Company says strike at Manesar plant illegal; ready to give sops; wants new union members to participate in workers’ elections next month.
Maruti Suzuki, the country’s largest car maker, has toughened its stand against the protesting workers at its Manesar plant in Haryana and terminated the services of 11, who were allegedly inciting the workers, with immediate effect.
The action was taken even as the management is holding discussions with the workers to stop the agitation.
Chairman R C Bhargava said the strike was illegal and the company had imposed no work no pay principle from today. “The strike is illegal. The workers had not gives any notice to the management. Also, those who have applied for registration of a new union, which is separate from that of the Gurgaon plant, did not receive permission or were registered.”
The 2,500-odd workers at the Manesar plant, who struck work from Saturday evening, are demanding the recognition of a new union — Maruti Suzuki Employees Union (MSEU). The union is independent of the present one, including workers of the the Gurgaon plant.
V L Sachdeva, secretary AITUC (All India Trade Union Congress), which is backing the strike said, “The new union applied for a registration to the registrar of trade unions on Friday. The next day, Maruti's management asked its workers to sign an undertaking that they will not be a part of the new union. We do not want the management interfering in our matters. We have met the labour minister and the labour commissioner. There is every likelihood that agitation will increase if demands are not met.”
Sources said that senior management at Maruti Suzuki planned to meet labour department officials on the issue.
More From This Section
The Manesar plant rolls out over 1,200 to 1,300 cars every day which include the Swift, DZire SX4 and the A-Star and the Gurgaon plant over 4,000 cars per day.
The strike has already impacted production with a loss of under 2,000 cars in the last three days (The factory is closed on Sunday).
Bhargava, however, said they do not have much scope for a contingency plan to ensure that supplies of cars do not get impacted if the strike prolongs. “We have dealer stocks of over 28 days, but the models which are made in Manesar are mostly not produced in Gurgaon (its other unit). The Gurgaon facility can increase there limits if the workers agree to work on Sundays,” he said.
He said the management was willing to offer sops to ensure that the agitating workers returned to work. “The Maruti union will hold elections next month. I am sure they can show their strength there. They can air their grievances there,” he said. Bhargava said the management was willing to look at a separate institutional mechanism to address the special concerns of the Manesar workers, independent of the Gurgaon plant.
However, the management is trying to convince the workers that a politically-affiliated union is counter-productive for workers as it is followed by multiple other unions with allegiance to other parties being formed. “One strong union is much better than multiple unions, which only helps the management. That is what we are trying to convince them,” said a key executive involved in the talks with the workers.
Maruti has had a peaceful union relationship except a strike call in 2001 when the unions backed by the AITUC struck work for over three months. In the 90's Om Prakash Chautala had pushed for setting up of a second union, but the move fizzled out after it promoters got routed in the union elections.
Strikes targeting the auto sector supported by AITUC has been common in the Gurgaon-Manesar-Bawal zone and reflects the unions aggressive bid to increase clout in the area. Sixty per cent of the country’s auto production comes from this belt. What has made it easier for unions to make a dent is the fact that 80 per cent of the one million workers in this auto hub are hired as contract workers.
Experts say AITUC has gained influence by playing a key role in negotiating wages between workers and management in the Honda Motorcyle and Scooter India Ltd dispute in 2007.