How Can HR Prevent Union Formation While Ensuring Worker Satisfaction in the Garment Industry?

Hi Everybody,

I am working as an HR Manager in a Garment Export Company. In this industry, the labor turnover is very high due to a significant gap in the demand and supply of operators. After the quota abolishment from Jan. '05, many NRIs, multinationals are coming into India to set up large manufacturing facilities with state-of-the-art machinery and facilities. Consequently, there are very few unions in this industry. Although there may be one or two unions here and there, they have not been successful. Today, the Garments industry is the second biggest foreign exchange earner. The local laws are stringent, and foreign buyers are even more strict in social aspects, benefits, minimum wages, etc. Almost all big organizations adhere to these legal requirements.

Due to the increasing population in this industry, a National Level Union is attempting to attract workers to join the union. As an export-oriented industry, no garment company can afford any labor unrest or work stoppages.

As an HR professional, I prefer not to have a union in my organization, as we are already compliant with all legal requirements. Under these circumstances, I seek advice on how to prevent the formation of a union in the organization, how to detect any potential issues early on, and how to educate workers about the motives of these unions.

Could any of you shed light on these aspects? Can you suggest strategies I should implement to avoid any issues?

- Srinaren

Hi,

The industry problems are genuine and need a satisfactory answer. But the right to associate is a right granted by the constitution of the country. The various laws since independence are made to regulate the terms and conditions of the working class, and it is too late in the day to think of a day when one will have support from law or the governments to extinguish trade unions, and this is also not required.

Trade Unions are a reality that cannot be wished away. Also, not all unions are negative or perpetually adversarial to the industry. Those days are gone. The profiles of workers and their leaders have changed. A lot more education has come into the field. Globalization and concomitant competition have taken a toll on the adventurism in most unions. The conflicts are now perceived these days not between employers and employees essentially, but the two together on one side and the competition on the other!

This has posed new challenges to industrial managements. Feudalism and arbitrariness will no longer work. Blind obedience is not available anymore. We as managements have to master the skills of transactional relationship exercises that are based more on rationality, fact, competence, and institutional approaches. The greater the transparency in managements, the better the results will be.

Workers do not join unions merely for money and benefits, not just for rights without responsibilities (though you do find these in deceptive forms in places). They join unions to get what most employers fail to give them (as they can't). That fact is "Self-concept". Today, the workers, unlike in the past, are in a defensive stance not because they are scared, but because they have realized that no one can sleepwalk through life and achieve whatever he wants to achieve out of life! They are learning newer ways of relationships, and if we are not found wanting in requisite skills, professionally, I do NOT see problems.

Dealing with human beings, especially at collective levels, there won't be permanent peace, but the parties can work for harmony by resorting to objectivity, humane approaches, and following the age-old wisdom, "fair and firm".

Lastly, one small observation. All issues between the parties (two interest groups) are classified into two groups: "Issues of rights" and "Issues of interests". Rights are enshrined in applicable laws, terms and conditions of employment, case laws, wage settlements, and court awards, etc. Any question concerning "rights" is a matter of verification and appropriate action. However, issues of interests are tricky to handle. They can only be negotiated through negotiations on a principle of "give and take".

It is far better to learn appropriate skills and deal with problems than to try and avoid problems.

Kindly do not get offended. I am trying to advise and not criticize.

Regards,

Samvedan

August 5, 2006

Hi Srinaren,

How can I avoid the formation of a union in the organization? How do I sense any trouble in the organization? How do I make the workers understand the ploy of these unions?

Can any of you shed light on these things? Can you suggest the modalities I should adopt so that there will be no trouble?

Well, I may not be the right person to advise as we already have the union in our factory, which was formed just prior to my joining the organization. However, I have discussed this issue with key people of the plant and consultants as an afterthought. Here, I would like to share some points.

First of all, please understand, as Samvedan pointed out, that it is primarily a lack of interest or a "don't care a damn" attitude on the part of the organizations that have led to the formation of unions by workers to ensure themselves collective bargaining and benefits. Also, inefficiency or poor skills displayed by the Managers, especially IR ones, who in some cases have secretly abetted the same.

- Review the benefits compared to the Union-led associations.
- Make sure you have a Plant Manager who has prior experience in handling the workers and believes in a holistic and collaborative approach towards them.
- Review the trends and history of the companies in your areas which had a union and are now defunct or on the verge of becoming a sick company.
- Review and profile the existing workers.
- Identify the key decision-makers/influencers among the workers and manage them well.
- Make sure these workers have a say on their issues at the workplace, productivity, etc.
- Form a committee of members who would represent the workers to highlight the issues/problems.
- Implement good HR initiatives like regular training programs, timely address their grievances, regular updates on the company's operations, treat them as you would with the employees.
- If there is a hint of a union being formed, involve the key people, tell them the Management would withdraw all the existing benefits, and renegotiate the revised and lower terms with the union if they are compelled.
- In such cases, make sure you have the ability to divide them on certain issues and have sources to keep you updated on their thought process and proposed plan of action.

To understand this situation in your existing organization, use the reversal method of lateral thinking:

"What the company ought to do to compel them to form a union" - this would give some ideas.

Should you require clarifications, please feel free to connect.

Have a great day.

Cheers,

Rajat

Dear Srinaren,

The comments by Samvedan were nice and proper, but being an IR person, I would like to put across some points:

1) Non-unionism openly can be practiced in countries with a capitalistic economy but not in a socialistic country like ours, as rightly said by Samvedan.

Comment: You should not air your views openly but carry them out diplomatically. If you carry them out openly, the whole concept of "They and us" will arise, which the Unions will garner support and paint you as an oppressor or enemy of the working class.

2) The next major problem is political influence. With left parties influencing and holding power at the Centre, the Unions have become active and powerful. Just look at reservation issues, petrol price control, among others, to see how politics scores over economics. As long as political influence is present, there is practically little you can do about these Unions. The Union per se is not wrong, but what creates a problem is political influence, and politicians use it as a power center to increase their clouts and goals.

Comment: Never show or view your political leanings. This will result in groups painting you as partisan or prejudiced against a certain section, and they will always try to show others that the action taken by you is because of your political affiliation or leaning.

3) Attend to everybody impartially on a personal level. Never give importance to one or two employees; otherwise, a division in the workforce will take place. This practice gives rise to Union Leaders.

4) Never try to solve problems when a worker comes in a group; always tell them to come individually and be quick to sort out their problems. Don't keep a problem pending, thereby giving a chance to workers to form a group to come to you to solve their problems. Try to keep problems as individual problems and not group problems.

5) Last but not least, as HR, you should make an image of yourself as a transparent, fair, just person who genuinely has concern for employees, and their welfare and benefits are close to your heart.

In the end, just remember, if there is a genuine movement to form a union by any major political party or a group of political parties, the process of Union formation can be delayed but not stopped in almost all cases, barring very few instances. So, don't take it as a failure should a union formation take place.

Best of Luck.

Kind Regards,

SC

Hi Srinaren,

Kindly excuse me for the misunderstanding.

You may not be able to stop the formation of a union because any 10 workers can form a union.

However, it would be in your favor if you could persuade the workers to do away with the union.

For this purpose, like all successful negotiations, you will have to identify the factors that are compelling them to join the union (What aspects is the BMS presenting to the workers as benefits to attract them to join the union.)

You will need to approach each of them on a personal level. Understand their problems. Don't make false promises but try to resolve their issues.

Do not leave any problems unresolved. Make each one of them feel important and valued by the organization. (Deal with them one person at a time)

Be honest in your dealings.

If you or another competent person like an IR Executive can persuade them by offering them benefits even if they are not part of the union.

Another strategy would be to list the liabilities of the union. You might have to be assertive as well.

Also, provide them with useful information about the failures of the union in providing what is rightfully theirs. An argument in your favor could be the compulsory deduction and how it would impact their finances.

No one would want to endure additional hardship if the root cause of their grievance (if any) is addressed.

Lastly, having a union is not necessarily negative as it can facilitate negotiations.

Tata Sons have various factories, yet they have one union overseeing the workers. Labor welfare is and should be a joint responsibility shared by both workers and management.

Regards,

Shyamali

Hi Srinaren,

Kindly excuse me for the misunderstanding.

You may not be able to stop the formation of a union because any 10 workers can form a union.

However, it would be in your favor if you could make the workers do away with the union.

For this purpose, like all winning negotiations, you will have to identify the factors that are forcing them to join the union. What are those aspects that the BMS is posing to the workers as benefits to entice the labor to join the union?

You will have to approach each of them on a personal level. Understand their problems. Don't make false promises but try to resolve their problems.

Don't leave any problem unresolved. Make each one of them feel important and valued by the organization. (Deal with it one person at a time)

Be honest in your dealings.

However, if you or any other competent person like an IR Executive can dissuade them from doing so by giving them the benefits even though they are not part of the union.

Another thing to do would be to list the liabilities of the union. You might have to be coercive too.

Also, provide them with useful information about the failures of the union to provide what is necessarily theirs. An argument that would go in your favor is the compulsory deduction and how it would affect the money spent.

No one would want to go through the extra pain if the root of their grievance (if any) is resolved.

Lastly, having a union is not such a bad thing as negotiating becomes easier.

The Tata Sons have different factories. However, they have one union that looks after the workers. Labor Welfare is and should be a joint responsibility to be shared by both workers and the management.

Regards,

Shyamali

Hi all,

Interesting discussion.

Would like to share my experience. I worked in a factory where multiple unions existed. My experience tells me that fairness and firmness on the part of the employer is the key to having harmonious relations with the employees.

Union or no union, it is just that problems need to be presented. When the employer fails to provide a platform or, being in HR, we fail to respond properly, an association gets formed. The region also plays an important role, as rightly said, that today unions are becoming strong just because of left parties being in the center.

However, my experience while dealing with a militant union taught me that politeness, proactiveness, a bit of diplomacy, fairness, and firmness solve all the problems.

Nowadays, some employers encourage employees to have a union by forming internal associations also.

It would be good to have a few representatives coming to you and sharing their problems and demands rather than individuals coming every now and then.

You cannot deny the rights as laid out in the constitution and as provided by the law, but good practices, teamwork, and fairness in the approach solve the problem.

Any comments from seniors?

Regards,

Anand

Hi,

I have read the postings here. I have been in Industrial Relations (IR) for the last three decades, having dealt with all aspects of unions. There is no definitive formula on the subject; every employer aims to keep their establishment 'union-free'. That's the common goal!

I have handled numerous success stories in this area where the union was successfully kept out. A recent case took over six months to bring about the reformation but was achieved through various methods, including:
a. Employee-employer awareness
b. Communication - a crucial but often overlooked relationship tool
c. Training - a vital aspect
d. Utilizing external channels
e. Providing counseling to all, with a special focus on the leaders

While these methods are not revolutionary, the delivery and approach are key. Building trust in relationships was paramount, leading to employees willingly submitting letters of withdrawal. The perspectives shared in this discussion are highly relevant and form the foundation.

Regards,
HRG-Rajaram

Dear Rajat,

I beg to differ on the following point:

"If there is a hint of a union being formed, involve the key people, inform them that the management would withdraw all existing benefits, and renegotiate the revised and lower terms with the union if they are compelled."

It is not advisable to take the above approach because any conflict or negative results that arise from this could lead to the company facing legal consequences in court.

Kind regards,
SC

Hi Friends,

I am thrilled to receive so many replies to my post. I want to thank you for the interest you have shown, your thoughtful responses, and your vast experience in handling such situations - truly amazing! I will be responding to your messages shortly. In the meantime, please review the responses from other members once again; I am sure you may have more to add. I am very grateful that, in times of emergency, there is a whole community of HR professionals willing to help their friends in need!

-Srinaren

Dear Swastik,

I beg to differ on the following point:

"If there is a hint of a union being formed, involve the key people, tell them the management would withdraw all the existing benefits, and renegotiate the revised and lower terms with the union if they are compelled."

It is not advisable to take the above approach because if any conflict or negative results arise from this, the company will be exposed and could face legal action.

I agree with your views. As I mentioned earlier, these steps should be taken in a proactive manner, and one must have the ability to handle the key people to ensure their buy-in. Subtle threats can be effective, depending on how they are communicated and how expectations are managed.

Let's face it. Today's industrial relations scenario is a much watered-down version of the industrial relations of the 1980s and 1990s. Therefore, unions have also realized that their bargaining power is declining, and they are more interested in politics rather than the welfare of the workers.

Recently, I attended a meeting of the local management where I met the leader of the union, a prominent figure who recently aligned with a political party after being denied a ticket. He spoke about his recent visits to the US, South Africa, Sweden, etc., regarding union trends, showing little concern for the ground realities in India.

My point is that as industrial relations professionals, we are better positioned to handle these situations. Our professionalism is put to the test when we can effectively manage the dynamics.

Hi Srinaren,

"I am thrilled to receive so many responses to my post. I sincerely thank you for the interest you have shown, applying your experience in handling such situations. It's truly appreciated! I will respond to your replies shortly. In the meantime, please review the responses from other members again; you may have more to add. I am pleased that in times of emergency, the HR community stands together to support those in need."

After posting my thoughts, I took a break for an hour. Upon returning to the forum, like you, I am delighted to see the overwhelming responses and ideas.

Regards,

Rajat

Hi Srinaren,

I appreciate your concern regarding union formation. As an HR professional, some of the basic requirements are:

- Any concerns of employees should be considered important.
- Need to attend production meetings and obtain information about the issues faced by supervisors and employees.
- Have a monthly meeting with the employees as part of the communication strategy, discussing production, sales, and any issues. This needs to be addressed by the CEO.
- Last but not least, "Walk the Talk."

Regards,
Raghu

Hi Everybody,

As promised, I am back to discuss the above subject. I am very glad to have so many of you participate in the discussion of this topic. Whether you like it or not, if the Union is formed in an organization, everybody will be on tenterhooks! I would first like to refresh what our friends have told during this discussion.

Mr. Samvedan said, "Right to associate is a right granted by the constitution of the country. Not all unions are negative or perpetually adversary to industry. As managements, we have to master the skills of transactional relationship exercises that are based more on rationality, fact, competence, and institutional approaches. The greater the transparency in managements, the better will be the results. Workers do not join unions merely for money and benefits, not for just rights without responsibilities (though you do find these in deceptive forms in places). The union people have realized that no one can sleepwalk through life and achieve whatever he wants to achieve out of life. If we are not found wanting in requisite skills, professionally I do not see problems. The parties can form harmony by resorting to objectivity, humane approaches, and following the age-old wisdom, 'fair and firm.' All issues are classified as 'Issues of rights' and 'Issues of interests.' Questions concerning 'rights' are a matter of verification and appropriate action. They can only be negotiated through negotiations on a principle of 'give and take.'"

What a wonderful analysis of the subject. Whatever Mr. Samvedan has said is 100% right. The complete gist of the Union and how to face it is very well dealt with by him. Thanks, Mr. Samvedan.

Mr. Rajat says, "Identify the key decision-makers/influencers among the workers...manage them well... If there is a hint of a union being formed...involve the key people...tell them the management would withdraw all the existing benefits...and renegotiate the revised and lower terms with the union if they are compelled... What the company ought to do to compel them to form a union...this would give some ideas."

Well, Mr. Rajat, I will not agree with you as far as your statement...If there is a hint of a union being formed...involve the key people...tell them the Management would withdraw all the existing benefits...and renegotiate the revised and lower terms with the union if they are compelled. As Sc has said, it is not advisable to take the above approach because if any conflict or negative results take place out of this, the Company will be stripped and lashed in court.

As Rajat puts it, "Let's face it...today's IR scenario is a much watered-down version of yesterday's IR of the 1980-90s...therefore they have also realized that their bargaining power is on the wane and are more interested in politics rather than the welfare of the workers."

Mr. Rajat, I totally agree with your above point. Also, what you have said..."My point is that we as IR professionals are in a better position to handle the situations, and our test of professionalism comes to the fore when we are effective and able to manage the dynamics." I fully endorse your viewpoint!

As Shyamali puts it, "You may not be able to stop the formation of a union because any 10 workers can form a union. You will have to approach each of them on a personal level, understand their problems. Don't make false promises but try to resolve their problem. Don't leave any problem unresolved. Make each one of them feel important and valued by the Organization. (Deal with it one person at a time) Be honest in your dealings. You might have to be coercive too. Also provide them with useful information about the failures of the union to provide what is necessarily theirs. An argument that would go in your favor is the compulsory deduction and how it would affect the money spent. No one would want to go through the extra pain if the root of their grievance (if any) is resolved. Lastly, having a union is not such a bad thing as negotiating becomes easier."

Yes, Shyamali, What all you have said is right. Did the management leave you as the HR/IR head to be honest in your dealings? I doubt!

As Mr. Sc puts it, "Non-Unionism openly can be practiced in countries with a capitalistic economy but not in a socialistic country like ours and as rightly said by Samvedan. Comment: You should not air your views openly but carry it out diplomatically, as an oppressor or enemy of the working class. Never ever show or view your political leanings. This will result in groups painting you as partisan or prejudiced against a certain section...affiliation or leaning. Never try to solve problems when a worker comes in a group; always tell them to come individually and be quick to sort out their problems. Try to keep problems as individual problems and not group problems. Last but not least, you as HR, should make an image of yourself as a transparent, fair, just person who genuinely has concern for employees, and their welfare and benefits are close to your heart."

You are right, Mr. Sc, but when the union is formed, and if you want to keep problems as individual problems and not group problems, I feel it is difficult, though not impossible because in the group they feel stronger and "Ghar ka Kutta"!

As per Mr. Anand's experience, "Fairness and firmness on the part of the employer is the key to have harmonious relations with the employees. When the employer fails to provide a platform or being in HR, we fail to respond properly, an association gets formed. Nowadays, some of the employers encourage employees to have a union by forming internal associations also. You cannot deny the right as laid out in the constitution and as provided by the law, but good practices, teamwork, and fairness in the approach solve the problem."

Thanks, Mr. Anand, for your outspoken words.

As per Mr. hrg-rajaram, "There is no definite formula on the subject. Yes! every employer wants his establishments 'Union-free.' That's the lingo! ...a. awareness for employee-employer, b. communication-a major relationship tool mostly left out, c. training-a very important tool, d. external channels, e. counseling all...special focus on the leaders. These are not very new methods, but how one delivers them is important and the skills of approach. A trust in relationship-building was the focus, with the employees coming with the letter of withdrawal on their own."

Mr. Anand, you are very practical! Thanks, these things are practiced by me also on a previous occasion.

Before proceeding, I would like to thank all of you above friends for your wonderful ideas, views, solutions. I am happy that this subject, very relevant in these days, has evoked so much of worthwhile responses from my professional friends.

Now, I would like to put across to you all about the scenario in the Readymade garment industry, which is the second-highest foreign exchange earner after IT.

Now, it is the time for the readymade garments factories boom! Indians, NRIs, Foreign investors, everybody is coming to India to set up factories. They are coming to India because the labor is cheap, very adorning and talented people, encouragement from the Government, etc. At this juncture, i.e., after the quota is abolished in January 2005, the number of big organizations are coming up with huge capacities. Though the Garment industry has undergone a very high technology change in terms of automats, workstations, etc., still it is labor-oriented. Except in Northern India, the workforce is mainly female. These workers come from very poor families, trying to meet the two ends. You will find the whole family working in garment factories. That means, of late, there is a big gap in the demand and supply of workers.

Suppose I am working in a garment factory and in the neighborhood, another factory is opened, and they are offering 100-300 rupees more per month, I don't mind changing my job, least bothering about the benefits of PF, etc. I need the money for the day...that's all. Or in another case, if I am not happy working in a particular organization, I don't want to fight for it, I will just leave that organization and join another company.

This being the case, after the quota is abolished, the foreign buyers to have a hold on the manufacturers, have strictly enforced Social Compliance of the code of conduct in garment factories. They strictly instruct the managements that they will do business with organizations that honor the rules and factories act of the Land, pay minimum wages, non-employment of child labor, non-compulsory Overtimes, compulsory holiday every six days of working, hygienic work area with potable water, comfortable seating arrangements, etc. All statutory things like PF, health insurance, gratuity, etc., have to be given. The buyers during their audits can select anybody they wish and confidentially interview the worker on anything they like. Any misquote by the worker results in disqualifying the organization for the manufacture and supply of their goods. Because of all these, the Managements have appointed professionals in labor welfare, doctors, nurses, provide minimum wages, hygienic working conditions, leave benefits, health insurance, etc. That means, there is no way a worker is dissatisfied as all legally to be given things are given.

Apart from this, the buyers want to give the workers the freedom of association, form workers committees like Grievance committee, Canteen committee, Sexual harassment committee, etc., and they will go through the recordings of the meetings in detail and the visual recordings like photos, etc.

Such being the scenario, no management dares to go against the rules and provides all the facilities which legally have to be

Hi Everybody,

Being in HR, I would like that there should not be any union in my organization, since all the legal requirements are being taken care of! Under these circumstances, may I request you how can I avoid the formation of a union in the organization, how do I sense any trouble in the organization, how do I make the workers understand the ploy of these unions? Can anybody of you, throw light on these things? Can you suggest the modalities I should adopt so that there will be no trouble!

-Srinaren

Dear Srinaren,

Can you tell whether you are facing a problem right now or making a future prediction?

1) Current Situation: If you are facing a problem right now, you can go for the application of "DIVIDE AND RULE" for the time being.
2) Future Plan: If you have doubts that formation will take place in the coming days, you should adopt what you have suggested to all members.

Note: You should adopt the "wait and watch" technique and act accordingly.

Regards,
Sidheshwar

Hi,

I have chosen the question from your post as a representative of the anguish that you share.

"DO YOU WANT OUR INNOCENT POOR GIRLS/WORKERS, WHOSE EARNINGS ONLY SUPPORT THEIR FAMILIES, TO GET RUINED BY THE ULTERIOR MOVES OF SOME TRADE UNIONS?"

See, the Labour Movement has made a significant contribution to the Freedom Movement of our country through political movements. Upon achieving independence, each political party realized the potential strength of organized labor and therefore established a "labour wing" of the party. So far, so good. But the party in power was always partial to its labor wing. Those parties not in power exploited their own labor wing to gather power (nuisance?), popularity, funds, and similar advantages. These stratagems have worked excellently in the Indian scenario, and no political party has the guts or the ability to give up its interests in labor. The fusion between a political party and its labor wing is so complete and permanent that it is well nigh impossible to break. We have to live with this reality and devise an intelligent way of overcoming/neutralizing their nuisance value.

I repeat, you can neither wish Unions away nor can you insulate yourself permanently against them.

I am yet with your sentiments expressed in the quoted question that I borrowed from your post.

My answer remains the same! The industry must do what it has to, within the norms of ethics and law, to overcome obstacles. Eliminate the EVIL and PROTECT the GOOD. There is no escape from this!

Lastly, in the industrial system, like in politics and social matters, only the weak and the meek continue to suffer, and no one has a license to expect others to protect itself. If you will partake of the fruits of a belligerent Union strategy (willingly or by default), then you must also be prepared to suffer the consequences. You can't eat the cake and have it too!

Get it?

Regards,

Samvedan

August 11, 2006

Hi Mr. Samvedan,

Thanks for your views. I fully endorse your views. You can do away with the Unions. If these unions do what they are supposed to do, then there will not be any issues. But unfortunately, these unions are there, who in the disguise of helping the worker community will do very little for their benefit and get benefitted themselves by aligning themselves with a particular political party. It looks to me that by hook or crook, we have to trouble the managements! This is probably their motto!

I am not against forming unions. Being in HR and having responded to the needs of the worker community all through my career by being their leader, guide, friend in need and a philosopher. But I have a living example in front of my eyes, how these innocent workers became the victims of the callous attitude of the Union! These workers who came to streets without any wages for months together. I have gone deep into their problems faced by the garment factory workers. Even being a General Manager, vice-president, I have gone to the workers' house, sat in their houses, solved their personal problems and have eaten in their houses! To help these workers, I go to any extent. Many times, I have been termed as Pro-worker. Having seen these workers so close, their wants closely, their sufferings closely, I personally feel these unions if leave them high and dry, they have no choice than committing suicide. If they take their own decision to leave that factory and join some other factory, they can survive.

I only hope a day will come wherein the union will really feel and work for the workers' benefit and not just for deriving political mileage! I know that the Managements cannot fulfil all the statutory requirements for their reasons, maybe due to the lack of knowledge of the pros and cons, or overconfidence or believing in their money power, etc. But being HR & IR professionals, we have greater responsibilities towards both Managements as well as workers. Probably after winning the confidence of the workers by being proactive towards them, we may assist them in forming committees like grievance committee, canteen committee, sexual harassment committee, etc., and give them a platform to express their views. After listening to them, act immediately to resolve their issues, keeping in mind the interests of the Managements.

I am ready to accept and adopt this system of working. My suggestion to the entire HR & IR community is to have a good listening ear. If you listen to the workers' problems attentively, they feel that their 50% problem is solved though you have not done anything! Then you can solve their balance 50% problems by suggesting ways and means to overcome them by using your Wisdom, experience, humanitarian approach for which they will respect you and listen to you.

Anyway, I thank all the members of this forum who have expressed their views, ideas, etc., which are wonderful and useful to the whole HR & IR community.

Thanks

Srinaren