How Should HR Handle a Shop Incharge's Arrogant Language Towards Contract Workers?

Incident in a Manufacturing Company in North Bangalore

This incident has happened in one of the largest manufacturing companies in North Bangalore. There was a small clash between the contract employees and the Shop Incharge regarding wages paid to technical and non-technical contract category employees in the said industry.

The Shop Incharge used arrogant language and said, "You come and join our company like beggars, sneak in through the gate and now open your tails, just shut up and go and work, you will be kicked out, you are contract employees...beware!" The contract employees then went and indicated the same to senior permanent employees of the company. Infuriated, the Shop Incharge shouted, "You buggers, have gone and told these people...fine, I know how to tackle you."

Now this incident has come to HR, who are supposed to support the Shop Incharge. Kindly suggest.

The name of the company is kept confidential. Your views, please.

Why does HR have to support something that is wrong? If the company management has done something incorrect, then it is HR's responsibility to ensure that the necessary repairs are made. It is not about taking sides; it is about improving relations. Open communication is essential. Taking sides will only lead to agitation, which is not beneficial.

Therefore, it is important to speak with the management and establish a team where employees can seek clarity for their questions. The top management needs to engage with managers and advise them against using rude or abusive language. In this situation, it is not about the Shop Manager apologizing to the workers, but about creating a buffer between management and workers to address day-to-day issues effectively.

Kind regards,
Regards

Let us not draw conclusions hastily; such situations are common in any industry. The poor HR professional has to manage both the immediate issue and the underlying problems. However, the situation needs to be handled tactically. Without causing disruption, first try to defuse the situation. At any rate, the contract workers cannot dictate terms, and the shop in charge should not be undermined. So, try to communicate with all parties involved to restore normalcy.

Secondly, the genuine concerns of contract labor need to be addressed, and you need to persuade management to make some deserved concessions. Thirdly, there may be something wrong with the shop in charge; he needs to improve his interpersonal relations. You can send him to the next available training program.

Once again, let us not outright condemn the shop in charge; it will definitely hurt the overall organizational morale.

Regards,
KK

There is no rule that you should support the shop floor in charge. You should support the fact/truth and forward the matter to management. You have to look at both sides.

1. What made the shop floor in charge speak like that?
2. Is there a repeated carelessness in the contract workers' past performances that made the shop floor in charge talk like that?
3. Check/get feedback from the shop floor in charge on how they are handling the workers!

If you find the truth from both sides, analyze it and give a strict warning to both parties. Warn the worker as well as the shop floor in charge across the table and talk to them separately. Inform them that management takes this issue seriously. If it happens again, action will be taken seriously.

Create a healthy atmosphere for the betterment of industry development.

Thanks,

The Role of HR in Conflict Resolution

This is a situation where HR has to play the role of a fire brigade to douse the flames and not as an inflammable gas to fuel the fire. A more or less similar kind of behavior of a supervisor with a workman in an automobile factory led to large-scale violence. HR should not approach such issues with a preconceived notion that it has to support a particular side. It needs to get at the facts with an open mind and look at various options to deal with the problem, weighing each option against an IR situation in the factory.

However, whatever may be the provocation, the Shop Floor in-charge's behavior is in bad taste. Behavior plays a very important role in interpersonal relations, which are vital for peaceful industrial relations. If a workman—whether a contract worker or permanent—indulges in indisciplined behavior, it needs to be dealt with professionally by either talking to him on a one-to-one basis, counseling, and in habitual cases by resorting to disciplinary action. Responding to indisciplined behavior with equally indisciplined behavior is no answer to the problem. Two wrongs do not make a right.

It seems that the supervisory staff need to be trained by a behavioral specialist in communication and conduct to avoid similar events.

Regards,
B. Saikumar
In-House HR & IR Advisor

The views expressed and the suggestions given by M/S Ashutosh, K.K. Nair, Stephan, and Saikumar certainly show their equanimity of minds and practical wisdom. I am sure that by this time the questioner would have realized the importance of approaching such a sticky problem dispassionately and handling it deftly to avoid further escalation.

Understanding the Challenge

It is true that uneasy lies the head that wears the crown. It is also equally true that if you scratch your head, you will find ego. Uneasiness arises out of inability, and inability, in turn, arouses ego in its disguised form as anger. The natural corollary is a shabby and negative response to the situation. A word and a stone, once thrown, cannot be called back. So, persons in the position of grievance handling should be very careful in their language, both verbal and non-verbal.

Managing Anger and Grievances

At times, of course, anger is a form of inevitable response, but it should be kept within the limits of manageability. So, executives such as the shop-floor-in-charge should know anger management. Managers should realize the fact that the indirect engagement of labor, such as contract labor and casual labor, is only a stop-gap arrangement for the incidentally intermittent nature of activities rather than a cheap and uncared-for source of employment for core activities. If they do have that realization, they will certainly change their perception and adopt a more humane attitude and approach to the grievances of such people.

Regards.

As we believe, HR is the link between the employee and employer. HR needs to maintain harmony and decorum within the organization. Supporting such behavior could indirectly influence similar events in the future and may wrongfully gain the confidence of employees. Therefore, steps should be taken to control such behavior immediately. Many questions have been raised by members seeking a better understanding of the exact history or cause of such anger. It could be due to the behavior of contractors or staff causing such anger.

HR should take steps without bias and conduct a domestic inquiry. Based on the results of the inquiry, HR should take appropriate action against the guilty person, setting a good example for all employees. Failure to do so could lead to significant problems in the future for both employees and employers.

On a legal basis, such behavior cannot be tolerated under the Contract Labour Act. It may be considered exploitation of contract employees, which is why The Contract Labour Act (REGULATION AND ABOLITION) ACT, 1970 was created. It aims to safeguard the basic rights of contract laborers and prevent exploitation by employers.

If the opponent approaches the ALC or Conciliation officer in the labor department, it could result in unavoidable consequences for the company.

Evaluating the Incident: A Balanced Approach

We need to look a bit in-depth into this case. What were the grounds and the situation for the Shop In Charge to use abusive language? Considering the fact that Contractual Workers are also workers and are covered under various acts, it is completely necessary to look into both sides of the coin. However, the fact remains persistent. As an HR Professional, after evaluating the scenario, things need to be taken care of.

1. The Shop In Charge should not have used abusive language in any case and is already at fault.
2. Was the Shop In Charge's behavior in the said act correct because of the fault of the Contractual Worker? What was the fault? Is it serious in nature? If yes, then support the Shop In Charge.
3. If the Shop In Charge had behaved unethically and without any reasons, support the contractual worker.

In my opinion, only after hearing what both parties have to say can a solution be reached.

Regards,
Dr. Urjit Kavi

I need to add something more here. See, this is a case where ego and super ego are clashing. On one hand, there is a contract laborer, and on the other hand, there is a manager whose responsibility is to align everything for better output, such as maintaining harmony in relations at work, creating a good working environment, etc.

Steps to Address the Incident

Firstly, you need to report the incident to your higher authority and seek permission for individual discussions. Inquire about their past attitudes from their colleagues, peers, and seniors. Make records. If you find similar behavior in the past, start counseling sessions separately. Present the evidence to them and ask for their reasons. When they provide their perspective on the incident, compare it with the evidence you have. Subsequently, initiate disciplinary action or a training program accordingly.

Moreover, if it is the first time such an incident has occurred, there is no need to take immediate action. Bring both parties together and issue a verbal warning about the violation of industrial disputes. Inform them that if such incidents reoccur or if there are any further breaches of industrial harmony, management will take serious action.

I hope this helps!