Total No. of Questions 08] [Total No. of Pages 03
EXECUTIVE M.B.A. DEGREE EXAMINATION, MAY 2018
First and Second Year
C-HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Labour Legislation IR
Time 3 Hours Maximum Marks :70
SECTION A
Answer any three questions. x 5 15)
Q1) Industrial relations.
Collective bargaining.
Colour legislation.
Remuneration.
Works committees.
Minimum wage.
SECTION B
Answer any three questions. x 15 45)
Q2) What are the dominant aspects of industrial relations?
Q3) Explain different methods of dispute settlement in India.
Q4) Brief out the schemes of workers participation in management.
Q5) What forces influence the labour legislation in India?
Q6) State the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Q7) Explain the various types of labour legislation.
(DEMBC3)
SECTION C
(Compulsory)
Q8) Case Study:
Manidra Manidra Limited (MAML) is a Punjab based company in private
sector with employee strength of around 1,800. The managerial recruitment
policy of the company emphasized that one has to join the company as
management trainees and after completion of their training, they are suitably
absorbed at the lowest intake of the managerial level. The company always
stressed upon that the higher posts in the company are to be filled by promotions
transfers. Therefore, direct recruitment to higher positions is avoided in the
company. In case of any urgency to fill a higher post and right candidates are not
available/eligible from within the company, then only open advertisements are
placed in various newspapers to advertise the vacancies to potential job seekers.
In the year 1992, the company was badly in need of assistant Manager
(Marketing) due to sudden resignation of the person occupying the position.
There were six Assistant managers in the department who had together joined the
company as management trainee in the year 1991. They were promoted to the
present position because of their excellent performance, who in turn reported to
the Manager (Marketing). The company released an advertisement for the post in
two national newspapers. The job specification specified that the person
interested for the post must have atleast 2 years' experience in the field of
marketing and preference will be given to the person having previous experience
of marketing in any organisation. Mr. Satish Madhavan, who had just completed
3 years' service in a FMCG concern applied and was selected. He found the
terms of appointment interesting, so joined the company in June, 1992. As six
assistant managers were already working in the company, Madhavan became the
junior-most assistant manager in their department. As per the promotion policy
of the company the six assistant marketing managers would become eligible for
promotion to the post of manager Marketing in the year 2001 (on completion of
10 years service) and Mr. Madhavan in 2002.
In July 2000, the post of Manager Marketing was vacant because of the
resignation.
The Company decided to fill the vacancy by direct recruitment. In the
advertisement it was stipulated that the applicants should have a minimum of 10
years' experience. Mr. Madhavan met the specification since he had 3 years' of
(DEMBC3)
previous experience plus eight years in the present company; he applied for the
post through proper channel. The company decided to call all the eligible
candidates for interview. But, Mr. Madhavan was not called along with the
external candidates. The argument put forth by the management is that
Mr. Madhavan is an internal candidate and he has to complete 10 years of service
to meet the experience requirement of the company to become eligible for the
post. Mr. Madhavan, however, could not understand the logic of the company.
He represented his case before the Board and the board has also rejected his
representation. Out of frustration, he resigned from MAML and joined another
company promoted by a competitor's firm.
Questions:
What is the problem in this case?
Is it right on the part of the company not to call Mr. Madhavan for the
interview?
Is Madhavan's grievance genuine?