word file for pdf final phd - a reservoir of Indian...

100

CHAPTER 4 DATA ANALYSIS

As mentioned earlier, the data was collected by using questionnaire and Interview

method. The entire section of data analysis has been divided into three subsections. Subsection A

contains the data analysis in respect of the Workers, while subsection B contains the data

analysis in respect of the Managers and subsection C in respect of Inspectors.

Two separate questionnaires were prepared for the purpose of data analysis. One

questionnaire was prepared to collect the data from the point of view of workers and second was

made with the purpose to know about the condition of workers and implication of Safety

measures and provision by the Managers.

Data is also been collected by conducting Interview of Safety officers for the purpose of

study of current situation of Safety provisions in SSIs in Pune city.

101

SECTION-A

4.A Data analysis done for the responses that were given by the employees.

Table 4A.1: Age of the employees in years

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 18-25 171 28.5 28.5 28.5

25-35 272 45.3 45.3 73.8

35-45 125 20.8 20.8 94.7

45-60 28 4.7 4.7 99.3

60 and above 4 .7 .7 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

Graph 4A.1: Age of the employees in years

From the above table it can be clearly seen that out of the respondents that were randomly

selected, nearly 95% are from the age groups 18 to 45. Only 5% of the respondents were above

the age of 45. When the workers were interview informally, some responded that after the age of

102

45, most of the workers do not prefer to work on hazardous activities or jobs that can cause

excessive physical stress.

Table 4A.2: Gender


Valid Male 567 94.5 94.5 94.5

Female 33 5.5 5.5 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

Very less number of female workers were found. Less than 6% of the respondents were

found to be female workers. The table, although strikingly indicates a possibility that the female

class does not prefer to work on activities that involve physical effort, although quite

understandably.

Graph 4A.2: Gender

The figures also indicate that activities which happen in the workshop are not suitable for

females, as they include physical labour, not usually suitable for females. Lifting heavy things,

working on cutting machines and other machines that require physical strength seem to be

activities that are not usually preferred by females. According to the National Sample Survey, the

103

worker population proportion for women in the rural area was 24.8 in the year 2011-12 whereas,

that for male workers was 54.3. In the Urban sector, it was 14.7 for females and 54.6 for males.

Table 4A.3: Marital Status


Valid Married 533 88.8 88.8 88.8

Unmarried 67 11.2 11.2 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

Graph 4A.3: Marital Status

Nearly 90% of the respondents were found to be Married. This also means that they have

higher chances of having dependents. The Cross tabulation provided on the next page shows that

maximum number of respondents who were between the age group of 25 to 35 years, were

would to be married. The data above confirms to the traditional and conventional aspect of

marital status of typical Indian workers.

104

Table 4A.3.1 Age in years * Marital Status Cross tabulation

Marital Status

TotalMarried Single

Age in years 18-25 154 17 171

25-35 245 27 272

35-45 106 19 125

45-60 26 2 28

60 and above 2 2 4

Total 533 67 600

Table 4A.4: Occupation of the spouse


Valid Housewife 444 74.0 74.0 74.0

Industrial Worker 24 4.0 4.0 78.0

Self Occupied 72 12.0 12.0 90.0

Salaried employee elsewhere 60 10.0 10.0 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

74% of the respondents said that their spouses were housewives. Being housewives, and

dependents, their livelihood depends entirely on the earnings fetched by the working member of

the family. Hazardous processes can pose serious threats to the physiological and psychological

well being of the worker. It is difficult to imagine, as to what would happen to a given worker's

family, if he stops generating income due to some temporary or permanent disability due to a

hazardous process.

105

Graph 4A.4: Occupation of the spouse.

Table 4A.5: Total Experience as an Industrial labourer


Valid Less than 1 year 85 14.2 14.2 14.2

1-3 years 329 54.8 54.8 69.0

4-6 years 144 24.0 24.0 93.0

7-10 years 39 6.5 6.5 99.5

11 years and above 3 .5 .5 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

106

Graph 4A.5: Total Experience as an Industrial labourer

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Frequency Percent

Less than 1 year

1‐3 years

4‐6 years

7‐10 years

11 years and above

Total

Nearly 80% of the respondents were found to be experienced for 1 to 6 years. The cross

tabulated table below would give a clear idea of the age and corresponding experience of the

workers.

Table 4A.5.1 Age in years * Total Experience as an Industrial labourer (Cross tabulation)

Total Experience as an Industrial labourer

Total

Less than 1

year

1-3

years

4-6

years

7-10

years

11 years and

above

Age in

years

18-25 85 62 19 0 0 166

25-35 12 253 5 7 0 277

35-45 15 14 72 13 11 125

45-60 0 1 0 27 0 28

60 and

above 0 1 0 2 1 4

Total 113 330 96 49 12 600

Approximately 42 to 43% of the workers in small scale industries were found to be

experienced for 1 to 3 years and were in the age group 25 to 35 years. Very less number of

107

workers were found to be experienced for more than 10 years. This may be because of the

hazardous nature of the job.

Graph 4A.5.1: Age in years * Total Experience as an Industrial labourer

Table 4A.6: Number of Members in the family


Valid 2 121 20.2 20.2 20.2

3 97 16.2 16.2 36.3

4 135 22.5 22.5 58.8

5 174 29.0 29.0 87.8

6 43 7.2 7.2 95.0

7 24 4.0 4.0 99.0

8 6 1.0 1.0 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

Nearly 70% of the respondents have 3 to 5 members in the family. It would be interesting

to observe on the next page, in table that shows cross tabulated data between number of members

in the family and number of dependents.

108

Table 4A.7: Number of Dependents


Valid 0 64 10.7 10.7 10.7

1 104 17.3 17.3 28.0

2 174 29.0 29.0 57.0

3 155 25.8 25.8 82.8

4 74 12.3 12.3 95.2

5 17 2.8 2.8 98.0

6 9 1.5 1.5 99.5

7 3 .5 .5 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

From the above table it can be seen that only around 10% of the respondents have no

dependents. This may be because there can be seen only a couple of members in the family, with

no children or elderly people to be taken care of. 54.8% of the respondents had 2 or 3 dependents

in their families. Less than 5% of the respondents had 5 or more people who were dependents.

Table 4A.7.1: Number of Members in the family * Number of Dependents (Cross

tabulation)

Number of Dependents

Total0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Number of Members 2 64 57 0 0 0 0 0 0 121

3 0 46 51 0 0 0 0 0 97

4 0 0 62 73 0 0 0 0 135

5 0 1 61 56 56 0 0 0 174

6 0 0 0 21 11 11 0 0 43

7 0 0 0 5 5 5 9 0 24

8 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 3 6

Total 64 104 174 155 74 17 9 3 600

109

Nearly 30% of the respondents who have three or more members and the family have at

least two dependents. Clearly the above data suggest that the employees who work in hazardous

processes and have more than 2 family members have people who are dependent on their earning

capacity for their livelihood. The above numbers help us to understand the necessity and the

requirement of the employees who work on hazardous processes to maintain good health to

support their families.

Table 4A.8 Salary paid, approximately per annum


Valid 0-75000 135 22.5 22.5 22.5

75000-100000 290 48.3 48.3 70.8

100000-150000 171 28.5 28.5 99.3

150000-200000 4 .7 .7 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

Graph 4A.8 Salary paid, approximately per annum

0 100 200 300

150000‐200000

100000‐150000

75000‐100000

0‐75000

110

This study focuses on workers who are employed on hazardous jobs. The situation at an

individual's job varies significantly depending on income levels, that decide the class (Kerbo,

Herald (1996). Earning members of the upper-middle class and middle class families get

pleasure from superior freedoms in their jobs. They are more valued, benefit from extra

diversity, and are awarded a little authority.

For further analysis, a cross tabulated sheet that contains a comparison between the

salaries earned by the employees and the number of dependents in their family yields interesting

results.

Table 4A.8.1 : Number of Dependents * Salary paid, Approximately per annum Cross

tabulation

Salary paid, Approximately per annum

Total0-75000 75000-100000 100000-150000 150000-200000

Number of Dependents 0 14 33 17 0 64

1 26 45 33 0 104

2 36 87 49 2 174

3 33 76 45 1 155

4 18 31 24 1 74

5 4 10 3 0 17

6 2 7 0 0 9

7 2 1 0 0 3

Total 135 290 171 4 600

The above table shows that almost the entire set of respondents belong to lower middle

class. Those in lower classes face lower levels of job satisfaction. The physical and

psychological environment of the place of work vary significantly among classes. The blue-

collar employees are subjects to suffer with monotonous work that may involve health hazards,

injury, that may even turn out to be fatal in nature. Approximately 48% of the employees belong

to the income group between 75,000 to one lack rupees. The majority of who belong to this

111

income group have more than one dependent. With the general rise in the price of essential

commodities, one may find it hard to imagine that the way these people must be surviving.

14.5% of the observed respondents have 2 dependents, with a salary ranging between

75000 to 100000. 12.7% have 3 dependents, within the same salary range. It means that nearly

27% of the employees are earning less than 1 lakh rupees per annum and have to take care of 2 to

3 dependents. The cross tabulated data shows that even after operating at very high risks, the

standard of living of these employees yet remains very low.

Graph 4A.8.1: Number of Dependents * Salary paid,

112

Table 4A.9: Type of House/ Home / Residence


Valid Rent Free Accommodation 18 3.0 3.0 3.0

Rented 276 46.0 46.0 49.0

Owned 287 47.8 47.8 96.8

Others 19 3.2 3.2 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

The above data shows us that on the 3% of the employees have been given rent-free staff

quarters to stay. 46% of the respondents live in rented houses. This adds up to the cost of living,

especially then they are paid such low salaries. As an interesting fact, 47.8% of the employees

who were questioned, have their own houses.

Table 4A.10: Consumption of tobacco


Valid Yes 396 66.0 66.0 66.0

No 204 34.0 34.0 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

113

Table 4A.10.1: Age in years * Consumption of tobacco Cross tabulation

Consumption of tobacco

TotalYes No

Age in years 18-25 109 62 171

25-35 191 81 272

35-45 78 47 125

45-60 17 11 28

60 and above 1 3 4

Total 396 204 600

Graph 4A.10.1: Age-wise Consumption of tobacco

The processes which involve physical labour are monotonous in nature. When some of

these workers were interviewed informally, they complained that their work was boring. Then

they were asked as to why they consume tobacco? The most common answer was they were

addicted to tobacco because tobacco in a way stimulates them to carry on with their work. 191

employees working within the age group of 25 to 35 years, were more frequently found to be

addicted to tobacco. The above data points to an interesting fact that after the age of 35 following

the 60 and above group, the tobacco habit has been found to be less frequent.

114

These workers already work in hazardous processes. Consumption of tobacco is almost

an added hazard with these kind of occupations as nearly 70 percent of the respondents agreed

that they consume tobacco.

Table 4A.11: Consumption of Alcohol


Valid Yes 305 50.8 50.8 50.8

No 295 49.2 49.2 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

Table 4A.11.1: Age in years * Consumption of Alcohol Cross tabulation

Consumption of Alcohol

TotalYes No

Age in years 18-25 83 88 171

25-35 148 124 272

35-45 62 63 125

45-60 11 17 28

60 and above 1 3 4

Total 305 295 600

Again in the above tables 4.11 and 4.11.1, it can be seen that maximum number of

employees consume alcohol. When informally asked about their habit, the reason was the

physical and mental stress associated with their job. Some of them replied that they drink to

enjoy and recoil. Some said that alcohol makes them numb and their body stops aching after they

drink alcohol. Nearly 51% of the respondents agreed that they consume alcohol. The disturbing

fact is that with the given income levels, they can afford country liquor which is extremely

injurious to health and proves to be an additional problem to the general well being of the

employees and their families.

115

Table 4A.12: Consumption of tobacco * Consumption of Alcohol Cross tabulation

Consumption of Alcohol

TotalYes No

Consumption of tobacco Yes 197 199 396

No 108 96 204

Total 305 295 600

The above is another table which matches the bad habits of the workers. It can be seen

that almost all those who consume alcohol, consume tobacco and have agreed to the fact.

Alcohol and tobacco consumption, for the same person can lead to medical conditions which

may range from mental stress to serious medical conditions like cancer, lever cirrhosis etc. The

above data shows that most of the workers are either not aware of the consequences or are not

bothered about the consequences.

Graph 4A.12: Consumption of tobacco * Consumption of Alcohol

116

The above graph shows us that workers who commonly chew tobacco are also

consuming alcohol. It is known that this combination is lethal to the health of the workers who

are already exposed to several different industrial pollutants.

Table 4A.13: Major hazard associated with the job

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid Sound Pollution, 53 8.8 8.8 8.8

Air pollutants 157 26.2 26.2 35.0

Any other physical / orthopedic

stress

138 23.0 23.0 58.0

Dangerous machines, which can

cause fatal/serious injury

193 32.2 32.2 90.2

Mental stress

59

9.8

9.8

100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

The above table helps us to interpret the data mix. Air pollutants that can cause irritation,

any other physical / orthopedically stress and dangerous machines, which can cause fatal/serious

injury constitute the majority of the hazards in the small scale industry. Sound pollution and

mental stress seem to be less dominant, though they are potentially destructive hazards. Most of

the workers were found to be using phones that had MP3 playback capacity with noise isolating

heap-phones plugged into their ears.

When asked informally, they replied that the music they play does 2 things, 1. It blocks

background noise that is extremely disturbing and 2. Helps them as a stress buster by keeping

them entertained at the job. Very rarely it was observed that the employees are banned from

carrying cell phones within the factory premises.

117

Table 4A.13.1: Total Experience as an Industrial labourer * Major hazard associated with

the job Cross tabulation

Major hazard associated with the job Total

Sound

Pollution

Air

pollutants

Physical

stress

Dangerous

machines

Mental

stress

Total

Experience

Less

than

1

year

5 23 14 25 18 85

1-3

years

26 88 79 103 33 329

4-6

years

18 34 35 52 5 144

7-10

years

4 10 9 13 3 39

11

years

and

above

0 2 1 0 0 3

Total 53 157 138 193 59 600

From the table we can see that workers who belong to the group of workers who have an

experience of 1 to 3 years are at maximum risk of suffering injuries that happen due to dangerous

machines.

The table also shows that the figures of sound pollution are heavily under- estimated.

This may be because the ill effects of sound pollution may not be considered as immediate and

life threatening by the employees.

118

Graph 4A.13: Hazards and Experience as an Industrial Labourer

Mental stress is actually associated with every job. But all other hazards seem to

dominate the mental stress of the workers. They seemed to be worried about other hazards more

than mental stress. The above figure also points out that the maximum effects of sound pollution

can be felt within the span of 4 to 6 years for the industrial labourers.

Table 4A.14 Medical problems in the past year due to the type of hazard.


Valid Yes 188 31.3 31.3 31.3

No 412 68.7 68.7 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

31.3% of the employees have faced medical conditions in the past one year. This

indicates that the almost every one out of three workers face a medical condition, within one year

of beginning their job. The above numbers are quite disturbing in nature and show that the

employees in hazardous small scale industries have to indeed risk their well being to make a

living. The medical problems were serious to moderate, but necessarily originated from the type

of activity performed on the job. For further analysis, this table has been cross tabulated with the

type of hazard associated with the job.

119

Table 4A.14.1: Major hazard associated with the job * Medical problems in the past year-

related to the hazard Cross tabulation

Medical problems in the past year-

related to the hazard

TotalYes No

Major

hazard

Sound Pollution, affecting the

physical and mental health 15 38 53

Air pollutants that can cause irritation

66

91

157

Any other physical / orthopedic stress 44 94 138


cause fatal/serious injury 53 140 193

Mental stress 10 49 59

Total 188 412 600

The major hazard that creates a problem seems to be Air Pollutants. Air pollutants

include particles, chemicals and other elements which can cause irritation. Employees reported

difficulty in breathing. Some reported asthma, Continuous cough etc. Some companies involve

employees who operate on cutting / drilling machines. These machines pose dual hazards as

these machines are dangerous and can cause serious injuries too. Welders, people who lift heavy

parts mainly reported orthopedic stress.

120

Graph 4A.14.1: Major hazard associated with the job * Medical problems in the past year

Following the air pollutants, dangerous machines also seem to cause problems for the

workers. Wounds varying from minor to serious happen to workers when they work on

machines. Cuts, sprains and Repetitive Motion Injuries were found to be common among

workers.

121

Table 4A.14.2: Medical problems in the past year- related to the hazard * Age in years

Cross tabulation

Age in years

Total18-25 25-35 35-45 45-60 60 and above

Medical problems in the past year. Yes 53 57 66 10 2 188

No 118 215 59 18 2 412

Total 171 272 125 28 4 600

More than 50% of the worker who were of the age group 35-45 years seem to be already getting

the symptoms of a major irritation due to the occupational hazard.

Table 4A.14.3: Medical problems in the past year- related to the hazard * Total Experience

as an Industrial labourer Cross tabulation

Total Experience as an Industrial labourer

Total

Less than

1 year

1-3

years

4-6

years

7-10

years

11 years

and above

Medical problems in the past

year- related to the hazard

Yes 23 78 72 14 1 188

No 62 251 72 25 2 412

Total 85 329 144 39 3 600

50% of the people who have an industrial experience of 4-6 years have faced medical problems

in the past year.

122

Table 4A.15 Problems observed in colleagues due to type of the job


Valid Yes 150 25.0 25.0 25.0

No 450 75.0 75.0 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

The above question was asked to further enquire into the injurious nature of such units

that carry on hazardous activities. 25% of the workers responded that they have seen their

colleagues suffer due to occupational hazards.

Table 4A.16: Frequency of medical checkups - number of times every six months


Valid None 184 30.7 30.7 30.7

1 TO 2 211 35.2 35.2 65.8

3 TO 5 178 29.7 29.7 95.5

More than 5 times 27 4.5 4.5 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

The workers, Government and the employers must target towards making working

conditions safe and hygienic. Most of the poisonous chemicals used in small scale industries can

create grave health threats that can cause cancer, respiratory and other dermatological disorders.

Past studies have shown that they can lead to adverse effects on reproductive function. Although

it seems simple and obvious, this idea does not seem to have gained meaningful recognition in

the case of this research study. 30.7% employees responded that they have not undergone any

medical checkup.

Symptoms of injuries can sometimes not be visible. They become visible only after

conditions get worse and cost the employee his life. If medical checkups are done regularly, the

chances of an injury or disease associated with a particular risk area can be identified and action

can be taken.

123

Table 4A.16.1: Frequency of medical checkups - number of times every six months *

Medical problems in the past year- related to the hazard Cross tabulation:

Medical problems in the past

year- related to the hazard

TotalYes No

Frequency of medical checkups -

number of times every six months

None 65 119 184

1 TO 2 67 144 211

3 TO 5 52 126 178

More than

5 times 4 23 27

Total 188 412 600

From the above table it can be seen that more than 10% of the employees who faced

medical problems arising out of the hazard, seem to have neglected the need for a medical

checkup. Only four employees reported for having medical checkups for more than 5 times

during the past six months.

In practice, it is usually suggested for a person who is working on a hazardous process to

have at least one medical checkup monthly to prevent things from becoming bad to worse.

124

Graph 4.16: Frequency of medical checkups every six months.

Table 4A.17 Are medical check-ups provided by the organization?


Valid Yes 75 12.5 12.5 12.5

No 525 87.5 87.5 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

Only 12.5% of the companies were found to provide their workers with medical

checkups. When managers were informally asked for not providing checkups, some managers

responded that the body of the workers slowly gets immune to the hazard and they develop

tolerance. In addition to the above, some also coupled the reason with the fact that the company

was a small scale unit and that the owners and decision makers cannot afford to provide a free

medical checkup for the employees.

125

As a matter of fact, a simple medical checkup once every 3 months is easily affordable

for every worker. Where there are less than 20 workers, a basic medical checkup can be made

where each worker goes through a preliminary physical examination. It would actually cost the

employer a little over 1500 rupees, which can be deemed to be reasonable if done once in three

months. The table shows us that in 87.5% of the cases, the managers or the employers were not

human enough to understand the importance of knowing the impact of hazardous processes on

the employees.

Table 4A.17.1: Frequency of medical checkups - number of times every six months * Are

medical check-ups provided by the organization? Cross tabulation

Are medical check-ups provided

by the organization?

TotalYes No

Frequency of medical checkups -

number of times every six months

None 35 149 184

1 TO 2 16 195 211

3 TO 5 21 157 178

More than

5 times 3 24 27

Total 75 525 600

35 respondents who are given the facility of medical checkups do not opt to go for it.

Around 30% of the workers who are not given medical checkup facility from the organization,

voluntarily pay for it.

A local doctor is appointed to do a general physical examination of the workers. In 75

(only 12.5%) cases it was observed that the management has a tie up with the doctor and the

doctor's fees are borne by the company.

92.4% of the employees who go for medical checkups once or twice every six months,

pay for it from their own pockets.

126

Graph 4A.17: Frequency of medical checkups – Medical Checkups provided by the

organization – Cross tabulation.

Table 4A.18: Has the company made it mandatory to undergo medical examination?


Valid Compulsory 39 6.5 6.5 6.5

Optional 561 93.5 93.5 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

Majority of the companies that have made medical checkups optional, do not provide the facility

to the workers. This fact will be clear after we observe the following cross tabulation:

127

Table 4A.18.1: Has the company made it mandatory to undergo medical examination? *

Are medical check-ups provided by the organization? Cross tabulation

Are medical check-ups provided

by the organization?

TotalYes No

Has the company made it to undergo

medical examination?

Compulsory 39 0 39

Optional 36 525 561

Total 75 525 600

None of the companies who do not provide medical checkups, make it mandatory for the

employees. Out of the 75 employees who responded that medical checkups are provided to them,

nearly half responded that the medical checkups are more need based or optional in nature.

Table 4A.19: Does the hazard de-motivate the employee from continuing the current job?


Valid Yes 379 63.2 63.2 63.2

No 221 36.8 36.8 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

Modern day occupational hazards seem to challenge the employees in all industries. The

small scale industrial workers belong to a special type of semi-skilled and unskilled workers who

have very less options but to continue on their job. Several studies have shown that the level of

job satisfaction reflects in the motivation for any employee and vice versa.

For an employee to be productive it is necessary that he should be motivated. From the

above table we can see that most of the employees are in the state of being de-motivated.

128

In an informal reply many of the workers have responded by asking a counter question:

"Who would like to suffer from medical problems, especially when one knows that the type of

work he does is going to cause some or the other adverse medical condition?”

The workers who were de-motivated seemed to be not wanting to continue with the kind

of work they do, on the basis that they were very less motivated to continue to do the same job.

A cross tabulation below would illustrate the type of hazard associated with the job.

Table 4A.20: Major hazard associated with the job * Does the hazard de-motivate the

employee from continuing the current job? Cross tabulation

Does the hazard de-motivate the

employee from continuing the current

job?

TotalYes No

Major hazard

associated with the

job

Sound Pollution, 32 21 53

Air pollutants 104 53 157

Any other physical /

orthopedic stress 86 52 138

Dangerous machines 113 80 193


Total 379 221 600

At places where air pollution is the major hazard, 66.2% of the employees responded that

they were de-motivated to continue with the job. In cases where there are dangerous machines,

58.5% of the employees feel less motivation to continue with the same job. Nearly 75% of the

employees who feel that mental stress is the major hazard associated to the job, feel that the

current job fails to motivate them to continue doing it.

129

Table 4A.21: Does the company provide safety equipment?


Valid Yes 552 92.0 92.0 92.0

No 48 8.0 8.0 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

In 8% of the cases, safety equipment is not provided to the workers. A cross tabulation shown

below yields some interesting results.

Table No 4.21.1: Major hazard associated with the job * Does the company provide safety

equipment? Cross tabulation

Does the company provide

safety equipment?

TotalYes No

Major hazard associated

with the job

Sound Pollution, 53 0 53

Air pollutants 145 12 157

Any other physical /

orthopedic stress 126 12 138

Dangerous machines 169 24 193


Total 552 48 600

From the above table it can be seen that in cases where air pollution is a major hazard, 7.6% of

the employees responded that they are not given safety equipment.

130

Table 4A.22: Do employees use safety equipment?


Valid Yes 359 59.8 59.8 59.8

No 241 40.2 40.2 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

Table No 4.22.1: Does the company provide safety equipment? * Do employees use safety


Do employees use safety

equipment?

TotalYes No

Does the company provide safety

equipment?

Yes 332 220 552

No 27 21 48

Total 359 241 600

In 40% of the cases, employees do not use the safety equipment even when it is provided

by the company. This is a very serious issue that raises various questions from whether the

equipment is really needed? whether it is useful? questions relating to the quality of the safety

equipment are analyzed in the latter part of this chapter.

56.3% of the individuals seem to buy their own equipment. Some workers who were

found to be working in cutting units, were wearing a "towel" around their face when they

performed the cutting work.

Their informal response was that the management does not care and that they had to get

these from their houses, and it was like a uniform to them, to be washed daily.

131

Table No 4.22.2: Major hazard associated with the job * Do employees use safety



equipment?

TotalYes No

Major hazard

associated with the job

Sound Pollution, affecting the

physical and mental health 22 31 53

Air pollutants that can cause

irritation 139 18 157

Any other physical / orthopedic

stress 66 72 138


cause fatal/serious injury 101 92 193

Mental stress leading to other

chronic/ acute 31 28 59

Total 359 241 600

In the case of 48% of the employees who work on dangerous machines seem to have a

false sense of confidence that the machines are not so dangerous. This may be due to their

experience, but certainly it is a disturbing thing that can be seen from the above table.

Employees also seem to neglect or not be aware of the disturbing effects of sound

pollution as nearly 60% of the employees who work in noisy environments, do not use safety

equipment.

132

Table 4A.23: Need felt for safety equipment


Valid Yes 532 88.7 88.7 88.7

No 68 11.3 11.3 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

The above table depicts the natural response of a human being. 89% agreed to the fact that safety

equipment at work is necessary.

Table 4A.23.1: Does the company make it compulsory to use the safety equipment?


Valid Yes 501 83.5 83.5 83.5

No 99 16.5 16.5 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

From the above table, it can be seen that the company makes it compulsory to use safety

equipment. Only in 99 cases out of 600 it was observed that the usage of safety equipment is not

compulsory. It can also be seen that according to the earlier table no.4.22, 241 employees were

found not to be using safety equipment. This research thus identifies this gaps which raises many

questions mentioned earlier.

Table No 4.24: Does the employee think insurance is important


Valid Yes 600 100.0 100.0 100.0

The above table shows that all the employees feel that insurance is important. They all in fact

have themselves got insured as they are well aware of the hazard of the occupation that they are

working on.

133

Table 4A.25 Does the company pay any separate compensation to the employees, or their

family


Valid Yes 583 97.2 97.2 97.2

No 17 2.8 2.8 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

The above table shows that the companies are considerate enough. 97.2% of the

employees are sure that the company would compensate them separately and that they would

readily make a demand for such compensation collectively if the contrary happens. In only 2.8%

of the cases it was found that the companies as employers do not give any separate compensation

to the employees.

Table 4A.26: Does the company care to keep the employees away from hazards?


Valid Yes 579 96.5 96.5 96.5

No 21 3.5 3.5 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

In most of the cases it was observed that the employees feel that the company cares for

them and tries to keep the employees away from hazards. Only 3.5% of the respondents said that

the company is not bothered about this.

134

Table 4A.27: Do the employees feel that the company follows the provisions of the safety

related provisions of the Factories Act?

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid Employee not aware of the act so

cannot make a statement 428 71.3 71.3 71.3

The company does not follow all

the provisions 172 28.7 28.7 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

In most of the cases, the employees refused to say yes or no. They were clearly confused

as they did not really know about the major provisions of the factories act relating to the safety

and working conditions of the workers, especially in small scale industries.

Table 4A.28: Has the company arranged an awareness program regarding safety issues?


Valid Yes 37 6.1 6.1 6.1

No 563 93.9 93.9 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

Clearly the above table states that the awareness programs are not organized or

undertaken by majority of the companies. Only 6.1% of the companies conduct such awareness

programs. Awareness of the safety issues is a part of training according to the informal responses

of the majority of the managers. Some said that the awareness program need not be taken, the

employees are told by their co-workers about the safety issues.

135

Table 4A.29: Does quality safety equipment in increase productivity and work efficiency?


Valid Yes 525 87.5 87.5 87.5

No 75 12.5 12.5 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

Only 12.5 % of the employees feel that the quality of safety equipment does not

contribute to efficiency and productivity of the workers. These workers certainly seem to be

belonging to those people who respond that they do not need any safety equipment. The

following cross tabulation will clarify the above statement further.

Table 4A.29.1: Need felt for safety equipment * Employee's feeling about contribution of

quality safety equipment in increasing productivity and work efficiency Cross tabulation.

Contribution of quality safety equipment in increasing productivity and

work efficiency

TotalYes No

Need

felt

Yes 524 8 532

No 1 67 68

Total 525 75 600

From the above table it can be seen that most of the people who do not feel the need for

safety equipment have responded that the quality of the safety equipment does not contribute for

increasing the productivity and work efficiency of the workers. Out of 68 people who have said

that safety equipments are really not necessary, 67 people have responded that the contribution

of safety equipment in increasing the productivity and work efficiency is not that significant. All

the others that is, 525 have responded that the quality of safety equipment does affect the

productivity and efficiency of the workers.

136

Table 4A.30: Work of the safety inspectors - Do they achieve their objectives - Employee

perspective


Valid Yes 77 12.8 12.8 12.8

No 523 87.2 87.2 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

According to 87.2% of the employees who had responded to this question, the safety

inspectors seem to be failing in achieving their objectives. There were informal gestures made by

workers that some of the inspectors would never even make a detailed inspection of the

workshop.

Table 4A.31: Whether formal training is imparted to the employees to avoid accidents or

injuries.


Valid Yes 39 6.5 6.5 6.5

No 561 93.5 93.5 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

There are several dangerous machines within the factory premises that can cause a

variety of accidents. According to the factories act, it is necessary that the employer makes sure

that every person who works on a dangerous machine must be given sufficient training. Sveral

workers responded that they are given some basic training. But such training was informal in

nature. Such informal training was given to the workers to operate the machinery by senior

workers and make sure that the machinery works properly and wastage of resources and raw

material is minimised. Only 6.5% of the employees responded that though they were given

formal training for the proper usage of machines.

137

When workers work on machines that have heavy tools which need to be lifted properly,

it has been seen that very rarely there are taught about ergonomics while performing physical

work. When weights are lifted in awkward positions, they can cause repetitive motion injuries to

the workers. For this purpose, it is necessary that workers who lift things, workers who bend,

twist or stretch at work must be given a proper training by an expert so that instances of injuries

would be minimized.

Table 4A.32: Have the employees been given Fire Fighting training OR Disaster

management training?


Valid Yes 57 9.5 9.5 9.5

No 543 90.5 90.5 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

Every now and then, one may hear news about the factory premises catching fire and

many of the people losing their lives, especially the workers who were present at the time the fire

broke out. Fire has to be extinguished as soon as possible so that the damage that can be caused

to the fire can be minimized. People within the premises must be taught to fight against fire and

must be given a special kind of training that is called as, "firefighting training". In medium scale

or large-scale firms one would easily observe firefighting equipment and a special team of

employees who have been given training to fight with fire. As far as the small-scale industries

are concerned, it seems that the entrepreneurs find it very difficult to allocate budgets for the

purpose of training the employees to fight against fire. In only 9.5% of the cases it was observed

that firefighting training has been actually given.

138

Table 4A.33 Does the company upgrade the safety equipment at reasonable frequency?


Valid Yes 114 19.0 19.0 19.0

No 486 81.0 81.0 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

Safety equipment can prove to be useful only if it is upgraded whenever required. Like all

other assets safety equipment is also subject to wear and tear. Safety equipment like gloves,

safety goggles, helmets etc. can be most useful when they are upgraded and changed at the

proper time. In 81% of the cases it was seen that the safety equipment is not upgraded with

reasonable frequency. This further creates problems and jeopardizes the well-being of the

employees within the factory premises.

Table 4A.34: Temperature and Ventilation at work - Are employees satisfied?


Valid Yes 201 33.5 33.5 33.5

No 399 66.5 66.5 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

The above table shows that in 67% of the cases the employees were not satisfied with the

kind of ventilation they were provided at work. Some of them also feel that the places in which

they work are very hot. As a common observation, it was seen that the workshops had metal roof

tops which are known to be disturbing, especially in the summer season.

As far as ventilation is concerned, according to Rule 22-A Prescribed under sub-section

(2) of section 13 of the factories act and the Maharashtra Factories Rules 1963 (Rule 22A) the

number of ventilation openings, must be of a total area of not less than 15% of the floor area of

the workshop.

139

If this is not possible, the rules have also made provisions for mechanical ventilation. All

the sections and the rules have been formed in order to make sure that the entire workshop is

properly ventilated. Yet, the Chief Inspector may relax some requirements regarding ventilation,

if he feels satisfied enough considering the location of the factory and "some other variables".

An improper ventilation intensifies the problems of dehydration and medical problems

related to air pollution. An improper ventilation also disturbs the employee and reduces the

productivity while at work.

Table 4A.35: Are the employees asked to pay for the safety equipment?


Valid Yes 41 6.8 6.8 6.8

No 559 93.2 93.2 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

From the above table it can be seen that 93.2% of the employees responded that company

bears the cost of the safety equipment that is provided to them. But, in nearly 7% of the cases it

was observed that the company makes the workers bear the cost of the safety equipment.

When managers were asked informally about the reason for making the employees pay

for the safety equipment, they said that the safety equipment is not properly used by the

employees.

In a few cases the managers responded that the safety equipment gets misplaced and thus

the company cannot keep on affording to invest in safety equipment again and again. Another

cross tabulation would clarify certain facts as stated below:

140

Table 4A.36: Are the employees asked to pay for the safety equipment? * Do employees use

safety equipment? Cross tabulation


equipment?

TotalYes No

Are the employees asked to pay for the safety

equipment?

Yes 25 16 41

No 334 225 559

Total 359 241 600

The above cross tabulation helps us to understand that nearly 40% of the employees who

are asked to pay for the safety equipment do not use the safety equipment. It is quite possible that

the employees who do not use safety equipments cannot afford it. And the fact that they cannot

afford it may be one of the major contributing factors for not using any safety equipment.

Table 4A.37: Quality of the safety equipment - Employee's perspective


Valid Excellent 39 6.5 6.5 6.5

Very good 72 12.0 12.0 18.5

Good 124 20.7 20.7 39.2

Average 257 42.8 42.8 82.0

Poor 108 18.0 18.0 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

141

Graph: 4.37: Quality of the safety equipment

Nearly 61% of the employees have responded that the quality of the safety equipment is

either average or poor. Improper quality of the safety equipment only adds up to the possibility

of injuries and accidents.

Table 4A.38: Do the employees feel comfortable while working with the safety equipment?


Valid Yes 315 52.5 52.5 52.5

No 285 47.5 47.5 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

From the above table we can see that nearly 48% of the employees responded that they

do not feel comfortable while using the safety equipment. 52.5% of the employees have

responded that they do feel comfortable while using the safety equipment. There were informal

responses given by the employees that they do not have a choice to not use the safety equipment.

Safety equipment for these employees was a compulsion and they would use it whether it were

comfortable or not.

142

Table 4A.39: Do the employees feel comfortable while working with the safety equipment?

* Do employees use safety equipment? Cross tabulation


equipment?

TotalYes No

Do the employees feel comfortable while working

with the safety equipment?

Yes 196 119 315

No 163 122 285

Total 359 241 600

The cross tabulation tries to examine the contribution of the comfort factor for not using

the safety equipment. It can be seen that out of the 285 workers who do not feel comfortable

while working with the safety equipment, 122 do not use it (more than 42%). On the contrary out

of 315 of the employees who feel comfortable while working with the safety equipment, 119 still

do not use it.

Clearly it can be interpreted that it is all about the attitude and the behaviour of the

workers towards the usage of safety equipment. The workers must be trained and told, educated

about the importance of safety equipment.

They must be taught that comfort is secondary to safety and that safety must be there first

priority. At the same time, the managers too need to understand that if at all an employee is

expected to use safety equipments; they must be reasonably comfortable so that maximum output

can be obtained from a satisfied worker.

143

Table 4A.40: Did machine handling expert supervise the activity for the first few instances?


Valid Yes 579 96.5 96.5 96.5

No 21 3.5 3.5 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

From the above table it can be seen that in case of 3.5% of the employees who were

working on dangerous machines, their work was not supervised by an individual who was an

expert in handling such machine. Thus, it can be interpreted that these 4% workers had to learn

to protect themselves and understand the safety issues related to the machine. It can also be said

that these workers were supervised by people who were not so good at operating that particular

machine.

Table 4A.41: Are Lifting machines, chains, ropes and lifting tackles etc, maintained

regularly?


Valid Yes 325 54.2 88.1 88.1

No 44 7.3 11.9 100.0

Total 369 61.5 100.0

Missing System 231 38.5

Total 600 100.0

In almost 12% of the cases it was seen that lifting machines, chains, ropes and lifting

tackles along with all other equipment that is required to hoist or lift a particular equipment or a

tool was not maintained regularly. There are 231 missing values in the table. This is because

there were some workshops which did not involve lifting machines or any other equipment of

that type.

144

Table 4A.42: Are Floors, stairs and means of access such as ladders etc, properly

constructed?


Valid Yes 336 56.0 56.0 56.0

No 264 44.0 44.0 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

Table 4A.42.1: Are Floors, stairs and means of access such as ladders etc, maintained

neatly?


Valid Yes 286 47.6 47.6 47.6

No 314 52.4 52.4 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

Both the tables have shown data about construction and maintenance of floors, stairs and

other means of access. In 56% of the cases it was observed that the means of access are not

properly constructed. In nearly 47.6% of the cases it was seen that means of access were not

properly maintained.

In some of the cases when the premises was observed carefully, some ladders did not

have bars to hold on. In one of the premises it was observed that the workers were expected to

carry tools and equipments using this ladder. In such cases the risk of accidents is maximum and

one may say that means of access must be properly constructed and maintained regularly so that

the workers feel safe at work.

145

Table 4A.43. Does the job involve the employee's eyes being exposed to excessive light or

small particles?


Valid Yes 356 59.3 59.3 59.3

No 244 40.7 40.7 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

The above table shows that in 60% of the cases, the employees are exposed to some pollutant

that can prove to be harmful for their eyes. Welding, cutting and spraying operations were

mostly found to be in this category.

Table 4A.43.1: If yes, Are safety goggles/ mask / protective covering given?


Valid Yes 241 40.2 67.9 67.9

No 114 19.0 32.1 100.0

Total 355 59.2 100.0


Total 600 100.0

If safety goggles or masks or protecting covering is not used the eyes and the skin of the

workers is at risk. It can cause temporary or long-term damage to the employee. Out of the small

scale industry workers who work in environments that contain excessive light or small particles,

32.1% of the responded that they are not provided safety goggles. Especially with workers who

working on welding machines had a common complaint that they need to be given a protective

cover not only for their eyes, but for their entire face to protect them from the sparks. Some of

them were found to be not using these safety levels this because the goggles were of not their fit,

and that they would not be comfortable wearing them.

Note: The above table shows that 245 values are missing. This is because their job does

not require them to work with safety goggles.

146

Table 4A.44: Are the necessary equipment and facilities for extinguishing fire provided?


Valid 1 496 82.7 82.7 82.7

2 104 17.3 17.3 100.0

Total 600 100.0 100.0

In 17.3% of the cases it was found that necessary equipment and facilities for

extinguishing fire were not provided. In the majority of cases that is, nearly 83% of the cases it

was found that such facilities were provided.

Table 4A.45: Is casing done for dangerous moving parts of machines?


Valid Yes 186 31.0 76.5 76.5

No 57 9.5 23.5 100.0

Total 243 40.5 100.0


Total 600 100.0

In almost 24% of the cases which involved machines that had dangerous moving parts, it

was found that there was no casing done for such machines. Again in this table 357 values are

missing. This is because there were some cases where there were no dangerous moving parts for

machines.

147

Section –B

4.B Data analysis for the responses that were given by the managers.

Table 4B.1: Age in years


Valid 18-25 8 13.3 13.3 13.3

25-35 13 21.7 21.7 35.0

35-45 23 38.3 38.3 73.3

45-60 14 23.3 23.3 96.7

60 and above 2 3.3 3.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

From the above table which shows the ages for the managers we can see that almost 40%

of the managers were found to be between the age group of 35 to 45 years. Only 3.3% of the

managers were found to be aged 60 and above. 21.7% of the managers were between the age

group of 25 to 35 years. 35% were found to be between the age groups of 18 to 35 years.

The remaining 65% of the managers were found to be above the age of 35 years. It can be

interpreted that most of the managers are usually above the age of 35 years. Though, in this

particular study, people have been called as managers, in most of the cases it was observed that

the managers were the owners also.

This may be the case because in small scale industry it is very difficult for a business

which has a very small turnover to maintain two separate levels of management and ownership.

Young entrepreneurs who have acquired the most advanced knowledge through a developed

academic scenario need to participate more and start more small scale industries whereby the

economy of our country will benefit and the contribution of the small scale sector to our GDP

will maximize.

148

Graph 4B.1 Age in Years

Table 4B.2: Gender


Valid Male 55 91.7 91.7 91.7

Female 5 8.3 8.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Clearly, males dominate the above table which shows the gender of the managers work in

small scale industries. Nearly 92% of the observed managers were found to be male. This may be

because of the nature of the work that is performed in the manufacturing or processing unit. Yet

it is interesting to observe that 8.3% of the managers were found to be female.

60 and above45-6035-4525-3518-25

149

Graph 4B.2: Gender

The above bar chart shows a graph, which has been prepared on the basis of the age and the

gender of the managers. It can be seen that in the age group of 18-25, no female managers were

to be seen. The same can be said about the age group of 60 and above.

150

Table 4B.3: Educational Qualification


Valid Under Graduate 4 6.7 6.7 6.7

Graduate - Engg. 23 38.3 38.3 45.0

Graduate - Other 11 18.3 18.3 63.3

Masters - Other 14 23.3 23.3 86.7

Masters in Engg 2 3.3 3.3 90.0

Diploma 4 6.7 6.7 96.7

Others 2 3.3 3.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

The above table is regarding the educational qualification of the managers. It can be seen

from the above table that most of the managers were found to be graduates in the field of

engineering.

Only 3.3% of the managers had acquired their masters degrees in engineering. It is

always said, that a successful business does not require a sound technical knowledge but also

requires the proper knowledge of business management and commerce.

That is why, nearly 20% of graduates who were from a non-engineering background have

been seen to become managers in the sample that was undertaken for study.

Only 6.7% of the people were diploma holders and some of the managers responded that

diploma holders become technicians in such factories provided that their studies support that

particular activity.

151

Graph 4B.3: Educational Qualification Cross Tabulated with Age

The above graph shows that engineering graduates between the age of 35 to 45 years

have been most commonly found to be managers in hazardous small scale industrial units.

60 and above45-6035-4525-35 18-25 Age in years

10

8

6

4

2

0

Others DiplomaMasters in EnggMasters - OtherGraduate - OtherGraduate - Engg.Under Graduate

EducationalQualification

152

Table 4B.4: Total Experience as a manager


Valid 0-2 years 9 15.0 15.0 15.0

2-4 years 18 30.0 30.0 45.0

4-6 years 17 28.3 28.3 73.3

6-10 Years 13 21.7 21.7 95.0

10 years+ 3 5.0 5.0 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Approximately, 58% of the managers were found to be having a total experience between

2 to 6 years. Nearly 21% were found to be having the experience of 6 to 10 years. Only 5% of

the managers were found to be experienced for more than 10 years in the field of manufacturing

in small scale industry.

Graph 4B.4: Total experience as a manager

Very less number of managers, only nine totaling to 15% of the entire sample, were

found to be experienced for less than two years. Thus, the about table helps us to interpret that

more than half the managers (65%) are experienced for more than 4 years.

153

Table 4B.5: Number of years in the current company as managers.


Valid 0-2 years 12 20.0 20.0 20.0

2-4 years 18 30.0 30.0 50.0

4-6 years 16 26.7 26.7 76.7

6-10 Years 12 20.0 20.0 96.7

10 years+ 2 3.3 3.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

From the table we can see that 30% of the managers have been occupying a position in

the same company for a tenure of 2 to 4 years. 20% of the managers responded that they had

been working in the same company for 6 to 10 years. Only 3.3% of the managers responded that

they have been working for more than 10 years as managers in the same organisation.

Graph 4B.5: Number of years in the current company as managers.

A cross tabulation has been given below to see how well have managers been loyal to

their organisation and whether they have been involved in frequent job shifts from one

manufacturing concern to the other.

154

Table 4B.5.1: Total Experience as a manager * Number of years in the current company

Cross tabulation

Number of years in the current company Total

0-2 2-4 4-6 6-10 10 +

Total Experience 0-2 years 9 0 0 0 0 9

2-4 years 2 16 0 0 0 18

4-6 years 0 1 16 0 0 17

6-10 0 1 0 12 0 13

10 years+ 1 0 0 0 2 3

Total 12 18 16 12 2 60

The above table points out to an interesting fact that managers have not changed their

jobs and have remained in the same position for almost all the years that they have experience as

a manager. The reason for this situation may be because of the absence of difference between

management and ownership levels in most of the cases as mentioned earlier.

Graph 4B.5.1: Total Experience as a manager * Number of years in the current company

155

Table 4B.6: Number of Workers in the factory


Valid 10-15 27 45.0 45.0 45.0

15-20 24 40.0 40.0 85.0

20-30 7 11.7 11.7 96.7

30 and above 2 3.3 3.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

85% of the managers responded that there are 10 to 20 workers working in the workshop

or the factory premises. The remaining 15% responded that there were more than 20 workers

working in the premises. The small scale firms were chosen at random. The above table shows us

that on most of the cases with regards to hazardous industries there are less than 30 people

working in the factory.

Graph 4.6: Pie chart showing number of workers distribution

156

Table 4.7: Approximate number of Working Machines


Valid 0-5 17 28.3 28.3 28.3

6-10 34 56.7 56.7 85.0

11-20 7 11.7 11.7 96.7

20 and above 2 3.3 3.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Nearly 60% of the managers responded that there are 6 to 10 machines that are in

working condition within the workshop premises.

Graph 4.7: Number of working machines

157

Table 4B.8: Major hazard that the managers think that is associated with the job

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid Sound Pollution, affecting the

physical and mental health 6 10.0 10.0 10.0

Air pollutants 16 26.7 26.7 36.7

Any other physical /orthopedic

stress 7 11.7 11.7 48.3

Dangerous machines 31 51.7 51.7 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

In the earlier section of this chapter we have looked at the employee's perspective for the

type of hazard associated with the job. In this section of the same chapter the above table points

out the major hazard according to the managers perspectives.

Graph 4B.8: Major hazard that the managers think that is associated with the job

More than half the managers responded that the major hazard is factors are dangerous

machines which can cause serious accidents the people were working on them. That is followed

by air pollutants which according to the managers contribute to nearly 27% of the cases.

158

Table 4B.9: Is there a housing or fencing for every moving part of all the machines?


Valid Yes 38 63.3 63.3 63.3

No 22 36.7 36.7 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

In 37% of the cases, the managers responded that fencing was not done for moving parts

of machines. Informally, the managers responded that fencing is not required. According to the

factories act, such a fencing is essential for moving parts of all the machines. Fencing is one of

the most essential elements and has the ability of saving several serious accidents because due to

a fencing, the workers hands or legs are safeguarded to particular extent.

When asked for the reasons of not having a fencing, the managers responded to the

workers are well-trained and even in the most rare cases will never make a mistake of putting

their hand or getting the finger stuck in a moving part of a machine. In some cases it was said

that there is no fencing because the machine design does not allow them to have any fencing

around the moving part.

In some cases it was also seen that there was no space which could be allotted for any

casing of any kind. Some managers out of the above 37% also said that it is very difficult for

them to allocate a budget to do an additional fencing for the machine.

159

Table 4B.10: Approximate number of days training is given to the employees before they

work on dangerous machines

Days Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 1 19 31.7 31.7 31.7

2 22 36.7 36.7 68.3

3 9 15.0 15.0 83.3

4 7 11.7 11.7 95.0

5 3 5.0 5.0 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

In nearly 68% of the cases it has been seen that the workers are just given one or two

days of prior training before they start working on dangerous machines. Only 5% of the

managers responded that the workers are given a training of around 5 days before they actually

start working on a process.

When asked informally the managers seemed to be worried about the losses that would

occur due to wastage arising from improper utilization of raw material on the machines. They

seemed to be more worried about the quality of the produce.

Graph 4B.10: Approximate number of days training

54321

Approximate number of days

25

20

15

10

5

0

160

The United States Department of labour has developed Occupational Safety and Health

Administration standards. These standards are commonly referred to as OSHA Standards.

According to these standards "For Initial training. (i) General site workers (such as equipment

operators, general labourers and supervisory personnel) engaged in hazardous substance removal

or other activities which expose or potentially expose workers to hazardous substances and

health hazards shall receive a minimum of 40 hours of instruction off the site, and a minimum of

three days actual field experience under the direct supervision of a trained, experienced

supervisor." It is an astonishing fact that majority of the managers become very confident and

very quickly to withdraw training activities within two days for a person who works on a

dangerous machine.

Table 4B.11: How well do employees carry out any mounting or shipping of belts or

lubrication or make any adjustments when the machinery is in motion?


Valid Very Well 14 23.3 23.3 23.3

Good Enough 8 13.3 13.3 36.7

Poorly 1 1.7 1.7 38.3

Carelessly 2 3.3 3.3 41.7

They are not allowed 35 58.3 58.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

This question was designed to test the knowledge of the manager regarding the safety

provisions that have been mentioned in the factories act of 1948. According to the provisions of

the act employees are not allowed to carry on any mounting or shipping of belts or lubrication or

make any adjustments when the machinery is in motion. In almost 60% of the cases it was seen

that managers knew that such an action is not allowed therefore the responded that no one is

permitted to do any activity regarding belts or machines and the lubrication especially when the

machinery is in motion. Others unfortunately did not even know about this provision and

indicated that they allow this particular work to be done.

161

Table 4B.12: How frequently cranes and other machines are checked for safety - every

three months?


Valid Once 18 30.0 30.0 30.0

2 to 3 times 12 20.0 20.0 50.0

Weekly basis 11 18.3 18.3 68.3

Daily Basis 8 13.3 13.3 81.7

As per Requirement 11 18.3 18.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Nearly 18.3% of the managers responded that cranes and other machines are checked for

safety only as per requirement. When they're actually being checked only as per requirement it

means that unless and until there is a fault or some problem associated with a crane was a

machine it would never be checked.

Graph 4.12: How frequently cranes and other machines are checked for safety - every

three months?

As perRequirement

Daily BasisWeekly basis2 to 3 timesOnce

162

Every worker who is working with the crane cannot be deemed or cannot be assumed to

be an expert and to understand all the warnings that particular machine or a crane gives before it

contributes to a major accident. Such a practice is very dangerous. Unfortunately, there is no

such single international standard which tells us as to how many times should a particular crane

be checked in three months.

It is actually the job of the person who manages the affairs of the production department

to make sure that all the parts are well serviced, lubricated and are safe to work on. Actually for

practical purposes, some equipments are not of dangerous nature. These equipments in the

workshops are of such a nature that they would not lead to an accident. All that would happen, if

such an equipment malfunctions is that the work would stop. Strikingly, this category of

equipment was tested more regularly as compared to the others.

Managers want the work to continue, at all costs. This fact came up during informal

interviews with the managers and workers. The above pie chart also depicts that nearly 50% of

the equipment is tested only once or as per requirement.

Lathe machines have been observed to the most feared machines based on personal

interviews. Lathes are machines which are equipped with a motor that turns along with the work

piece (job). A very sharp lathe knife or other cutting device changes its shape or form. The

workers responded that lathe machines can cause serious injuries in certain conditions.

Lathe machines can be made safer by using guards. The following exhibit shows how a

lathe machine with a guard looks like:

163

Fig 4B.12.1: Lathe Machine Guard.

Fig 4B.12.2: Guarded Lathe Machine

The above figures show that the workplace can be made safer. Unfortunately, when the

researcher made visits, there were very rare instances where such dangerous machines were

found to be properly guarded. One of the examples of the lathe machine that was seen is shown

in Fig 4.12.C.A Lathe machine can cause accidents in various forms. Minor to serious injuries

that can occur due to a lathe machine are that the small particles of metal can fly and pierce the

eyes of the operator or a person who is standing near the lathe machine. Thus, wearing eye

protection while working on a lathe machines is extremely essential.

164

Fig 4B.12.3: Lathe Machines - Example of an observed lathe machine.

Table 4B.13: Need of adequate supervision by an expert for a person working on a

dangerous machine.


Valid Yes 46 76.7 76.7 76.7

No 14 23.3 23.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

23.3% of the managers responded that there is no need of adequate supervision by an

expert for person working on a dangerous machine. Another cross tabulated table as shown

below will make things more clear

165

Table 4B.13.1: Approximate number of days training * need of adequate supervision by an

expert for worker on a dangerous machine? Cross tabulation

Supervision

TotalYes No

Number of days of training 1 12 7 19

2 16 6 22

3 8 1 9

4 7 0 7

5 3 0 3

Total 46 14 60

Graph 4B.13.1: Need for supervision and approximate number of days of training.

Clearly the above graph shows us that those managers who say that only one or two days

training is given to the people were working on dangerous machines, majority of them are such

people who feel that there is no adequate need of supervision to be done by experts when such a

person is working on a dangerous machine.

166

Table 4B.14: How frequently does the Safety Inspector Visit the premises?

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid Once or more than once in a

year 46 76.7 76.7 76.7

Not even once in a year 14 23.3 23.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

From the above table it can be seen that in most of the cases (77 %) it has been observed

that the safety inspectors visit the factory premises at least once in a year. In 23% it was found

that the factory inspectors do not visit the premises even once during the entire year.

Graph 4B.14: How frequently does the Safety Inspector Visit the premises?

167

Table 4B.15: Managers' rating for the strictness of the Safety Inspector

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid Extremely

Strict 30 50.0 50.0 50.0

Strict 7 11.7 11.7 61.7

Not so strict 9 15.0 15.0 76.7

Lenient 10 16.7 16.7 93.3

Very Lenient 4 6.7 6.7 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

50% of the managers responded that the safety inspectors were extremely strict. 12%

responded that they were strict. All others have responded that they are either not so strict or

lenient or they are very lenient. Certainly, the above table helps us to understand that the

inspectors are very strict with the majority of the managers.

Graph 4B.15: Managers rating for the strictness of the Safety Inspector

168

Table 4B.16: Frequency of minor accidents: Responses given by managers.


Valid Very rare 19 31.7 31.7 31.7

Rarely 8 13.3 13.3 45.0

Sometimes 18 30.0 30.0 75.0

Often 9 15.0 15.0 90.0

Very frequently 6 10.0 10.0 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Graph 4B.16: Frequency of minor accidents

In 55% of the cases seen that accidents that are minor in nature either happen sometimes,

often or very frequently. In 10% of the cases it was found that accidents happen very frequently.

When enquired the manager said that now the workers have accepted it is a part of the job and

have become immune to such minor accidents and at times they continue their work without

even paying attention to such small accidents.

169

Table 4B.17: How many fatal accidents took place during their entire experience as a

manager?


Valid 0 57 95.0 95.0 95.0

1 2 3.3 3.3 98.3

2 1 1.7 1.7 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Graph 4B.17: Frequency of Fatal Accidents during the tenure of the manager

5% of the managers responded that there has been at least one fatal accident during their

entire experience as a manager. This table points out to a very interesting fact that actually fatal

accidents are rare. This fact will be further supported by another cross tabulation as below.

170

Table 4B.18: Total Experience as a manager * How many fatal accidents took place? Cross

tabulation

How many fatal accidents took place?

Total0 1 2

Total Experience as a manager 0-2 years 9 0 0 9

2-4 years 16 1 1 18

4-6 years 16 1 0 17

6-10 Years 13 0 0 13

10 years+ 3 0 0 3

Total 57 2 1 60

The above cross tabulation shows managers who have experiences ranging from 2 to

more than 10 years. Managers who have an experience of more than 10 years have not reported

any fatal accident during their entire lifespan. Certainly these managers are the most experienced

managers of the entire lot but have not encountered a situation of a fatal accident even after

serving as managers or entrepreneurs for more than 10 years.

Table 4B.19: During the entire experience as a manager, how many accidents happened in

the factory that caused permanent disability to the worker?


Valid 0 49 81.7 81.7 81.7

1 11 18.3 18.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

The above table shows that in 81.7 % of the cases permanent disability was not caused to

any of the workers. In remaining 18.3% of the cases it was seen that at least once did the

managers face a situation where a permanent disability was caused to a worker due to an

accident that happened in the factory. Certainly, this percentage is very high. It helps us to

interpret that at least one in five managers does encounter a situation in his career and has to

manage problems caused by an accident which cause permanent disability to a worker.

171

Table 4B.20: Is the maintenance of the machines cranes and all mechanical parts or tools

done by in-house personnel or is it out-sourced?


Valid In-house personnel 46 76.7 76.7 76.7

Outsourced 14 23.3 23.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

It seems to be a common practice in more than one third of the firms that maintenance is

taken care by in-house personnel. Only in 23.3% of the cases the managers responded that a team

from some vendor is appointed to make sure that the machines are maintained, lubricated and are

safe to work on.

Graph 4B.20: Is the maintenance of the machines cranes and all mechanical parts or tools

done by in-house personnel or is it out-sourced?

172

Table 4B.21: Do all workers working in the factory have certificate of fitness issued by a

certified surgeon?


Valid Yes 16 26.7 26.7 26.7

No 44 73.3 73.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

73.3% of the managers responded that all the workers working in the factory are not

having a certificate of fitness issued by certified surgeon. They were asked the reason as to why

this was the case. Their answer was that most of the workers work on daily basis and are given

daily or weekly pays.

Graph 4B.21: Do all workers working in the factory have certificate of fitness issued by a

certified surgeon?

They are temporary workers. Some also said that some of these workers are highly

irregular and there is no guarantee that such a worker who is working today will come tomorrow

for work.

173

Table 4B.22: What kind of provision has the company made for medical emergencies that

may arise?

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid First aid box 33 55.0 55.0 55.0

Special Training is given to the

employees 4 6.7 6.7 61.7

Both 1 and 2 8 13.3 13.3 75.0

None* 15 25.0 25.0 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Medical emergencies come without any warning. Such emergencies may arise out of an

accident or otherwise. There has to be some kind of a provision made within the factory premises

to face such a medical emergency.

Graph 4B.22: Kind of provision

A first aid box which is one of the most basic requirements which we also see in a bus.

25% of the managers responded that there is no safety box or medical aid box maintained within

the factory premises. Such boxes were in some cases hanging like showpieces on the wall. Some

174

were broken and were not properly maintained. Only 6.7% of the managers responded that some

kind of training is given to the employees to treat a person who needs immediate medical

attention.

*Note: None here means that there were 11 instances where the managers said that there

was a provision, but when observed, the first aid boxes were empty- out of supplies, and in 4

cases, there was no first aid box at all.

Table 4B.23: Has the company tied up or subscribed for the services of any organization

that spreads awareness regarding employee's safety?


Valid Yes 47 78.3 78.3 78.3

No 13 21.7 21.7 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Graph 4B.23: Tie-up or Subscription with organizations that spread awareness

In 78% of the cases it was seen that the company of the firm has tied up or subscribed for

the services of an organisation that spreads awareness regarding employee safety. The remaining

21.7% of the managers responded that there are no such active tie-ups.

175

Table 4B.24: Do managers attend seminars other programs arranged by any such

organization?


Valid Yes 35 58.3 74.5 74.5

No 12 20.0 25.5 100.0

Total 47 78.3 100.0


Total 60 100.0

Graph 4B.24: Do managers attend seminars other programs arranged by any such

organization?

In the above table 13 values are missing. This is because these managers have not tied up

with any such organisation that spreads awareness regarding safety issues. Out of the remaining

47 managers, 35 managers responded that they do attend seminars or workshops that are

arranged by such organisations. Only 12 managers responded that they do not attend seminars

and workshops on account of them being busy managing the affairs within the workshop.

176

Table 4B.25: Frequency of upgrading the safety equipment:


Valid Once a year 20 33.3 33.3 33.3

Need Based Upgrade 40 66.7 66.7 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Graph 4B.25: Frequency of upgrading the safety equipment:

Safety equipment must not only be purchased but also maintained and upgraded

whenever required. The workers keep on using safety equipment unless they're found to be

defective or outdated by either themselves or the supervisor. The situation certainly needs to

improve as nearly 67% of the managers responded that their upgrade of the safety equipments is

need based. The major reason behind this is that small scale industries operate on very tight

budgets. Yet, 33% responded that they upgrade safety equipment at least once a year.

177

Table 4B.26: According to the managers, are the Safety Inspectors doing a very good job?


Valid Yes 38 63.3 63.3 63.3

No 22 36.7 36.7 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Graph 4B.26: According to the managers, are the Safety Inspectors doing a very good job?

From the above table we can see that 63% of the managers have responded that according

to their perspective the safety inspectors are doing a very good job. Very recently, our Hon.

Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, seems to have taken a serious note of the issues related to safety

inspection. Mr. Narendra Modi, strongly believes that labour reforms hold the master key to the

success of India.

On Oct 17, 2014, at Pt. Deendayal Upadhyay "Shramev Jayete" which was a program

organised by the Labour Ministry, uncovered a new line of action, that includes several

procedures to end the ‘Inspector Raj’ with a structure that is likely to stridently limit the element

of judgment with labour inspectors and a single window compliance method for companies on

issues that are related to workers. More details of the scheme have been given in the Literature

Review.

178

Table 4B.27: Has the company ever been penalized for not following safety provisions?


Valid Yes 13 21.7 21.7 21.7

No 47 78.3 78.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

In 22% of the cases the managers responded that they have been penalised at least once

for not following the safety provisions. The above table helps us to interpret that the managers

were managing the affairs of small scale industries are in the phase of learning the importance of

safety provisions that have been stated by the factories act and other legislative frameworks

which cover such industries.

Table 4B.28: Do your safety provisions exactly match with the provisions laid down by the

Factories Act?


Valid Yes 17 28.3 28.3 28.3

No 13 21.7 21.7 50.0

Cannot Comment 30 50.0 50.0 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

30 managers chose not to comment whether they're provisions exactly match with those

laid down by the factories act or the State rules that have been stated to make sure that the

factory is a safe place to work. 21.7% of the managers bluntly said that they were sure that all the

provisions do not match. 28.3% of the managers seem to be confident enough that they're safety

provisions exactly match with the provisions laid down by the factories act.

179

Table 4B.29: When Safety provisions are upgraded, do you observe an effective increase in

the productivity of the workers?


Valid Yes 46 76.7 76.7 76.7

No 14 23.3 23.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Nearly 77% of the managers agreed to the fact that there is an effective increase in the

product of the workers won the safety equipment has been upgraded. On the 23.3% of the

managers said that there were other factors which were more important than a mere safety

provision upgrade that contribute to an increasing the productivity of the workers.

When being interviewed most of the managers responded that bonuses and salary hikes

are even more elemental increasing the productivity of the workers. Salaries, bonuses and other

financial incentives are the major concern of the employees. If paid substantial amount of salary

given worker according to some managers would sacrifice his safety to a particular extent and

work more productively.

Table 4B.30: How efficiently do they work with available safety equipments? Rating given

(10 Most effectively, 1 Least effectively)


Valid 1 3 5.0 5.0 5.0

2 5 8.3 8.3 13.3

3 4 6.7 6.7 20.0

4 5 8.3 8.3 28.3

5 6 10.0 10.0 38.3

6 11 18.3 18.3 56.7

7 9 15.0 15.0 71.7

8 9 15.0 15.0 86.7

9 3 5.0 5.0 91.7

10 5 8.3 8.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

180

Graph 4B.30: How efficiently do they work with available safety equipments? Rating given

(10 Most effectively, 1 Least effectively)

Statistics

N Valid 60

Missing 0

Mean 5.88

Mode 6

The table shows us that the mode six and the meanness 5.8. This means the managers

have responded with considerable consistency that the workers are working with reasonable

efficiency with the currently provided safety equipment.

181

Table 4B.31: Motivation, retention and sense of belonging

Motivation Retention Sense of belonging

Yes 52 56 55

No 8 4 5

In the above table the responses of the managers to questions such as: whether proper

safety equipments help to increase motivation workers? Whether such equipments help in

retaining the workers? Whether safety equipments contribute towards increasing the sense of

belonging of the workers towards the company? Have been recorded. In all the three cases more

than 50/60 managers have responded positively that a proper set of safety equipments which is

maintained from time to time damages of reasonably good quality does not only motivate the

workers but also helps the company to retain such workers and increases sense of belonging

towards the company.

A proper safety equipment when given to a worker underlines the fact that the company

cares for the workers and also makes an informal appeal to the workers to care for the company

and work for the company with maximum efficiency and loyalty.

182

Graph 4.31: Motivation, retention and sense of belonging

Table 4B.32: Training of the managers for in working with hazardous industry


Valid Yes 18 30.0 30.0 30.0

No 42 70.0 70.0 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

It is not only the workers who can face the difficulties arising out of hazardous processes

or chemicals. Since they are into the work of supervision of the workers were working on

different machines and processes, the managers equally need to be careful and must protect

themselves from whatever hazards may arise. Therefore it is necessary to the managers are also

trained in working in hazardous environments.

It is also necessary for them to use the appropriate safety equipment when they are

performing supervision activities. From the above table it can be seen that 42/60 that is nearly

183

70% of the managers have responded that they have not taken any such formal training to work

in hazardous industries.

Table 4B.33: Up-to-date health records of all the employees in the factory.


Valid Yes 6 10.0 10.0 10.0

No 54 90.0 90.0 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Only 6/60 managers responded that they do have up-to-date health records of all the employees

in the factory. Remaining 90% of the managers responded that they do not keep up-to-date

records and that they are sure that no other company does the same.

Table 4B.34: Have you provided for medical examination of very worker before he joins as

a new worker in the factory?


Valid Yes 23 38.3 38.3 38.3

No 37 61.7 61.7 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

When an individual is appointed for any particular work in a company or a medium or

large-scale organisation usually, he must undergo medical examination which is conducted by a

health officer who is a doctor and is appointed by the company.

Some basic variables regarding the workers health checked and recorded. The factories

act also makes it mandatory to the appointing firm to provide for medical examination of every

worker before he joins a particular factory. Almost 62% of the managers responded that no such

medical examination is conducted.

184

Table 4B.35: Knowledge of permissible limits of exposure of chemical and toxic substances


Valid Yes 21 35.0 35.0 35.0

No 39 65.0 65.0 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Graph 4B.35: Knowledge of permissible limits of exposure of chemical and toxic substances

The above question was employed in, is the knowledge of the managers. They were

asked whether they knew the permissible limits of exposure of chemical or toxic substances

according to law.

65% of the managers responded that they did not know about this and that as long as the

workers did not complain about any health problem though not much concerned about measuring

the amount of exposure of the workers towards chemical and toxic substances. In the interview,

managers were also asked whether they have set their own standards for the same.

The answer was somewhat similar and more than 60% replied that such standards are

followed in large industries which have very huge turnover and have budgets for establishing and

maintaining standards.

185

Table 4B.36: Workers' participation in safety management


Valid Excellent 8 13.3 13.3 13.3

Very Good 9 15.0 15.0 28.3

Reasonable 18 30.0 30.0 58.3

Very Rare 15 25.0 25.0 83.3

Never 10 16.7 16.7 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Graph 4B.36: Workers' participation in safety management

Safety management cannot be taken care of by the manager alone. He must take into

confidence his subordinates and the workers who can give useful suggestions as far as

implementation of safety norms is concerned.

Nearly 32% of the employees very rarely or never participate in safety management

issues. According to the managers there are not bothered about their own safety. As a response to

this interview question some of the managers responded that they were only bothered about the

daily pay and bonuses and salaries and the financial aspect of the job.

186

Table 4B.37: Do workers work on hoists and lifts?


Valid Yes 33 55.0 55.0 55.0

No 27 45.0 45.0 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

A hoist is a piece of equipment used for lifting or lowering a weight through a drum or

lift-wheel in the region of which cable or chain wraps. It may be manually or mechanically

operated. Such hoists are used in many of the small scale industries. In 55% of the cases it was

found that workers work on hoists and lifts.

Picture 4B.37: A Hoist

187

Table 4B.38: Frequency of maintaining and servicing the hoists and lifts


Valid Very rare 9 15.0 27.3 27.3

Rarely 8 13.3 24.2 51.5

Once in 6 Months 6 10.0 18.2 69.7

As per requirement only 5 8.3 15.2 84.8

Very frequently 5 8.3 15.2 100.0

Total 33 55.0 100.0


Total 60 100.0

Graph 4B.38: Frequency of maintaining and servicing the hoists and lifts

From the above table it can be seen that out of the 55% of the cases where it was found that

workers work on hoists and lifts out of them, 51.5% managers responded that very rarely the

hoists and lifts are serviced and maintained.

15.2% responded that these are serviced only as per requirement and if there is a particular

fault arising out of the considered for the purpose of being serviced and maintained.

188

Table 4B.39: Register kept to record the details of every examination of hoists and lifts.


Valid Yes 7 11.7 21.2 21.2

No 26 43.3 78.8 100.0

Total 33 55.0 100.0


Total 60 100.0

Many of the managers responded that there is no need to keep a register for the

examination of a hoist or lift as they had a continuous watch on the way a particular hoist or lift

is working and that they would know by just looking at it whether or not it requires any

maintenance.

The managers seemed to be a little bit overconfident over here. 78% of the managers

have responded that there is no register kept to record the details of every such examination. If

there is a major repair they get a bill which is then attached to a file and entries are also recorded

using software like Tally onto the computer so they have a ready reference whenever they want

to check the date of servicing a particular lift a hoist and that such data is readily available along

with all the details of the repairs made to this mechanical equipment.

Only 21.2% of the managers responded that they keep a separate register and every

time the equipment is serviced or maintained or repaired an entry has to be made in the register.

189

Table 4B.40: Floors, stairs and means of access: Is fencing done?


Valid Yes 45 75.0 75.0 75.0

No 15 25.0 25.0 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Floors stairs and means of access can prove to be very dangerous if there not properly

fenced or their weak. Many accidents happen well people walking on the floors or the stairs lose

their balance. Very easily such accidents can cause fractures and serious injuries. Therefore it is

necessary that proper fencing is made to the floors or the stairs and other means of access. From

the above table we can see that 45/60 managers responded that floors stairs and means of access

are properly fenced. When the data was being collected a general observation of the entire

factory premises was made. In 25% of the cases it was found that fencing was not proper and in

some cases fencing was totally absent.

Table 4B.41: Maximum weight of material article, tool or appliance is regularly lifted by

your strongest employee


Valid More than 100 Kgs 2 3.3 3.3 3.3

60 to 100 Kgs 19 31.7 31.7 35.0

55 to 60 Kgs 22 36.7 36.7 71.7

Less than 55 Kgs. 17 28.3 28.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

The Maharashtra Factory Rules State that "(3) No woman or young person shall be

engaged in conjunction with others, in lifting, carrying or moving any material, article, tool or

appliance, if the weight thereof exceeds the maximum weight fixed by the schedule to Sub-rule

(2), multiplied by the number of the persons engaged. "

190

Graph 4B.41: Maximum weight of material article, tool or appliance is regularly lifted by

your strongest employee

Unfortunately, many of the managers did not know about the rules. The maximum weight

that can be lifted by an adult male employee is 55 kgs. 72% of the managers answered that there

strongest employees can carry anything that is above 55 kgs. As one of the most astonishing

observations we can see that nearly 32% have stated that there strongest worker can lift 60 kg to

100 kg of weight.

191

Table 4B.42 Motivation level of employees (1=Poor, 10 Fabulous)


Valid 1 6 10.0 10.0 10.0

2 8 13.3 13.3 23.3

3 2 3.3 3.3 26.7

4 14 23.3 23.3 50.0

5 12 20.0 20.0 70.0

6 11 18.3 18.3 88.3

7 5 8.3 8.3 96.7

8 2 3.3 3.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Graph 4B.42 Motivation level of employees (1=Poor, 10 Fabulous)

The above table shows the responses of the managers about the motivation levels of the

employees. This question was purposefully asked to the managers because they are the ones who

really understand how well their employees are motivated. Around 30% of the managers have

given a rating of 6, 7 or eight on a scale of 10, where one meant least motivated and 10 meant

most motivated.

192

Table 4B.43 Productivity/ Efficiency of employees


Valid 1 3 5.0 5.0 5.0

2 5 8.3 8.3 13.3

3 7 11.7 11.7 25.0

4 16 26.7 26.7 51.7

5 5 8.3 8.3 60.0

6 11 18.3 18.3 78.3

7 5 8.3 8.3 86.7

8 4 6.7 6.7 93.3

9 3 5.0 5.0 98.3

10 1 1.7 1.7 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Like the earlier table, the managers were requested to rate the productivity of their

employees on a scale of 10 where one meant least productive and 10 meant most productive.

Most of the managers have given an average rating between 4 to 7.

Table4B.44: Safety measures rating


Valid 2 10 16.7 16.7 16.7

4 24 40.0 40.0 56.7

5 19 31.7 31.7 88.3

6 6 10.0 10.0 98.3

7 1 1.7 1.7 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

193

In the table above the managers were requested to give a rating out of 10 for the safety

measures that there were undertaken in the workshop. In the rating of 10, 1 meant poor safety

measures whereas 10 was for the best safety measures.

It is interesting to see that none of them have given a rating above seven. With this we

can interpret that not even a single manager could rate his safety features as the best.

Table 4B.45: Approximate average monthly salary per employee


Valid 6000 13 21.7 21.7 21.7

6500 11 18.3 18.3 40.0

7000 11 18.3 18.3 58.3

7500 10 16.7 16.7 75.0

8000 2 3.3 3.3 78.3

8500 3 5.0 5.0 83.3

9000 10 16.7 16.7 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

In the above table we see the responses given by the managers about the average monthly

salary they pay per employee for the factory workshop. It will be seen that most of the managers

were between Rs. 6,000 to 7,000 as an average monthly salary to the employees.

194

SECTION –C

4.3 Interviews of the inspectors:

As mentioned earlier, a detailed interviews of safety inspectors were conducted. This

section focuses on the same interview which contained a series of questions, asked to the

inspector.

The first question was asked how many industries were allotted per inspector. This

question was asked because it was essential to know as to how much attention could one

inspector give to a particular company or a group of companies in a given area. A proper

inspection of the entire premises is essential to make sure that the objectives of the visits made

by the inspectors are achieved. If too many companies are allotted to a single inspector, it means

that such an inspector would not be able to give proper justice at each of his visit. Therefore it is

necessary that the amount of load per inspector is kept reasonable. When asked the same

question the inspectors answered that around 2000 to 2500 firms are allotted to one safety

inspector.

Though this particular number is an approximate figure and not an exact figure, it can be

seen that the total number of firms that have been allotted per inspector seem to be unreasonable.

Taking into consideration the above answer if one calculates three monthly visits per inspector

for 2000 odd companies, the inspectors will have to do 8000 visits per annum at an average of

around 22 visits every day. It is very difficult for a single person to make 22 visits in one day and

be just and equitable to all these workshops or firms that have been visited.

The inspectors were asked about the approximate duration of each visit. According to the

inspectors the duration of each visit depends upon the size of operations and the provisions in

each case. In case of bigger workshops or units it took them around 30 to 40 minutes to conduct

the visit. In some cases it took even more time where it was found that many discrepancies

195

existed. The inspectors responded that the duration of the visit is not standard and is totally

dependent upon the circumstances of each case.

This question was followed by another question which is connected to the previous one.

They were asked that how frequently are visits conducted in a single year? The answer was that

visits happen mostly once in a year. For the rest of the year it is the employer and the employees

are the ones who are taking care that the workers work in a healthy environment. It is quite

sensible and can be easily understood that 22 visits every day are not reasonable. Safety

inspectors also take leaves and have their holidays. Since the workload on each inspector is so

huge, they cannot conduct quarterly visits to the premises of the various companies and factories

that require inspection.

The next question that was asked was about the cooperation that the inspectors receive

from the managers. There is full cooperation from the managers. It is a good thing to know that

whenever visits are arranged the managers are always present and respect the inspectors. At the

same time, according to what the inspectors said, all the suggestions that are given are

implemented by the managers of such factory workshops with the visits have been done.

Since there is a huge load per inspector, a special team that is trained in operating

technical equipments that are required to take vital measurements during the visit is appointed.

There are several instances where the inspector may demand the sound levels be checked in

terms of decibels. There may be certain instances where the inspectors may require a temperature

or humidity to be measured to make sure that all these variables do not cross the permissible

limits according to the laws framed from time to time. This special team knows the correct way

to use the testing equipment and helps to save the time of the inspectors. It can be said that the

inspectors are dependent totally upon the opinion and the measurements that are taken by the

team.

In the next question the inspectors were asked whether they have estimates relating to is

accidents or data that is related to accidents for example: how many accidents happened in the

past three months or six months? The inspectors answered that did not have exact estimates and

196

minor accidents kept happening from one place to the other. According to what they said, major

accidents or fatal accidents are not that much common and they don't happen very frequently.

The reason as to why there were no exact estimates relating to such accidents was that the

reporting of such accidents happens at the root level of the proprietors or managers of the small

scale firms. These proprietors or so-called managers are the ones who take sole responsibility of

whatever accident has happened within the premises.

The inspectors were asked the reasons as to why accidents happen. According to the

inspectors the accidents happen mainly due to 3 reasons. viz: Employee Psychology, Safety

measures and welfare. If the company does not provide for welfare facilities, which include

timely wages, bonuses, healthy working conditions etc., it affects the psyche of the workers and

the chances of accidents certainly rise. It must be said that inspectors were absolutely right in

giving the answer to this particular question. Employees psychology is totally dependent upon

the kind of wages that they get. The kind of wages that a particular employee gets decides the

lifestyle of that particular worker. In our earlier data analysis we have seen that the kind of

lifestyle that the workers live is not up to the mark. Their wages are the major reason behind this.

With so many dependents in their family, it is very difficult for a worker to be satisfied about his

job and the wages that he gets. Many times, workers are found to get depressed because their

wages are not enough to support the desires of the dependents. Due to this kind of disorientation,

the psych of the workers is affected adversely.

The workers are pushed to work for more hours to earn more money. When they work for

overtime, their health gets compromised and the chances of accidents and injuries that may

happen to workers increase. The most obvious reason is the safety provisions. Inadequate safety

provisions are also one of the most critical factors that affect the possibility of accidents.

According to the provisions of The Factories Act, 1948, safety registers of documents

related to safety must be properly maintained by the managers and must be kept up-to-date. The

inspectors were asked whether such records are always available at which are premises they

visit. The inspectors answered that when the eight the inspectors ask for the safety registers or

documents related to safety, these are not always available up to date. In such cases the

197

inspectors have to take very strict steps to make sure that all the compliances are properly

followed and taken seriously by the management. At times, they even charge penalties in case of

serious defaults being observed with the same regards. The next question is related to penalties.

It was asked to the inspectors about the maximum penalty that they have charged during

their tenure. The maximum penalty that was charged by the inspector most frequently was up to

1 lakh rupees and case was filed, according to the law applicable and the circumstances of each

case. Whenever required, criminal procedures were also made applicable.

When the cases are filed, the inspectors themselves present the case before the court as

the inspectors have the required qualifications or powers. The inspectors said that they are public

servants and that it is their prime duty to fight against all injustice.

The inspectors were asked that whether their advice was taken seriously and whether all

the recommendations or suggestions that they made were implemented. The inspectors answered

that their advice is taken very seriously and their recommendations are immediately

implemented. Whenever the inspectors suggest any changes to be made in the safety equipment,

the changes are brought about at the earliest.

Further, the inspectors were asked that whenever they feel that there is a particular

change in the existing laws that is to be brought about, what was the procedure? The inspectors

answered that they were the ones who work at the grassroots level. They affirmatively said that

their higher authorities do pay serious attention to the various suggestions that are made by the

inspectors regarding suggestions to make changes in the existing provisions in the laws or the

rules that are formed by the state.

The usual procedure is that inspectors make reports whenever they feel that a particular

change in the provision would make things better for the workers and for the act to achieve its

objectives in a more efficient way. Such reports are made to the higher authorities which are then

discussed by the respective panel specially appointed for the same purpose and changes are

brought about in the existing laws wherever it is felt necessary.

198

The inspectors were asked whether they feel that the remuneration was up to the mark of

whether they are completely satisfied with the kind of remuneration that is given by the

government to them. The inspectors responded that their remuneration is certainly not up to the

mark. The only motivation that drives them to serve is the amount of respect they get from the

concerned individuals especially the factory owners and the workers. They feel that they're doing

something for the society and have a feeling of service embedded into their minds.

Inspectors were asked whether they require additional task force to make sure that visits

happen more efficiently and more frequently and a better check is kept upon the safety of the

workers? The inspectors responded that task force was not enough. The task force according to

them is only up to the extent of 20 to 30% of the required force. According to what they said, this

percentage should increase to at least 70% so that the efficiency of the entire department

increases and the safety of the worker becomes guaranteed to a greater extent.

The inspectors rely upon their previous experiences. They visit several factories. Various

discrepancies and their effects are noted. The inspectors responded that there are several

incidences where it is found that a particular provision does not exist in the law, but it is essential

to make sure that a particular change in infrastructure or the safety provision must be brought

about so that the workers do not face the danger while working in a particular situation. Such

suggestions are given by them even though it is not mentioned in the law.

word file for pdf final phd - a reservoir of Indian...

Documents

Transcript of word file for pdf final phd - a reservoir of Indian...