Other Master Degree-Master of Personnel Management (MPM) 4th Sem (403) : CASE STUDIES IN PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS(University of Pune, Pune-2013)
M.P.M. (Fourth Semester) EXAMINATION, 2013
(403) : CASE STUDIES IN PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT AND
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
(2008 PATTERN)
Time : Three Hours Maximum Marks : 70
N.B. :—
(i) Attempt any two cases.
(ii) All cases carry equal marks.
Case No. 1.
1. Systems Corporation Ltd. is a large company with an excellent growth record and employs about 8000 people. The company has consumer product and is known to be a leader in the market. Among the staff there are different categories and grades leading to the organizational pyramid. Though the company advocates professionalism in personnel policies, a large number of employees feel that the reward system of the company is not fair and just. The annual rewards are given solely on the departmental manager’s recommendations without any performance appraisal system. Due to its operational size, the company employs about 150 secretarial staff in the categories of typists, stenographers, and personal assistants. Majorities of these employees who are accessible to the senior management of the company are not happy with reward system over a period of three years but do not feel it appropriate to approach the union. On the other hand, they are not very well with each other. The Chief Executive of the company receives an anonymous letter criticizing reward system for the secretarial staff and charging the management of favoritism and personal fancies. As there is no action taken about this letter, a second anonymous letter is received with a copy of Personnel Manager. The Chief Executive is seriously concerned when he receives a third letter within a period of six months. The Chief Executive has decided to entrust you with the responsibility of suggesting an acceptable solution to this problem, keeping in mind the company’s commitment to employment welfare and consultative philosophy to handle grievances.
Questions :
(i) Analyze the case
(ii) Comment on existing personnel policies of the company.
(iii) As a Personnel Manager how you will solve this problem ?
(iv) Give a suitable title for the case.[4376]-403 3 P.T.O.
Case No. 2.
2. Mr. Sandeep Kumar is the Administrative Manager of the ABC Company. It is a medium sized company. Mr. Sandeep Kumar had been working in that company for 10 years as a Secretary and Chief Accountant. His record was excellent. Recently, he has been selected as the Administrative Manager. This new post was created a year ago. As a result of this change, the output of his work in the office dropped considerably and morale became low. There was an alarming increase in the staff turnover. To study the situation, the Managing Director engaged a consultant.The report of the consultant while praising the expert knowledge of Mr. Sandeep Kumar, on any technical aspect of office administration pointed out his incapability especially in dealing with people. Surprisingly, Mr. Sandeep Kumar enjoyed much popularity of the senior executive of the company. He owned their esteem of his valuable services as a manager. They were very much worried over the capabilities of Mr. Sandeep Kumar in dealing with people. They were helpless.[4376]-403 4
Questions :
(i) What is the real cause of the problem ?
(ii) What can be done to rectify the situation considering Mr. Sandeep Kumar’s value to the company ?
(iii) What kind of training you would like to suggest for Mr. Sandeep Kumar to increase his effectiveness in dealing with people ?
(iv) Give a suitable title to the case.
Case No. 3.
3. Garuda Enterprises Ltd. is a public limited company employing more than 1600 regular employees apart from about 250 contract employees. There is a strong union operating in the company and the management union relations are cordial. January 2011 was the month when many employees were on leave and management had initiated action against some employees for absence without leave during 2010. Both these were a regular feature in the company every January. This January 2011, however, the company decided to launch a VRS scheme to reduce its permanent workforce and rationalize the manpower. The scheme was worked out and published for the employees on 27th January. The scheme stated that employees must submit their applications on or before 31st January 2011 and management will then take a decision about acceptance or non-acceptance of the VRS applications. Among the various applicants there were two applicants against whom action for absence without leave was initiated and one applicant who was on leave during 27 to 31 January. The two applicants against whom disciplinary action was initiated submitted their applications on 28th and 29th January respectively. The third applicant, who was on leave, resumed on 4th February 2011 and then submitted his application on 5th February 2011. Company considered all applications and rejected some applications including these 3 applications. The reasons forwarded by the Company were that in case of two employees, disciplinary action was in process and in case of the third employee he submitted his application after the due date i.e. 31st January 2011. Towards end of February the two employees were awarded punishment of 2 days suspension without wages. Upon hearing that their applications were rejected, the 3 employees went to Union and the Union is now agitated about the action of management in not accepting the VRS application of these 3 employees.
Questions :
(i) Is the action of management right ? How ?
(ii) What can the Union do in this respect ?
(iii) What should be the principles involved in operating a VRS Scheme ?
| Earning: ₹ 7.05/- |
