Don’t miss the latest developments in business and finance.

Mul Staff Revive Share Allotment Demand

Image
Saibal Dasgupta BSCAL
Last Updated : Sep 27 1997 | 12:00 AM IST

Maruti Udyog Employees Union has revived an old demand for enforcing a tripartite agreement of allotting shares amounting to nine per cent of the total equity capital, to them on a preferential basis. The Union plans to take up the matter with industry minister Murasoli Maran next week and may also move the Delhi High Court to enforce the agreement.

We had raised the issue with former managing director R C Bhargava and raised it again with the present MD, RSSLN Bhaskarudu, on Wednesday. We may be forced to move the High Court if the management and the government does not listen, Union general secretary Mathew Abraham told Business Standard.

According to Abraham, the government, Maruti management and employee representatives had signed a tripartite agreement in 1990, permitting allotment of Maruti shares to employees to the tune of nine per cent of the total equity capital.

More From This Section

A Maruti Employees Mutual Fund Trust was created with representatives from the management and the government. However, shares amounting to only .31 per cent of total equity were allotted to employees in 1990.

Two years later, the government passed on this reserved stake (8.69 per cent) and an additional one per cent to Suzuki, enabling Suzuki to hike its stake in Maruti to 50 per cent.

The government has violated its own agreement of 1990. The Union is under pressure from employees demanding a higher stake in the company, Abraham said.

He said the Union had discussed the issue with CPI leader Gurudas Dasgupta, who promised to obtain an audience with the industry minister next week. Besides, the issue would also be raised at the meeting of the Trade Union Council of Gurgaon on September 30, to be attended by labour minister M P Veerendra Kumar.

On Thursday, Union representatives had met T Kobayasi, Marutis joint managing director, to register their protest against a statement issued by Suzuki. In the statement, Suzuki had said that Bhaskaradu had failed to take action against some employees who had manhandled a company officer. This was cited by Suzuki as an instance to prove its point that Bhaskaradu was incapable of being the MD.

Kobayasi assured us that Suzuki had nothing against the employees and that such statements would not be issued again, Abraham said. Union representatives pointed out that the management under Bhargava had not taken action against employees when Suzuki chairman O Suzuki had been gheraoed in July, 1995, he said.

Besides, Suzuki had already opposed Bhaskaradus appointment at the Maruti board meeting on September 27 while the alleged incident of manhandling took place on September 28.

Suzuki had clearly made up its mind that Bharkarudu was inefficient before the alleged manhandling incident took place. How can they now cite this incident at the International Court of Arbitration (ICA) in London ? If necessary, we might even write to ICA stating the correct position, Abraham said.

Also Read

First Published: Sep 27 1997 | 12:00 AM IST

Next Story