Govt. & CII both are focusing on industries offering employment to less privileged people, i.e., people belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and other Backward Classes.
I would like to know what steps we should take from an HR perspective and whether other companies are also focusing on this. If yes, how? Please share your suggestions.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
5I would like to know what steps we should take from an HR perspective and whether other companies are also focusing on this. If yes, how? Please share your suggestions.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear All,
I am really looking forward to your opinions on the subject. I want to know if any other companies are taking steps towards promoting employment for less privileged people. Please reply with Yes or No, and if yes, how.
Hope all members will help me in this discussion.
Regards,
Shilpi
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am really looking forward to your opinions on the subject. I want to know if any other companies are taking steps towards promoting employment for less privileged people. Please reply with Yes or No, and if yes, how.
Hope all members will help me in this discussion.
Regards,
Shilpi
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Shilpi,
I don't know whether it is "individual concern" or "job concern" that you have for underprivileged people. Whatever it is, it is laudable. Are you in any way related to CII?
I have a good idea about how to reduce unemployment and offer employment to underprivileged people. But it is purely "lateral thinking"; it requires a great deal of dynamism on the part of the government and CII to respond to that idea. If you are in a position to push through this concept, then try to push it across.
Don't we see maid-servants working at the houses of middle-class and higher-middle-class people for the purpose of cleaning utensils, washing clothes, cleaning the floor of the house, etc.? The practice at our home is that if one day, the maid-servant does not come, she will send another worker to do her job.
Why can't we have the same practice for other jobs?
Let us say, Shilpi is Manager-HR in a big company like Reliance Industries Ltd. She gets a salary of Rs. 50,000 per month. But the timings of her job are from 9 a.m. in the morning to 9 p.m. in the evening. By the time she reaches home, it is 10 p.m. The only work she can do after she reaches home is to eat and then sleep and get up the next day morning at 7 a.m. and start preparing for going to the job to be in the office by 9 a.m.
She gets a good salary but she is not in a position to enjoy her family life because of her timings. She is ready to get rid of half of her salary if somebody is prepared to share half of her burden.
She wants to share half of her salary with her friend Vijaya, who is also an HR professional who is on the lookout for a good job, but because she does not have good experience, she will get a salary around Rs. 20,000 per month.
The Law of the land should allow Shilpi to share half of her job with Vijaya so that she can come home early and enjoy family life. At the same time, she can enjoy the friendship of Vijaya. That means both of them will be employed for the "same position" but half of the compensation benefits (like Salary, PF, Gratuity, Bonus, etc.) that Shilpi has been enjoying will go to Vijaya now, for sharing half of her work in proportion to the ratio of the number of days each one has worked for the organization.
Shilpi can quickly train Vijaya to match up to her talent because Vijaya needs as much competence to perform half of Shilpi's job as Shilpi has, and Shilpi can train Vijaya to perform the job.
Vijaya will not get as talented otherwise if she works for another company for a Rs. 20,000 salary. It will take another 5 years to grow as talented as Shilpi and earn a job that fetches her a salary of Rs. 30,000. But if she joins Shilpi as a co-worker, then after five years because of the increase in the salary of the job both of them have been doing, she may get a share of Rs. 35,000 per month after five years!
Even if she decides to part ways with Shilpi and do a full-time job somewhere else, she can get a job fetching Rs. 70,000 per month after five years because she is now as talented as Shilpi is.
Coming to the job aspect, how they divide the work between them is their problem. They can decide, "I will work from Jan to June, you work from July to December". Or, they can decide, "I will work from 9 to 3 in the afternoon, you work from 3 to 9 in the evening".
What is the advantage of this system of employing two persons for the same job for the company/employer?
They would not take leaves much because they will be working only half the time, i.e., six hours per day or six months per annum! The compensation paid is the same. Sometimes if there is work pressure, the boss can ask both of them to be on the job!
The company has absolutely nothing to lose. It only needs flexibility to allow Shilpi to take Vijaya as her co-worker.
If privileged sections of the Indian population can take underprivileged people to do half the job or some part of the job (there should be flexibility to allow the co-worker to even take 25%, 30%, or 40% of the job if the nature of the job allows to correctly arrive at the percentage work involved in the job), then the SCs, STs, and OBCs can be trained to become equals by the people who share their job with them!
It may sound quite unpracticable, but if this is done, then most of the unemployment problems in the country will vanish because India is a country where people do a lot for friendship. There may be workers in factories who want to share half their job with a friend. There may be people like Shilpi who want to share half their burden with people like Vijaya.
This can happen at all levels, from the position of an ordinary factory worker to the position of CMD in companies.
This kind of flexibility to allow the employees to share their job with their friends will ensure that the job is perfectly done. If the Law of the land and Companies can allow this kind of flexibility, then we will soon find advertisements in Newspapers given by Employees of companies asking people having a certain set of skills to "share their job". They will take the prospective candidates to the Employer and tell him, "this is the one who will do half of my job...I am responsible for him, his actions, and his placement in our company".
Remember this may not simply help friends but also the sons, daughters, or other relatives. A father who is Vice-President (marketing) in a big company like Tata Steel may share half of his job with his Son who has recently passed MBA with specialization in marketing. You know when a father gives training to his son, how it works...he will take personal interest and help him to grow as talented he is in no time... in other words, the Son will start the career from the position his father has left!
As emotional bondages between friends, relatives, family members are strong in our country, this kind of flexibility to share the job will do a lot of good for both the families, unemployed, and also to the companies/employers.
Thanks and regards,
Chandrasekhar.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I don't know whether it is "individual concern" or "job concern" that you have for underprivileged people. Whatever it is, it is laudable. Are you in any way related to CII?
I have a good idea about how to reduce unemployment and offer employment to underprivileged people. But it is purely "lateral thinking"; it requires a great deal of dynamism on the part of the government and CII to respond to that idea. If you are in a position to push through this concept, then try to push it across.
Don't we see maid-servants working at the houses of middle-class and higher-middle-class people for the purpose of cleaning utensils, washing clothes, cleaning the floor of the house, etc.? The practice at our home is that if one day, the maid-servant does not come, she will send another worker to do her job.
Why can't we have the same practice for other jobs?
Let us say, Shilpi is Manager-HR in a big company like Reliance Industries Ltd. She gets a salary of Rs. 50,000 per month. But the timings of her job are from 9 a.m. in the morning to 9 p.m. in the evening. By the time she reaches home, it is 10 p.m. The only work she can do after she reaches home is to eat and then sleep and get up the next day morning at 7 a.m. and start preparing for going to the job to be in the office by 9 a.m.
She gets a good salary but she is not in a position to enjoy her family life because of her timings. She is ready to get rid of half of her salary if somebody is prepared to share half of her burden.
She wants to share half of her salary with her friend Vijaya, who is also an HR professional who is on the lookout for a good job, but because she does not have good experience, she will get a salary around Rs. 20,000 per month.
The Law of the land should allow Shilpi to share half of her job with Vijaya so that she can come home early and enjoy family life. At the same time, she can enjoy the friendship of Vijaya. That means both of them will be employed for the "same position" but half of the compensation benefits (like Salary, PF, Gratuity, Bonus, etc.) that Shilpi has been enjoying will go to Vijaya now, for sharing half of her work in proportion to the ratio of the number of days each one has worked for the organization.
Shilpi can quickly train Vijaya to match up to her talent because Vijaya needs as much competence to perform half of Shilpi's job as Shilpi has, and Shilpi can train Vijaya to perform the job.
Vijaya will not get as talented otherwise if she works for another company for a Rs. 20,000 salary. It will take another 5 years to grow as talented as Shilpi and earn a job that fetches her a salary of Rs. 30,000. But if she joins Shilpi as a co-worker, then after five years because of the increase in the salary of the job both of them have been doing, she may get a share of Rs. 35,000 per month after five years!
Even if she decides to part ways with Shilpi and do a full-time job somewhere else, she can get a job fetching Rs. 70,000 per month after five years because she is now as talented as Shilpi is.
Coming to the job aspect, how they divide the work between them is their problem. They can decide, "I will work from Jan to June, you work from July to December". Or, they can decide, "I will work from 9 to 3 in the afternoon, you work from 3 to 9 in the evening".
What is the advantage of this system of employing two persons for the same job for the company/employer?
They would not take leaves much because they will be working only half the time, i.e., six hours per day or six months per annum! The compensation paid is the same. Sometimes if there is work pressure, the boss can ask both of them to be on the job!
The company has absolutely nothing to lose. It only needs flexibility to allow Shilpi to take Vijaya as her co-worker.
If privileged sections of the Indian population can take underprivileged people to do half the job or some part of the job (there should be flexibility to allow the co-worker to even take 25%, 30%, or 40% of the job if the nature of the job allows to correctly arrive at the percentage work involved in the job), then the SCs, STs, and OBCs can be trained to become equals by the people who share their job with them!
It may sound quite unpracticable, but if this is done, then most of the unemployment problems in the country will vanish because India is a country where people do a lot for friendship. There may be workers in factories who want to share half their job with a friend. There may be people like Shilpi who want to share half their burden with people like Vijaya.
This can happen at all levels, from the position of an ordinary factory worker to the position of CMD in companies.
This kind of flexibility to allow the employees to share their job with their friends will ensure that the job is perfectly done. If the Law of the land and Companies can allow this kind of flexibility, then we will soon find advertisements in Newspapers given by Employees of companies asking people having a certain set of skills to "share their job". They will take the prospective candidates to the Employer and tell him, "this is the one who will do half of my job...I am responsible for him, his actions, and his placement in our company".
Remember this may not simply help friends but also the sons, daughters, or other relatives. A father who is Vice-President (marketing) in a big company like Tata Steel may share half of his job with his Son who has recently passed MBA with specialization in marketing. You know when a father gives training to his son, how it works...he will take personal interest and help him to grow as talented he is in no time... in other words, the Son will start the career from the position his father has left!
As emotional bondages between friends, relatives, family members are strong in our country, this kind of flexibility to share the job will do a lot of good for both the families, unemployed, and also to the companies/employers.
Thanks and regards,
Chandrasekhar.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Shekhar,
Thank you very much for your opinion. Your idea is quite interesting, and I am sure it's unique too if implemented across industries. However, this will not help me right now. The subject I have raised is not my individual concern but a job concern. My organization is well connected with CII, and they are focusing on this. I have also been asked to come up with an idea through which we can give preference to less privileged people in the recruitment process.
So what should I do? Maybe I will include a question in the application form for candidates to declare if they are less privileged. This way, when candidates fill it in, I will come to know. However, candidates should take this question positively. I need some ideas from the HR fraternity for this. I am also interested to know if other companies are focusing on this or not, so that I can have an idea of the trend in the market.
Once again, I request my HR friends to help me with this.
Regards,
Shilpi
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you very much for your opinion. Your idea is quite interesting, and I am sure it's unique too if implemented across industries. However, this will not help me right now. The subject I have raised is not my individual concern but a job concern. My organization is well connected with CII, and they are focusing on this. I have also been asked to come up with an idea through which we can give preference to less privileged people in the recruitment process.
So what should I do? Maybe I will include a question in the application form for candidates to declare if they are less privileged. This way, when candidates fill it in, I will come to know. However, candidates should take this question positively. I need some ideas from the HR fraternity for this. I am also interested to know if other companies are focusing on this or not, so that I can have an idea of the trend in the market.
Once again, I request my HR friends to help me with this.
Regards,
Shilpi
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Shilpi and Chandashekar,
A very sensitive and yet pertinent discussion has been initiated by you.
First of all, a mental, psychological, and a very professional attitude need to be developed. We cannot deploy any such policy onto any company without trying to change the way people think.
People think "underprivileged" is a word that means "incompetent".
People think the "general" class people are "better"/competent/more competent people. Am I right? But is it really true?
From my experience, if I know 100 people, 70 are "general" class people and 30 are "underprivileged". Out of the 70 "general" class people, 40 are average/below average. Out of the 30 "underprivileged", 10 are average/below average, and others are much better off than their peers, including the "underprivileged" ones.
But will people believe me at first instant? NO. I too did not. But now I do.
This thinking has to change. Unless this is made, NO amount of ENGLISH written in a policy document will have its intended IMPACT.
Intent has to be unprejudiced.
Are we ready for that?????
Cheers
K
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
A very sensitive and yet pertinent discussion has been initiated by you.
First of all, a mental, psychological, and a very professional attitude need to be developed. We cannot deploy any such policy onto any company without trying to change the way people think.
People think "underprivileged" is a word that means "incompetent".
People think the "general" class people are "better"/competent/more competent people. Am I right? But is it really true?
From my experience, if I know 100 people, 70 are "general" class people and 30 are "underprivileged". Out of the 70 "general" class people, 40 are average/below average. Out of the 30 "underprivileged", 10 are average/below average, and others are much better off than their peers, including the "underprivileged" ones.
But will people believe me at first instant? NO. I too did not. But now I do.
This thinking has to change. Unless this is made, NO amount of ENGLISH written in a policy document will have its intended IMPACT.
Intent has to be unprejudiced.
Are we ready for that?????
Cheers
K
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear K & All,
Thanks for your response. I agree that there needs to be a change of mindset. Should I presume that currently no industries are focusing on this? I am surprised why my community friends are hesitating to reply or share their practices/ideas related to my subject. I am not personally connected to any government body or CII. I need your opinion as my organization wants to focus, so simply some ideas on how I can do that? Will my idea of including a declaration statement in the application form really help me in screening such applicants, or can you suggest any other ideas?
Regards,
Shilpi
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thanks for your response. I agree that there needs to be a change of mindset. Should I presume that currently no industries are focusing on this? I am surprised why my community friends are hesitating to reply or share their practices/ideas related to my subject. I am not personally connected to any government body or CII. I need your opinion as my organization wants to focus, so simply some ideas on how I can do that? Will my idea of including a declaration statement in the application form really help me in screening such applicants, or can you suggest any other ideas?
Regards,
Shilpi
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
There is no other way to make people declare their status other than the Application Form. The only problem with this idea is keeping the information confidential as the Application Form goes through a lot of hands initially, and a tick on the "underprivileged" box may put a cross on a life! A more confidential way can be having a separate 1-page form/affidavit which can be signed by the applicant who wants to declare themselves "underprivileged."
Cheers,
K
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Cheers,
K
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thanks K Yes, separate form can solve the purpose. I still request my other friends of community if they can help me out and can share their ideas. Rgds, Shilpi
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Shilpi,
I am aware it is not within the control or domain of any HR manager of a company to push through the Employment reform I have suggested. I only wanted you to push these ideas across CII so that the industry gets prepared for this change and discuss the implications of these ideas on the industry.
I have my own sphere of influence through which I can bring in necessary legislations to facilitate this kind of change; it takes some time. But in the meanwhile, I wanted to initiate a discussion in the Industry circles about this matter.
Another good impact of my Employment reform is on the "stress levels" of the employees. Companies these days are worried about how to tackle the problem of increasing stress levels of their employees. Some companies are organizing Yoga sessions for employees, some companies are providing sleeping rooms to allow employees to have a nap of 1-2 hours in between their work, and some companies are allowing employees to relax by way of playing some sports, etc.
The employment reform I have suggested requires no such activities because once an employee's work burden is reduced by half, he does not feel any stress in work. Hence this is another area where companies will immensely benefit if these employment reforms are implemented.
OK. Coming back to your subject, your immediate concern is how to employ SC, ST, and OBCs. Just ask for the particulars of the candidates whether they belong to those categories by putting this question in the Application form:
"Do you belong to any of these Categories?
A. Scheduled Castes B. Scheduled Tribes C. Other Backward Castes
If Yes, tick the relevant category (Preference will be given to those candidates who belong to these categories)."
If you add this sentence, "Preference will be given to those candidates who belong to these categories," the applicants will take this question positively; otherwise, they will think this question is being asked to remove my name from the list of applicants. Generally, SC, ST, and OBC candidates don't mind revealing their identity once they know that your company is truly concerned about their welfare. After recruiting some people belonging to those categories for two to three years, you will not have any problem because there will be talk in their communities that your company is truly concerned and it will truly give preference. Needless to mention, 'preference' does not mean "reservation."
Having done this, your concern will be how to pick up the candidates belonging to those categories. Generally in private companies, the concern is of Merit. Hence even in those categories companies want "meritorious candidates."
Hence you devise a Recruitment policy for SC, ST, and OBCs saying, "Any SC, ST, or OBC candidate getting more than 60% marks in the written test conducted (if there is any Written test or any interview conducted by the recruiting organization)"
OR (if a written test, interview, etc., is not conducted)
"Any SC, ST, or OBC candidate passing the qualifying exam of the Eligibility qualification (let us say, the eligibility qualification for the job of Foreman in some company is ITI....then ITI is the eligibility qualification) with a minimum of 60% percent marks will be given preference."
What this means is, the meritorious candidates generally remain above 80 percent marks. When you give preference to SC, ST, or OBC candidates, you will give them preference without compromising too much with merit. 60% marks are not bad. Isn't it?
This will ensure that you not only give preference to SC, ST, and OBC candidates but also don't compromise with merit much.
Hope these ideas are OK for you.
Thanks and regards,
Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am aware it is not within the control or domain of any HR manager of a company to push through the Employment reform I have suggested. I only wanted you to push these ideas across CII so that the industry gets prepared for this change and discuss the implications of these ideas on the industry.
I have my own sphere of influence through which I can bring in necessary legislations to facilitate this kind of change; it takes some time. But in the meanwhile, I wanted to initiate a discussion in the Industry circles about this matter.
Another good impact of my Employment reform is on the "stress levels" of the employees. Companies these days are worried about how to tackle the problem of increasing stress levels of their employees. Some companies are organizing Yoga sessions for employees, some companies are providing sleeping rooms to allow employees to have a nap of 1-2 hours in between their work, and some companies are allowing employees to relax by way of playing some sports, etc.
The employment reform I have suggested requires no such activities because once an employee's work burden is reduced by half, he does not feel any stress in work. Hence this is another area where companies will immensely benefit if these employment reforms are implemented.
OK. Coming back to your subject, your immediate concern is how to employ SC, ST, and OBCs. Just ask for the particulars of the candidates whether they belong to those categories by putting this question in the Application form:
"Do you belong to any of these Categories?
A. Scheduled Castes B. Scheduled Tribes C. Other Backward Castes
If Yes, tick the relevant category (Preference will be given to those candidates who belong to these categories)."
If you add this sentence, "Preference will be given to those candidates who belong to these categories," the applicants will take this question positively; otherwise, they will think this question is being asked to remove my name from the list of applicants. Generally, SC, ST, and OBC candidates don't mind revealing their identity once they know that your company is truly concerned about their welfare. After recruiting some people belonging to those categories for two to three years, you will not have any problem because there will be talk in their communities that your company is truly concerned and it will truly give preference. Needless to mention, 'preference' does not mean "reservation."
Having done this, your concern will be how to pick up the candidates belonging to those categories. Generally in private companies, the concern is of Merit. Hence even in those categories companies want "meritorious candidates."
Hence you devise a Recruitment policy for SC, ST, and OBCs saying, "Any SC, ST, or OBC candidate getting more than 60% marks in the written test conducted (if there is any Written test or any interview conducted by the recruiting organization)"
OR (if a written test, interview, etc., is not conducted)
"Any SC, ST, or OBC candidate passing the qualifying exam of the Eligibility qualification (let us say, the eligibility qualification for the job of Foreman in some company is ITI....then ITI is the eligibility qualification) with a minimum of 60% percent marks will be given preference."
What this means is, the meritorious candidates generally remain above 80 percent marks. When you give preference to SC, ST, or OBC candidates, you will give them preference without compromising too much with merit. 60% marks are not bad. Isn't it?
This will ensure that you not only give preference to SC, ST, and OBC candidates but also don't compromise with merit much.
Hope these ideas are OK for you.
Thanks and regards,
Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Deat Chandrashekhar, I logged in after a long time due to some specific non avoidable reason and saw your reply & idea. It will definetly work. Thanks a ton! :D
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Do you belong to any of these categories? A. Scheduled Castes B. Scheduled Tribes C. Other Backward Castes If Yes, tick the relevant category. (Preference will be given to those candidates who belong to these categories).
Hi, someone posted this message...
Can anyone tell me if preference is to be given to backward classes, then what would happen to those companies who state in their policy, "We are an equal opportunities employer"?
Knowledge is knowledge; there should not be any compromise for it.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi, someone posted this message...
Can anyone tell me if preference is to be given to backward classes, then what would happen to those companies who state in their policy, "We are an equal opportunities employer"?
Knowledge is knowledge; there should not be any compromise for it.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Shilpi! Thanks for 'thanks'! :lol: I don't know what the position of Education certificates is in your State, but in our State, Andhra Pradesh, the SSC certificate, Board of Intermediate Education certificate, and Degree and PG certificates necessarily contain the particulars of which category the candidate belongs to. Hence, the question of hiding does not arise because they will be aware that you will check their category in their certificates. So, they will not hide.
Chandrasekhar.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Chandrasekhar.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi, someone posted this message:
Dear Ravishankar,
I doubt whether you have gone through the discussion I made. I feel you are one of the "anti-reservation" activists. Shilpi is asking a query about her Company's intention to support the Backward castes, she is not asking for any legislation to be passed in parliament to create reservations for SCs, STs and OBCs in the private sector. It is the 'internal policy' of her company, not any legislation being passed by parliament that will be thrust upon all companies. Hence you need not worry about it.
It is not a discussion of "merit versus reservations" that we made. I don't have anything against "merit". That is why I have suggested to her, even though you take SC, ST, and OBCs, you give preference to meritorious candidates amongst them.
If any Company's policy is "We are an equal opportunities employer".....let it be! No one can disturb that company's internal policy as long as there is no legislation passed in parliament that private companies should give preference to SC, ST, and OBCs.
Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Ravishankar,
I doubt whether you have gone through the discussion I made. I feel you are one of the "anti-reservation" activists. Shilpi is asking a query about her Company's intention to support the Backward castes, she is not asking for any legislation to be passed in parliament to create reservations for SCs, STs and OBCs in the private sector. It is the 'internal policy' of her company, not any legislation being passed by parliament that will be thrust upon all companies. Hence you need not worry about it.
It is not a discussion of "merit versus reservations" that we made. I don't have anything against "merit". That is why I have suggested to her, even though you take SC, ST, and OBCs, you give preference to meritorious candidates amongst them.
If any Company's policy is "We are an equal opportunities employer".....let it be! No one can disturb that company's internal policy as long as there is no legislation passed in parliament that private companies should give preference to SC, ST, and OBCs.
Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Gathering data for an AI comment.... Sending emails to relevant members...
Join Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.
Enforcement of negative covenants in employment terms.pdf