How Can Companies Prevent Misuse of Authority by Supervisors and Ensure Safe Reporting of Abuse by Workers?

On December 8, 2025, an electronics assembly unit in Bengaluru was penalized by the Labour Department after CCTV footage emerged showing a night-shift supervisor slapping a contract worker for allegedly slowing down output. The footage was leaked to local media by the worker's colleague, sparking public outrage. Inspectors conducted an emergency visit, recorded statements from workers, and instructed the company to suspend the supervisor immediately. The department also demanded proof of safety training, grievance redressal mechanisms, and contractor compliance under labour laws. This incident has reignited discussions about dignity, power imbalance, and abuse in shop-floor environments.

The emotional fallout across factories in the region has been intense. Workers are shaken and angry, saying the video mirrors behaviour they have endured silently for years. Supervisors feel both defensive and fearful, worrying that past aggressive behaviour might now be used against them. HR teams feel deeply embarrassed that such a breakdown of workplace conduct occurred under their watch. Many employees say they now fear retaliation for reporting misconduct, even with video evidence. The emotional tone is heavy with humiliation, suppressed trauma, and urgent calls for accountability across the shop floors.

From a compliance perspective, the act violates provisions under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, the Factories Act, and the OSH Code, 2020, all of which mandate safe and respectful working conditions. Physical assault at work may also attract criminal liability under sections of the IPC. Employers must conduct thorough investigations, retrain supervisors, reinforce anti-harassment protocols, and establish anonymous reporting channels. HR must ensure contractors' workers receive equal protection and that disciplinary action is fair, documented, and transparent. Leadership must treat this as a systemic failure, not an isolated event, and redesign supervisory behaviour expectations accordingly.

What should companies do to ensure supervisors don't misuse their authority? How can workers safely report abuse without fear of retaliation?

To prevent misuse of authority by supervisors, companies should take several steps.

Firstly, they should establish clear policies and guidelines on acceptable workplace behaviour. These policies should explicitly state that any form of physical or verbal abuse will not be tolerated, and that violations will result in strict disciplinary action.

Secondly, companies should invest in regular training for supervisors on leadership, communication, and conflict resolution. This will equip them with the skills necessary to manage their teams effectively without resorting to aggressive or abusive behaviour.

Thirdly, companies should implement a robust grievance redressal mechanism. This should include multiple channels for reporting misconduct, including an anonymous hotline, to encourage victims and witnesses to come forward without fear of retaliation.

Lastly, companies should foster a culture of respect and dignity. This can be achieved by promoting open communication, recognizing and rewarding positive behaviour, and holding everyone in the organization, regardless of their position, accountable for their actions.

For workers to safely report abuse without fear of retaliation, companies should assure them of their protection under the Whistle Blowers Protection Act, 2014, which safeguards individuals who report illegal or unethical practices. They should also inform workers about the Protection of Women from Sexual Harassment at Workplace Act, 2013, which provides protection against sexual harassment and abuse.

Furthermore, companies should make it clear that any form of retaliation against those who report misconduct will not be tolerated and will result in severe disciplinary action. They should also provide support and counselling services for victims of abuse, and ensure that their identities are kept confidential throughout the investigation process.

In conclusion, it is crucial for companies to take proactive measures to prevent misuse of authority by supervisors and to create a safe and respectful working environment for all employees.

Dear member,

The extract of the first paragraph of your post speaks volumes. It says:

On December 8, 2025, the Bengaluru Labour Department imposed penalties on an electronics assembly unit after CCTV footage surfaced showing a night-shift supervisor slapping a contract worker for allegedly slowing down output. The worker’s colleague leaked the footage to local media, triggering public outrage. Inspectors conducted an emergency visit, recorded statements from workers, and instructed the company to suspend the supervisor immediately.

My take on the incident is as follows:

a) If the night-shift supervisor slaps a contract worker, then it shows his temerity. How come did he muster the courage to slap the worker? He must have lived under the notion that to get the work done, he had been given unlimited authority, with physical attack being no exception.

b) His notion was not misplaced as such. Was the employer not aware of what happens during the night duties? He must be aware, but he could be acquiescing with the mala fide actions of the night-duty authorities.

c) If the video of the physical assault had not been uploaded on social media, this incident would not have come to public attention. The uproar on social media led to an inspection by the regulatory authorities. They 'instructed' the employer to suspend the erring supervisor. Why did the employer wait for the labour authorities' instructions? Why did he not take action on his own? Should we believe that if the authorities had not instructed to take action against the supervisor, the employer would have pushed the incident under the carpet and move on?

d) Getting the work done by the workers is not an easy task. It requires patience. On the one side, the supervisors are under pressure to deliver results and on the other side, they have less obliging workers under their command. Their sandwitched frustrates them. Out of frustration, supervisors lose control, and it leads to such unseemly incidents. The incident shows the importance of training the workers and the supervisors on interpersonal skills.

e) Workplace fracas is common. The aggression by the supervisors or the managers has been going on for ages. In one of the companies, when a manager once was asked why he abuses the workers, he just quipped: show me how to get the work done from these lowbrows or get me the workers who work without abusing them. The plight of the supervisor in the incident could be the same. The incident highlights the importance of recruiting the right workers. The employers want to pay the minimum wage, but they want the quality and quantity of the highest standard. Unless this dichotomy is addressed, such incidents will continue to happen.

Final comments: The incident highlights the ground realities. While newspapers, electronic media, Internet discuss the AI-enabled work, productivity improvement through AI, the factories are grappling with the fundamental human behavioural issues. Can AI eradicate or mitigate workplace conflict? Can AI uphold the workers' worth, their esteem or respect? These are the thoughts to ponder.

Thanks,

Dinesh Divekar