Indian chief exec murder 'a warning for management'
Outrage at government minister's inopportune comments
Regcast training : Hyper-V 3.0, VM high availability and disaster recovery
India's Minister of Labour and Employment has landed himself in hot water by describing the death earlier this week of the chief executive of Graziano Transmissioni India as "a warning for management”.
Lalit Choudhary, 47, died on Monday of head wounds after being attacked by a mob at the Graziano Transmissioni car parts factory in Delhi. He'd been attempting to resolve a long-standing dispute with workers who had demanded better pay and permanent contracts, and some of whom had been sacked for their trouble.
However, a meeting with former employees turned seriously nasty and "the unemployed men began vandalising the machinery, turning on Choudhary when he tried to reason with them".
Company board member Ramesh Jain told the Hindustan Times: "Around 125 dismissed workers armed with iron rods barged into the factory and went on rampage. When Lalit tried to pacify them, they assaulted him with rods."
The Times explains that while the murder "has left much of corporate India in shock", minister Oscar Fernandes said the incident “should serve as a warning for management”, adding: “Workers should be dealt with with compassion... workers should not be pushed so hard that they resort to whatever happened.”
Unsurprisingly, India's business community reacted to the comments with disbelief. Rajeev Chandrasekhar, president of the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry, said: “I cannot believe that someone in the Government is condoning something like this. An innocent man has died. I am frankly flabbergasted. I am shocked.”
The Confederation of Indian Industry warned that the killing would "tarnish the sub-continent’s global standing as a place to do business", stating that "nothing in the world that can justify lynching of any person and no dispute can be settled by murdering an adversary”.
Graziano owner Oerlikon Segment Drive (Systems) issued a statement issued which said that "some of Mr Choudhary’s attackers did not have any connection with the company". This supports former employee claims that "outsiders" had been involved in the violence. One explained earlier this week: "We were demonstrating peacefully to get our jobs back. Outsiders may have assaulted the CEO leading to his death. Firing by the guards agitated workers and they clashed with the staff."
Oerlikon Segment Drive (Systems) head, Marcello Lamberto, said: “We absolutely condemn the attack. This is by no means a regular labour conflict, but is truly criminal action. The whole of Oerlikon Group is close to the family of Mr Choudhary in this terrible moment.” ®
Requirements Checklist for Choosing a Cloud Backup and Recovery Service Provider
COMMENTS
Union busting was acceptable
Now India have turned that pony around with CEO busting.
Not happy with the death, but the minister WAS right. This IS a warning to CEO's et al.
And ministers say that about the terrorist bombings: they are a threat to ordinary citizens. 'cept for some reason that's not "frankly flabbergasting" when they use it there.
Hypocritical wankers. CEOs should get 2x average pay and shares to double that. Each and every worker works to make the business a success but the CEO is the one that gets most of the bonus. If he's so indispensable, why not do without any workers and see how productivity shoots up.
"and no dispute can be settled by murdering an adversary"
Erm, yes it can.
It may not be nice or "right", but I would say that murdering the opposition in an argument would be a pretty effective method of winning the dispute.
Who's left? The winner, that's who.
Sometimes....
Sometimes companies make decisions that just can't be justified. Here in America we have a company that is closing a plant... they refuse to keep the plant open and they refuse to sell the plant. 600 workers losing their jobs, a small city is having to deal with 600 families losing their livelihood. An empty building becoming a source of blight within a small town.
Why? Who knows yet. Possibly wanting to sell the parts at a bit more money than if sold as a whole? To prevent a competitor in their market? For years employees and the city have been a source of income and profit for this company and now they are cast aside without so much as a backwards glance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJNIDjmEgmc
Was what they did right? Of course not.
IT infrastructure monitoring strategies
Agentless Backup is Not a Myth
Top 10 SIEM implementer’s checklist
Steps to Take Before Choosing a Business Continuity Partner
Enabling efficient data center monitoring
