Hi Friends,

Even as I launch this today ( my 80th Birthday ), I realize that there is yet so much to say and do. There is just no time to look back, no time to wonder,"Will anyone read these pages?"

With regards,
Hemen Parekh
27 June 2013

Now as I approach my 90th birthday ( 27 June 2023 ) , I invite you to visit my Digital Avatar ( www.hemenparekh.ai ) – and continue chatting with me , even when I am no more here physically

Sunday 23 December 1979

COMMU-TIES

Synopsis: Communication For Productivity
Letters written to some 7500 Workers / Managers / Union Leaders, following a period of strike / Go slow / Murders (1979 - 1987), at Mumbai factory of Larsen & Toubro Ltd. This direct / open / honest communication led to a remarkable atmosphere of trust between Workers and Management, which, in turn, increased productivity at 3% per year (ave). 

23 Dec 1979

To;

Deputy General Managers (DGMs)

"COMMU-TIES" - Yes
"COMMITTEES" - No

We already have many Committees.

Perhaps too many.

So I would be the last person to suggest one more.

An  anthropologist   discovered  existence   of  'Committees' during the Indus Valley civilization.

While digging at "mohenjo-daro", he  unearthed a room-full of chairs  and  cups of  tea  -  "Come-meet-tea"! (Since then civilization  has made  great strides  in this  art  of doing nothing, by introducing coffee.' - it keeps you awake !)

But then  "Mohenjo-Daro' in B.C.  3,000 had fewer  walls than Powai has in  1979 A.D. - except that  these are 'invisible' I (to frustrate the anthropologist of 4,000 AD'.?)

Non-believers, kindly study Annexure 'A'

That's right.  I meant 'Barriers to communication'.

So  we should have  some more  'commu-ties'  - communication ties.

These,  I call,  'holes-in-the-walls. '  Our  windows  to  the 'worlds'.
The 'worlds' of

-      Managers
-      Officers and Supervisors
-      Technical and Clerical staff
-      Workmen and Union

Under Phase  I (OPERATION commu-ties?)  we have already made a 'beginning with the

             "PRODUCTIVITY COMMU-TIE"
at 4 levels



Under  Phase  II, I  believe we  should  establish a  regular channel of  communication with the  Supervisors and Officers. They are there to implement  Company Policy - even help frame it  (Supervisory  participation  in  Management?).   We,  the managers,  should understand  them  better  - as  a group,  -their    feelings/difficulties/suggestions.     They    must understand   better,  the   managerial  directives  and   the inconsistencies  of  managerial  action  -  whether  real  or apparent.

With the foregoing objective  in mind, I met  17 of  them on 21st   inst.    The  response   was   very  encouraging   and constructive.   I  felt that  a major  source  of energy  has remained untapped in this age of energy-crisis 11
They  would  like  to  meet   us  once  a  fortnight   (at least initially).  Say at 4.30 p.m. (G-4 Conference Room) on

-    4th   January '80
-    17th January '80
-    31st  January '80

We may call this  "INNOVATION COMMU-TIE'.  Whether innovative communication  will  take  place  or  not  will  depend  upon whether you  are present  or not.  Therefore,  I urge  you to remain present and help bring down the walls!

Then someday we will sit down and think about Phase III.


       H.C. PAREKH

Sunday 16 December 1979

THE NIGHTMARE YEAR

Synopsis: Communication For Productivity
Letters written to some 7500 Workers / Managers / Union Leaders, following a period of strike / Go slow / Murders (1979 - 1987), at Mumbai factory of Larsen & Toubro Ltd. This direct / open / honest communication led to a remarkable atmosphere of trust between Workers and Management, which, in turn, increased productivity at 3% per year (ave).

16 Dec 1979

To:

Dear friends

THE NIGHTMARE YEAR
The year 1979 is drawing to a close.
It has been a bad year so far.  What  little is left does not appear all  that cheerful.   The future looks  as bleak  as a Hindi film does around interval!  (except that in the case of a  Hindi film, your  eight-year old  can  predict  'The HAPPY End' rather accurately !)
We  have seen  some  bad years  before.  What  is  so special about 1979?

FIRST:
The Management  and the  Union signed  a 4-year  Agreement in January 1979, that gave  an average wage-rise of over  Rs 200 per month  to the  workmen, resulting  in a  recurring annual expenditure of  Rs 125  lakhs.  Then  there was  the one-time lump sum payment of Rs 90 lakhs.
Now there is  nothing basically  'wrong' in such a  big wage-increase, if  it were  to be neutralised  by a  corresponding improvement  in the  labour-productivity  as incorporated  in the Agreement.  Not only  labour-productivity remained at the same level throughout the year, it went down in some shops !!
This is what makes 1979, a 'bad' year !

SECOND
The labour-cost  further kept on rising  throughout the year. The maximum DA which  was Rs 1145 in January rose  to Rs 1305 in November - a  rise of Rs 160 so far.'  D.A. rise alone has cost the Company around Rs 90 lakhs  during the course of the year.
With  one  more  month  to  go,  1979,  might yet  break  the previous record !!

THIRD:
Most  of the  raw  materials and  components  are  costing us today, between  25% to 50%  more than what  these  cost us 11 months  ago.   Shortages  of raw  materials  caused  loss  of production and termination  of—'Temporaries' .And—this—could happen again and again  !!
Isn't this 'bad' enough?


FOURTH:
A  company needs borrowed  money to  run the  business.  When labour-cost and  materials-cost go up  sharply, we  need more money.   And  the  borrowed  money  itself  has  become  more 'expensive ' because banks increased the rates of interest.
How bad can one get?

FIFTH :
Most of our business is a  'Fixed price' business.  Today, we are executing  orders which  were booked by  us  12/18 months ago at  'firm prices'.  With  all  costs rising  sharply, our 'margins ' are shrinking fast.
This is what makes 1979 a bad year.

SIXTH;
Maharashtra  is going through  one of  the worst  POWER CUTS, ranging from  35% to 55%  (and 100% for 5 days  in May 1979). We have survived  so far, on our own generated  power - which costs us  6 times as  much.  But if  diesel supplies  go down further, (current stock is  just enough for 7 days) the first to be affected would be the Company's transport.
Can we take anything at all for 'granted'?

FINALLY:
1979 began with all outstanding  issues between the Union and the  Management peacefully  settled.  7,000  people  of Powai paid a  heavy price in 1977  and thought that  the worst year in L&T's history had come and gone.
Apparently some people have thought  otherwise and would like to make  1979 THE  WORST  YEAR I The  'Go-slow' agitation  is crowning the nightmare of 1979.
At a time when we should all be unitedly  fighting the 'evil' forces of the ECONOMY, through higher production,  do we have to make matters worse,  by inflicting wounds on ourselves  by resorting to 'Go-slow'?
When  you go  home today,  ask  your eight-year  old what  he thinks 1980 would be like - for us and for our families.

H.C. PAREKH

Monday 10 December 1979

DO NOT ROCK THE BOAT

Synopsis: Communication For Productivity
Letters written to some 7500 Workers / Managers / Union Leaders, following a period of strike / Go slow / Murders (1979 - 1987), at Mumbai factory of Larsen & Toubro Ltd. This direct / open / honest communication led to a remarkable atmosphere of trust between Workers and Management, which, in turn, increased productivity at 3% per year (ave). 

10 Dec 1979

To:

Dear Co-traveller


DO NOT ROCK THE BOAT

POWAI WORKS  is like a  boat.  You are  aware that  this boat has  not been  sailing  smoothly of  late.   Some people  are trying to  drill holes  in it, little  realizing that  if the boat goes down, they  go down too ! - perhaps before  the boat goes down !! What else is 'go-slow' agitation?
Over the years, our boat has sprung a few small  leaks and we should all be busy bailing out water and sealing  these leaks - not drilling holes!!  Future of 7,000 people  (and of their families) is at  stake.  A few persons (whose own  futures do not ride  the boat) are  taking dangerous liberties  with the future of 7,000 workmen.  Can this be allowed?
To agitate peacefully and democratically  for a 'just' cause, is  the birth  right of  the working  class.  No  enlightened Management will deny that, and  L&T Management has repeatedly demonstrated that it is an enlightened Management.
But, is the present 'go-slow' for a ' just ' cause?
At  a considerable  sacrifice  to  the L&T  workmen,  the BKS Union got  the Management to  agree to refer  the cases  of 8 workmen  to the  Labour  Court.   now the  workmen  are being asked  to  make  further  sacrifices.   For  what?   Was  the earlier sacrifice all in vain?  You be the judge.
Our Management ''has a reputation of honouring an understanding, if it was given.   The one and only understanding is the agreement signed   by  the  Union   and  the  Management on 17.3.1978.  Management has every intention of honouring the same.  It is hoped that the educated and intelligent workmen of L&T will also uphold this democratic tradition and honour the  agreement  by  immediately  withdrawing the - GO-SLOW agitation, before this disease  spreads   like plague and consumes our futures !!

H.C. PAREKH

Friday 30 November 1979

GO-SLOW' AGITATION

Synopsis: Communication For Productivity
Letters written to some 7500 Workers / Managers / Union Leaders, following a period of strike / Go slow / Murders (1979 - 1987), at Mumbai factory of Larsen & Toubro Ltd. This direct / open / honest communication led to a remarkable atmosphere of trust between Workers and Management, which, in turn, increased productivity at 3% per year (ave). 

30 Nov 1979

To:

Dear Friends

'GO-SLOW'  AGITATION 
Whom does it hurt?
In our Notice dt.  28th instant  I  had explained  to  the workmen  that their agitation for reinstatement  of 8 workers is both  unfair and unjust.  We had also  advised the workmen to immediately  withdraw their action  of 'Go-slow' which can only hurt their own interest in the long term.
Despite   this   advice,   the   'go-slow'   is   continuing. Apparently  better  counsel has  not  prevailed.   This is  a matter  of  regret  and considerable  concern.   Already  the transport and  the canteen services are  disorganised and the workmen  are suffering.   If production  losses  pile-up, the workmen  cannot expect to remain unaffected.   The Management shall  not  remain an  idle spectator  should  this 'go-slow' agitation continue.
We  once  again  appeal   to  the  workmen  to  withdraw  the agitation at  once and adopt  democratic methods for settling their grievances, if any.
For nearly  18 months,  the  Union  has delayed  the  court-proceedings  in the matter  of 8 workmen.   It has taken the Union almost 18 months to file their Statement  of claim before the  Court, in October'79.  All along, the Management has shown anxiety to expedite the case.
For those of  you,  who  are  not  completely aware  of  the undertaking given by the Union, not  to agitate on any of the issues covered  by the Settlement  dated 17.3.1978,  the same is reproduced alongside.
We look forward to your cooperation in the withdrawal of the agitation and in the restoration of normalcy.

H.C. PAREKH

Wednesday 28 November 1979

NOTICE

Synopsis: Communication For Productivity
Letters written to some 7500 Workers / Managers / Union Leaders, following a period of strike / Go slow / Murders (1979 - 1987), at Mumbai factory of Larsen & Toubro Ltd. This direct / open / honest communication led to a remarkable atmosphere of trust between Workers and Management, which, in turn, increased productivity at 3% per year (ave).

28 Nov 1979

To:

Dear Friends

                                                              NOTICE

It  is reported  that the  Bharatiya Kamgar Sena at a Gate Meeting held on Friday, the  23rd November 1979, directed the workers to resort to  'Go slow' in work to secure the demands of reinstatement of  8 workers, full wages for  the period of suspension  of  operations  & subsequent  strike,  additional ex-gratia  bonus,  etc.    in  response  to  this  direction, workers, particularly  key personnel, have  started absenting from  work, work to  rule,  go  slow, refusing  overtime etc. Which  have  disrupted  the  essential services  in  canteen, transport etc.  The  shop floor workers have also slowed down their performance in work  and are resorting to sporadic work stoppages  under the pretext  of  non-availability of canteen services on time.
Employees are  aware  that the  issue of  reinstatement  of 8 workers  has been  referred to  industrial  Tribunal for  its adjudication and the  issue of payment of full  wages for the period of suspension  of operations and strike  is before the Arbitrator in accordance with  the Settlement dated March 17, 1978. In this Settlement the Union/workmen   have categorically  agreed  not  to  resort  to  strike,  go  slow tactics and  any other type of agitation on these two issues and  that  they shall  cooperate  with  the Management  in maintaining   discipline and improving production and productivity.
The actions on  the part of workmen, described above, amount to  serious  misconducts  under  the  Standing  Orders, and illegal strike/unfair labour practices in  contravention of the provisions of  the industrial Disputes Act and Maharashtra Recognition  of  Trade  Unions &  prevention  of Unfair Labour Practices  Act.  These acts are also in breach of the terms of the binding Settlements dated March 17, 1978 and January 12, 1979.
All workers are hereby advised not to indulge in such indisciplined and illegal acts and to restore normalcy forthwith.
Although, the issues/demands raised by the BKS Union are subjudice, it would have been more natural for  the Union to discuss these  matters with the  Management across  the table in a peaceful and congenial working atmosphere, rather than resorting to unjustified direct action.

H.C. PAREKH

Thursday 1 November 1979

PRODUCTIVITY - "PRODUCT" OF THE BRAIN BY THE BRAWN

Synopsis: Communication For Productivity
Letters written to some 7500 Workers / Managers / Union Leaders, following a period of strike / Go slow / Murders (1979 - 1987), at Mumbai factory of Larsen & Toubro Ltd. This direct / open / honest communication led to a remarkable atmosphere of trust between Workers and Management, which, in turn, increased productivity at 3% per year (ave).

1 Nov 1979

To:

Article Published in Powai Pageant

PRODUCTIVITY - "PRODUCT" OF THE BRAIN BY THE BRAWN
Someone said recently that productivity is yet another name for hard work. The  definition   is  elegant   for  its simplicity. It is a  simple statement of an otherwise complex subject.  It  is also a brief statement.   It has, therefore, both  the key  attributes  of  mathematics  - simplicity  and brevity.
Looking beyond this  simple definition, the word  'productive' makes  us think  of  the manner  in which  this  hard work-or effort-was applied.   Was all that  hard work effective?   The cause  and  effect   relationship is  brought  into  picture. Obviously,  effort   is the   "cause".  But  was   the  effort "effective"?   Did it produce  the desired result?  Or did  it produce any result at all?
Now we  see the light!   No matter how  "hard" the effort,  it is  no good  - not  productive -  unless  it produces  certain "effects" - the results.
Long before  man invented  the circle,  he used square  wheels on stone-age carts.   You can imagine the effect?   (Those who drive on Bombay  roads do not have to stretch their  imaginations).   It called for applying  a lot of effort  but did  not take  one  very  far!   It  also  took  a  long  time  to  get anywhere.   Although time was not  important, the effort  was, so when  the stone-age cart Mark II, with circular  wheels was test-marketed, it was an  instant success!
Someone  had finally  hit the  key  - how  to multiply  muscle power  by brainpower  -  the "product"  of  the brain  by  the brawn.   From this "product" came  "productivity".   This then is  the more  involved definition  of productivity.   Life  on earth was never  going to be the  same again!  Let us  look at the change the definition underwent.
From,
                                  effect =F  (effort)         
                                  (i.e. effect is a function of effort)

we moved into      
                     effect = F (effort x brain)
So we  learned how to enhance  the effect for  the same given effort through  application of  intelligence.  Alternatively, for the  same given  effect, we could  use much  less effort, using mental skills.
Productivity, therefore, means using both body and  mind simultaneously, for easier attainment of a given end-result.


Although  there is a  limit 'beyond which the  body cannot  be prodded  to greater  effort,  there does  not seem  to be  any such limit  to mental  powers.  When  the two are  multiplied, the  results can  be fantastic.   The history  of mankind  has proved  this again  &  again.  Depressingly, more  often  than not, this  multiplication has  been used  for the self  rather than for the benefit of mankind.
In so far  as productivity means producing  more for the  same effort or  producing the  same quantity  for less  effort,  no one would  have any quarrel.   This was  particularly so  when it  concerned  one's  own   efforts  to  gain  an   individual advantage.   Such a situation,  however, did not  last  beyond the days of the caveman who hunted alone for food.
For  an end  objective, (in  this case  food  - shall  we  say survival?)  - co-operative  effort  emerged as  early  as  the caveman-hunter  era.  Co-operative  effort was synergetic  and certainly  more  productive.   The  co-operative  effort   was problem-solving in so much  as it was an answer (solution)  to the  question of  survival.   Co-operation also  improved  the chances of attaining the desired solution.
One does not know for sure,  but at this stage one or more of the following things happened:
1.  Some persons with a  greater sense of survival     desired  greater  (than  equal)  share of  the     end-result.
2.  Some persons  with  greater mental  or greater     physical abilities  desired a greater  share -    a share  out of  proportion to  their physical     effort contribution.
(This  was  a couple  of  million  years  before  man  stopped working for  himself and  started working  for the  Income Tax Department;).
Anyway, we see  here at once, the roots of Marx-Lenin's  class struggle  as   also  Lord  Mahavira's   Asteya  principle   of desirability  of minimum  wants.   As  long as  an  individual desired  to take more  out of  the Society  than  what he  was prepared  to give  to the society  by  way of  his effort,  no societal  wealth could  be created.   In such  a situation  an individual   could  amass   wealth  only   at   the  cost   of impoverishment  of  some  other  individuals,  the  sum  total remaining the same.
It is only  when every member of  the society gave more  to it than  what  he took  away,  could  societal  wealth  increase. Create  more,  consume  less.   Contribute   more, distribute less.  This, then is the principle of  the Wealth of Nations.


Now you  will notice  the relevance of  the earlier  remarks. Productivity  became  a  dirty  word  only  when   it  became synonymous with exploitation of the efforts of  the others to gain personal advantage for a few.  This  was particularly so in  a cooperative  venture  like an  industrial  organisation where  necessary  persons  of  varying  physical  and  mental skills must work together towards a common goal.
Even in an indealistic situation where  nobody took advantage of  nobody,  the question  of  establishing an  equation  (or rather an inequation - mathematically  speaking.' ) between the contributions of thousands  of employees, each  possessing an unique  combination of physical  and  mental  skills, remains intractable.   Although  some   norms  of  overall  Corporate Productivity  can  be established  for  a  given venture  and could prove  to be a  useful yardstick  if used consistently, the enormous complexity of  a modern business venture renders all but  impossible any attempt at measuring  an individual's contribution to that overall productivity gain.
Any overall productivity index tends to mix up the  effect of several resource inputs in the denominator of  the simplified formula.

Productivity  =  Output
                                                                                 input
The same is true  of the selection of any numerator,  such as sales, cost of production, profit, etc.  Therefore, the only true measure of labour productivity can be equated as

Labour productivity  =  Physical output
                                                                               Labour manhours
The foregoing  equation  is particularly true  for a  diversified  operation,   considering   that,  at  macro-level,  no single  index   can  be  found   which  can   isolate  labour productivity,   it   appears   inescapable   that   all   the manufacturing units  must establish  work standards  in terms of  the standard  hours for  the production  to be  achieved. The ratio  of the  standard hours to  the actual  hours would then indicate an  individual's or a group's performance index or productivity level.   Output as measured by  the number of physical units  for a given  unit of time is  something which is easily  understood by all concerned.  This  brings us back to  where we started,  namely hard  work -  for what  is hard work other than doing more in the same period of time?

H.C. PAREKH