i.Yes[ ]
ii.No[ ]
iv. Are you constantly informed on what is being done about your
grievance?
i. Very often being informed[ ]
ii.Seldom being informed [ ]
iii.Does not inform at all [ ]
v. Is an atmosphere of cordiality and co-operation facilitated through
mutual discussion and conference?
i. Yes[ ]
ii. No[ ]

vi. Is there a positive and friendly approach during grievance

handling?
i. Yes[ ]

65 | P a g e
 ii. No[ ]
vii. Do you feel that discussion and conference is given more
importance rather than executive authority?
i. Strongly agree[ ]
ii. Agree[ ]
iii. Disagree[ ]
iv. Strongly disagree[ ]
viii. Is there a spirit of give and take and sharing and working
together?
i. Yes[ ]
ii. No[ ]
ix. Has the mechanism being followed resolves your grievance?
i.Yes[ ]
ii.No[ ]
x. How do you feel about the decision given corresponding to your
grievance? Is it
i. Highly satisfactory[ ]
ii.Moderately satisfactory[ ]
iii.No satisfaction[ ]

xi. Is there regular follow up to ensure that the right decision has
ended up in satisfactions?
i. Yes[ ]

66 | P a g e
 ii. No[ ]
xii. Is there any temporary relief provided until proper decision is
made so that it does not raise any adverse effects within the
organization?
i. Yes[ ]
ii. No[ ]
xiii. Do the various committee members actively engage in resolving
your problem?
i. Yes[ ]
ii. No[ ]
xiv. If the decision is not satisfactory are you given opportunity to
take it to higher officials?
i. Yes[ ]
ii. No[ ]

xv. Do you feel open to share your grievances?

i.Yes[ ]
ii.No[ ]

xvi. Do you feel that the supervisor possesses necessary human

relation skills in terms of understanding your problem?
i. Very highly skilled[ ]
ii.Moderately skilled[ ]

67 | P a g e
 iii.Not skilled[ ]
xvii. Are the matters relevant to the grievance kept confidential?
i.highly confidential[ ]
ii.Not kept confidential[ ]
xviii. Are the procedures for conveying grievance simple and easy to
utilize?
i. Very simple[ ]
ii.Difficult to utilize[ ]
xix. Is the supervisor given authority to take action necessary to
resolve the problem?
i. Has given authority[ ]
ii.Does not have authority[ ]
xx. Are proper records maintained on each grievance?
i.Yes[ ]
ii.No[ ]

68 | P a g e