PHILIPS INDIA LABOR PROBLEMS AT SALT LAKE

PRESENTATION BY:- Group 5

PHILIPS INDIA LIMITED

• The company was incorporated on 31st January,

1930, at Calcutta.

• A Private Company under the name Philips

Electricals Company (India) Limited.

• In 1956 the name was changed to Philips India

Private Ltd. on September 12th.

Cont..

• In 1957 it was converted into a Public company on 31st

October.

• In 1967 as on 31st October, the name was changed from

Philips India Private Ltd. to Philips India, Ltd.

• The Company manufactures and sells radio receivers,

components, amplifiers, electrical lamps, lighting fittings and

accessories, medical apparatus, etc.

Cont..

• The Company's products includes mercury and sodium

lamps, light fittings and accessories radios and public

address equipment; hospital and dental equipment etc.

• The wake of the booming consumer goods market in

1992, PIL decided to modernize its Salt Lake factory

located in Kolkata. The plant's output was to increase

from a mere 40,000 to 2.78 lakh CTVs in three years

CASE DETAILS

• The case study is about the labor problems of the

Philips India Limited’s PIL 1998 Salt Lake factory

Kolkatta India.

• Two unions active at PIL Philips Employee Union

(PEU) and Pieco Workers Union (PWU).

Cont..

• The differences with workers led to declining

production and losses.

• PILs management decided to sell the factory

• The Union objected and made a counter bid

highlighting the problems between PIL and its workers

the case examines the reasons behind the conflict

SALT LAKE FACTORY FOCUS AND EXPANSION

• The company even expected to win the Philips

Worldwide Award for quality.

• The Company wanted to become the source of Philips

Exports in Asia Focus basically on its audio and video

based products.

Cont..

• The company relocated its audio product line to Pune in

spite of the move that resulted in the displacement of

600 workers there were no signs of discord largely due

to the unions involvement in the overall process.

• Slowdown in the CTV market demand made the workers

to think about their job due to this workers raised voices

against the management and asked for a hike in wage.

Cont..

• The difference resulted in 20 month long battle over the

wages hikes issue, go slow tactics of workers declining

production and huge loss for the company.

• In May 1998 PIL announced to stop production in June

1998.

• A series of negotiations, the unions and the management

came to a reasonable agreement on the issue of wage

structure.

SELLING TROUBLES• PIL decided to have a common manufacturing unit and

integrated technology to reduce cost

• Videocon approached PIL as buyer but had reservations

about over staffed and under utilized plant.

• PIL reduces workforce modernized plant spending Rs 7.1

crore.

• Videocon confirms Kitchen Appliances India Limited as its

nominee for buying the plant.

Cont..

• PILs plan of selling the CTV unit Claimed the price of

Rs 90 million was quite low against valuation of 300

million by Dalal Consultants independent values.

• Workers approached the Videocon to withdraw from

the deal.

• They refused, workers filled petition in the Kolkata

High Court challenging the sale agreement.

Cont..

• In March 1999 Calcutta Court strikes down Philips

deal with Videocon.

• PIL and Videocon decided to extend their agreement

by 6 months to accommodate the courts order and

workers agitation.

JUDGMENT DAY• The Supreme Court finally passed judgment on the

controversial Philips case in favor of PIL.

• The judgment dismissed the review appeal filed by the

workers.

• The Company transferred to Videocon Workers employment

was taken over by Kitchen Appliances.

• The transfer of ownership did not interrupt the services of

workmen Kitchen Appliances, started functioning from March

2001

Cont..

• The factory has been design by Videocon as a major center to

meet the requirement of the eastern region market and export to

East Asia countries.

• The judgment said that though the workers can demand for their

rights, they had no say in any of the policy decision made by the

company, if their interest were not adversely affected.

• The Supreme Court decision taken repeats the position which

Philips has maintained all long that the transaction will benefit

the Philips’ shareholders.

CONCLUSION

• Supreme Court decision seemed to be a

typical case of all well that ends well.

• The transactions benefited to shareholders.

• How far the Slat Lake workers agreed with

this remain unanswered

QUESTIONS

Changes taking place in PIL made workers feel insecure about their jobs. Do you agree with this statement? Give reasons to support your answer.

• Yes,

• The idea of relocating of the Pune plant had almost

resulted in the displacement of 600 workers from 1

unit which in turn could possibly target their jobs also.

The unions realized that the management might not

be able to complete tasks and that their jobs are in

danger.

Cont..• The slow down in the CTV markets, the workers were asked to go slow,

which came down to take the decision of raising their voices against the

management for a hike in wages.

• The employees also retaliated stating that they continued to work in spite

of the irregular hike in wages.

• The union had to face another problem of being shifted under another

ownership of Videocon which made them think that this company will not

be able to pay the wages and they cannot trust on this company too,

because Videocon faced failures to make payments in time during the

course of its transactions with Philips.

Cont..

• The decision to have common electronics facility to

reduce the cost and eventually decision to sell the

factory to Kitchen Appliance India Ltd were cause of

their burning insecurity among the workers. And also

due to which PEU demanded salary hike and the

company decided to pay less hike in the salary than

demanded by the worker.

Highlight the reasons behind PIL’s decision to sell the Salt Lake factory. Critically comment on PIL’s arguments regarding not accepting the union’s offer to buy the factory.

• The unions were not willing to involve, besides there

were differences in workers and hence it led to

decline and losses.

• The plant’s target was to reach from 40000 to 2.78

lakh CTVs in three years. There was slowdown in CTV

market since the company was not able to reach the

target.

Cont..

• Expansion plans had fallen and the target was not

achieved

PIL reject this offer claiming that it was legally

bound to sell Videocon

• To reduce the recurring loses and to get out of the

series of problems posed by the PEU.

Cont..

• The company is justified to argue for not accepting the

union’s offer as the workers were underutilized due to

the slowdown in the sales and production of CTV.

• The company even had expected to win the Philips

Worldwide Award for quality but it was not able to do so

• Due to decline in production the company did not

become the source of Philips Exports in Asia

Comment on the reasons behind the Salt Lake workers resisting the factory’s sale. Could the company have avoided this?

• The factory was good because it has diversified its

business continuously. The workers have no faith;

they were scared for loosing their jobs as well as

wages were low, therefore deciding to make the sale.

• Yes, company can avoid their by giving good training

good wages, motivating them company would be in

profit.