EMPLOYEES WELFARE MEASURES TOWARDS PRODUCTIVITY

Asia Pacific Journal of Research Vol: I. Issue XXIX, July 2015

ISSN: 2320-5504, E-ISSN-2347-4793

www.apjor.com Page 159

EMPLOYEES WELFARE MEASURES TOWARDS PRODUCTIVITY OF NEYVELI LIGNITE

CORPORATION LIMITED

Dr. K. VIJAYARANI

Professor and Head, Commerce Wing, DDE,

Annamalai University, Annamalainagar-608002

Mr. G. SURESH

Ph.D., Research Scholar, Department of Commerce,

Annamalai University, Annamalainagar-608002, Mobile-9597904933

ABSTRACT

The present study identified the employees working in the mines and thermal power station is more

affected with the health facilities, and safety measurements for the workers provided by the corporation. The

female employees are less satisfied with the recreational facility and the crèches in the provided by the

corporation. The extramural like facilities of medical, township administration, education, and vocational

training are also important factors among the employee productivity. This article highlights employees’

welfare programme towards productivity of Neyveli Lignite Corporation limited.

KEY WORDS: Neyveli Lignite Corporation limited (NLC), Employee Welfare, Productivity, Employee

Welfare‟ Facilities, Intra-mural Facility, Extra-mural Facility, Impact of Employees Welfare

INTRODUCTION

To begin with, ‘welfare’ in industry means providing medical assistance and services, a work

environment conductive to work environment conductive to `work as well as education facilities. The

emphasis on these services has arisen, mainly, form the concept of social responsibilities that the industry owes

to the community, in which it operates. an industry who owe their responsibility to the society, have provided

elaborate welfare measures for its workers and employees: educational facilities, housing, transportation,

cooperative societies, social clubs, medical facilities, library, sewing and embroidery classes for ladies, various

recreational facilities, etc. These facilities which are highly subsidized by the industrial organisation are

provided over and above the provisions of the labour laws.

We have used the word employees‟ welfare above. Let us explain its meaning and what it constitutes.

The word “labour welfare‟ is part parcel of the concept of social welfare. „Social welfare‟ means welfare of the

total society and welfare of the labour being a small part of it.

employeesvernment of India had set up a committee on Labour Welfare in 1969. The report of the

committee has referred to „welfare‟ as a broad concept implying a condition of well-being of labour. It has

mentioned measures which promote physical, general and psychological well-being of the working class,


ISSN: 2320-5504, E-ISSN-2347-4793


generally. As such, labour welfare means providing better working conditions; which includes proper lighting,

heat control, low noise pollution, toilets, drinking water measures, rest rooms, canteens, health, safety and

cleanliness, reasonable hours of work and holidays, besides welfare facilities like housing, education,

transportation, counseling and recreation.

WELFARE MEASURES

The term‟ Employee Welfare‟ refers to the facilities provided to employee inside and outside the

organization premises such as canteens, rest rooms and recreation facilities, housing and all other services that

contribute to the well being of employee and efficiency of workers.

Employee welfare facilities enable workers to live a richer and more satisfactory life. After employees

have been hired, trained and remunerated they need to be retained and maintained to serve the organization

better. Welfare facilities are designed to take care of the wellbeing of the employees, they do not generally

result in any monetary benefits to the employees nor are these facilities provided by employers alone,

government and non-governmental agencies and trade unions too contribute towards employee‟s benefits.

NEED AND IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY

Employees‟ health, safety and welfare activities in India are urgently needed because India is an

industrial backward country and the working conditions are not satisfactory in Indian industries. The workers

are poor and illiterate. They are generally blamed for being irresponsible and lazy. Employees‟ health, safety

and welfare activities are necessary for improving their working conditions and their economic and living

standards. In modern society, economic development of laboureres plays a vital role in production. Hence, by

uplifting labour, the economic development of the nation increases markedly which in turn increases the

National productivity. In olden days, the employers suppressed the employees‟ by paying less salary and

extracting more work that too in an unsatisfactory working environment. This has created conflict between the

employer and the employee. To safeguard the employees from the ill-treatment of employer, the employee

trade unions were formed to solve their genuine problems.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

An organization is influenced by various human resources factors. The employees‟ welfare measure is

one of the factors penetrating in the life of employees those who are working in an organisation. The present

research is employees‟ welfare facility towards productivity in Neyveli Lignite Corporation limited. There are

large numbers of employees from different part of India are working in this organization. It cannot be expected

all the favourable and continence and comfortable arrangement in compare with own home town while they

are working. Further men and women it different age group have to be satisfied with some welfare facilities

according to their requirements. It would lead to some expectation in addition to their salary from NLC like

welfare facilities. Further, the NLC neither their full up the existing vacancies nor increase the number of

employees vacancies. This affected not only the employees welfare facilities enjoyed by existing employees

and also increased the burden of the present employees. The welfare facilities would encourage both men and

women employees to do their work smoothly and make peaceful working environment and reduce trade union

activities, if the NLC fill up carder position, this would leads to productivity of organization the NLC provide

study. This study explores the employees‟ welfare measures of NLC and seeks to find out which dimensions in

the employees‟ welfare significantly influence the level of productivity in NLC. However, employees view on

welfare measures and standard of labour welfare measures might be in different expectation. When both

expectations did not meet to certain extent, it would make conflict formal and informal trade unions are

functioning for the benefit of employees. Therefore this study became very important. The research will

analyse the influence of personal variables such as gender, age, dependent and independent variables

employees‟ welfare programmes towards productivity of Neyveli Lignite Corporation Limited.


ISSN: 2320-5504, E-ISSN-2347-4793


OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The following objectives are expected to achieve through this study.

1. To find out various employees welfare measure (programmes) provided by the Neyveli Lignite

Corporation Limited.

2. To analyse employees satisfaction with regard to intra-mural welfare facilities provided by Neyveli

Lignite Corporation Limited, especially level of satisfaction of family and individual employees

welfare scheme.

3. To analyse employees satisfaction with regard to extra-mural welfare facilities provided by Neyveli

Lignite Corporation Limited.

4. To ascertain the employees‟ welfare measures will improve the efficiency of productivity.

HYPTHESIS OF THE STUDY

The study is based on the following hypotheses framed and tested.

Ho1: There is no significant difference demographic variable and various intramural welfare facilities

provided by NLC.

Ho2: There is no significant difference demographic variable and various extramural welfare facilities

provided by NLC. Ho3: There is no significant difference between demographic variable and productivity of NLC.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The present study is based on survey method, both primary and secondary data are used. All the

objectives of the study are achieved by the collection, analysis and interpretation of primary data. Employees‟

welfare facilities are data collected through the well designed questionnaire with 5 point scales likert type by

distributing among employees working at NLC their middle of the year 2014. The average satisfaction point

was used to measure the total satisfaction of the employees.

SOURCES OF DATA

The data source for this research is absolutely primary, collected directly from the respondent

employees by serving the questionnaire to them personally. However the use of secondary data has also been

made in a limited was in the research. Where necessary, information is pertaining to the demographic variable

of employees such as age, gender, educational qualification, marital status, dependents category, experience

and income of the employees working in NLC. In addition oral survey has also been conducted to get

clarification from the appropriate authorities. On trivial issues relating to employees welfare.

Primary Data

The first hand information was collected from the different place of work, Mines, Thermal Power

Stations, township administration, central Service Units, Central Administration. As an essential part of the

study the primary data were collected form 825 employees Labour, Supervisor, non-executive, executive with

the help of questionnaire.

Secondary Data

The secondary data were collected mainly from the Newspaper, Journals, Magazines, books and

unpublished dissertation the relevant secondary sources of information were also collected form NLC

documentation centre.

SAMPLING DESIGN

The Proportionate Stratified Sampling Method was used to select the respondents in Employees

Welfare Programme Towards Productivity of Neyveli Lignite Corporation Limited. This sampling involved in

drawing sample from each stratum in proportion to the latter‟s share in the total employees. 5 per cent of each

category of employees in NLC namely mines thermal power station, central service unit, township

administration, central administration and others (Labours, supervisor, executives and non-executives


ISSN: 2320-5504, E-ISSN-2347-4793


employees) were selected for the study. The sample size constituted 5 per cent of the universe i.e., 825

employees. The universe constituting 16509 employees were classified on the basis of their nature of

employment.

STATISTICAL TOOLS FOR DATA ANALYSIS

This researcher employed some well-known statistical tools such as Fried man rank correlation, „T‟

test, „F‟ test, Chi-square test, and Multiple Correlation. The „T‟ test was used to identify the significance

among different variable and across the bases of classification, Chi-Square test and ANOVA were employed to

identify the degree of variance. The multiple correlation was adopted to identify classify and rank the variable

that had more being in determination of Employee welfare Programmes towards Productivity of NLC. The

reliability and validity analysis of the data in this study was analysed using Statistical Package for Social

Sciences (SPSS v 20.0). For analyzing the data collected during the investigation, the following statistical

values were used according to the relevance of its application.

PILOT STUDY

Before the researcher could start the actual survey. A pilot study was conducted on select 24 sample

respondent employees during October 2014 to know the relevance of the questions in the light of pre-testing;

few changes were incorporated in the questions and their sequences. The absolute aim of conducting the pilot

study was to record the views of the respondent employees with reference to the deficiencies in the

questionnaire set for this study. This process helped the researcher to make necessary corrections as suggested

by the respondents, on some aspect of employees‟ welfare programmes towards productivity. Accordingly, the

questionnaire has been restructured and the final questionnaire was prepared and approved by the research

guide for conducting the field work.

SOCPE OF THE STUDY

The study considered only the permanent employees those who have more than two year experience of

NLC because, permanent employees can get many welfare facility provided by NLC temporary, contract and

Casual cannot be considered for this study because employees welfare facility for this employees are very less

in compare with permanent employees the researcher did not consider temporary contract and casual

employees further the employees working at NLC Head office were also not considered for this study.

PERIOD OF THE STUDY

The study covered both primary and secondary data. Primary data were collected ding the period

November 2014 to April 2015. The secondary data relating to the study were collected from the period of ten

years from 2004-5 to 2014-15 for the purpose of analysis and evaluation.

TESTING OF THE HYPOTHESIS

This section is to test the significant difference between socio economic profile and the intramural

welfare facility provided by the corporation to the employees working in the Neyveli Lignite Corporation. The

following hypothesis has been framed to test the significant difference between socio economic profile and the

intramural welfare facility provided by the corporation

Ho1: There is no significant difference between the socio economic profile of the employees and the

intramural welfare facility provided by the corporation.

Testing the significant difference between gender and the intramural welfare facilities provided by the

corporation

T test is applied to ascertain if there were any significant difference between gender and the intramural

welfare facilities provided by the corporation and the following null hypotheses has been framed:

Ho1a: There is no significant difference between the gender and the intramural welfare facility provided by the

corporation.


ISSN: 2320-5504, E-ISSN-2347-4793


Table 1: t-test for Intra-mural Welfare Facility provided by the Corporation on the basis of Gender

Variables Gender N Mean Std. Deviation S.E.

Mean t - value Sig.

Canteen Facility Male 762 22.15 3.37 0.12

1.289 0.201 Female 63 21.56 3.51 0.44 Total 825 22.10 3.39 0.12

Family Welfare Male 762 14.61 2.77 0.10

0.380 0.705 Female 63 14.46 3.03 0.38 Total 825 14.60 2.79 0.10

Special Incentive Schemes for Small Family norms

Male 762 11.50 1.38 0.05 0.716 0.476 Female 63 11.35 1.61 0.20

Total 825 11.49 1.40 0.05

Health Facilities Male 762 24.00 3.62 0.13

1.722 0.090 Female 63 23.06 4.21 0.53 Total 825 23.93 3.68 0.13

Recreation Facilities Male 762 11.09 2.68 0.10

3.700 0.001* Female 63 9.60 3.03 0.38 Total 825 10.97 2.73 0.10

Sports Facilities Male 762 20.81 5.22 0.19

1.405 0.165 Female 63 19.65 6.35 0.80 Total 825 20.72 5.32 0.19

Post Retirement Medical Assistance

Male 762 18.40 3.34 0.12 1.490 0.141 Female 63 17.67 3.80 0.48

Total 825 18.35 3.38 0.12

Crèches Male 762 7.86 2.48 0.09

2.059 0.043* Female 63 7.27 2.16 0.27 Total 825 7.82 2.46 0.09

Uniform and Shoe Male 762 11.03 1.93 0.07

1.422 0.159 Female 63 10.63 2.14 0.27 Total 825 11.00 1.94 0.07

Safety Measurements for the Workers

Male 762 27.13 3.60 0.13 -0.379 0.706 Female 63 27.33 4.19 0.53

Total 825 27.14 3.65 0.13

Source: Computed from Primary Data * Significant at 5 % level

The calculated t value of 1.289, 0.380, 0.716, 1.722, 1.405, 1.490, 1.422 and -0.379 to the respective

variables of canteen facility, family welfare, special incentive schemes for small family norms, health facilities,

sports facilities, post retirement medical assistance, uniform and shoe, and the safety measurements for the

workers provided by the corporation is not significant at five per cent level. The values indicate that there is no

significant difference between the gender and the intramural facility provided by the corporation. Therefore,

the stated hypothesis of there is no significant difference between the gender and the intramural facility

provided by the corporation is accepted.

However, the calculated t value of 3.700 and 2.059 to the respective variables of recreation facilities

and the crèches facility provided by the corporation is significant at five per cent level. The values indicate that

there is a significant difference between the gender and the intramural facility provided by the corporation.

Hence, the stated hypothesis is rejected. Further, the mean value indicates the male employees are highly

satisfied with the recreational facility where as the female employees are less satisfied with the recreational

facility and the crèches in the provided by the corporation.

Testing the significant difference between age and the intramural welfare facilities provided by the

corporation

One way ANOVA is applied to ascertain if there were any significant difference between age and the

intramural welfare facilities provided by the corporation and the following null hypotheses has been framed: Ho1b: There is no significant difference between the age and the intramural welfare facility provided by the corporation.


ISSN: 2320-5504, E-ISSN-2347-4793


Table 2: ANOVA for Intramural Welfare Facility provided by the Corporation on the basis of Age

Variables Age N Mean Std.

Deviation S.E.

Mean F – Value P-Value

Canteen Facility

Below 35 59 22.29 3.72 0.48

0.099

0.961

36-45 332 22.12 3.14 0.17 46-55 330 22.04 3.50 0.19

Above 55 104 22.13 3.61 0.35 Total 825 22.10 3.39 0.12

Family Welfare

Below 35 59 14.86 2.81 0.37

0.528 0.663 36-45 332 14.63 2.72 0.15 46-55 330 14.47 2.84 0.16

Above 55 104 14.76 2.85 0.28 Total 825 14.60 2.79 0.10

Special Incentive Schemes for Small

Family norms

Below 35 59 11.69 1.44 0.19

0.685 0.561 36-45 332 11.52 1.31 0.07 46-55 330 11.44 1.45 0.08

Above 55 104 11.43 1.50 0.15 Total 825 11.49 1.40 0.05

Health Facilities

Below 35 59 24.59 3.92 0.51

1.350 0.257 36-45 332 23.68 3.63 0.20 46-55 330 23.98 3.66 0.20

Above 55 104 24.19 3.74 0.37 Total 825 23.93 3.68 0.13

Recreation Facilities

Below 35 59 11.27 2.75 0.36

0.753 0.520 36-45 332 10.84 2.71 0.15 46-55 330 10.99 2.84 0.16

Above 55 104 11.20 2.44 0.24 Total 825 10.97 2.73 0.10

Sports Facilities

Below 35 59 21.97 4.71 0.61

1.367 0.251 36-45 332 20.79 5.22 0.29 46-55 330 20.52 5.52 0.30

Above 55 104 20.40 5.30 0.52 Total 825 20.72 5.32 0.19

Post Retirement Medical Assistance

Below 35 59 17.75 3.39 0.44

1.045 0.372 36-45 332 18.34 3.33 0.18 46-55 330 18.34 3.48 0.19

Above 55 104 18.72 3.26 0.32 Total 825 18.35 3.38 0.12

Crèches

Below 35 59 7.97 2.51 0.33

1.156 0.326 36-45 332 7.75 2.43 0.13 46-55 330 7.96 2.44 0.13

Above 55 104 7.48 2.58 0.25 Total 825 7.82 2.46 0.09

Uniform and Shoe

Below 35 59 11.29 1.73 0.23

1.207 0.306 36-45 332 10.86 1.92 0.11 46-55 330 11.08 1.98 0.11

Above 55 104 11.02 2.03 0.20 Total 825 11.00 1.94 0.07

Safety Measurements for the Workers

Below 35 59 27.53 3.89 0.51

0.499 0.683 36-45 332 27.12 3.67 0.20 46-55 330 27.02 3.65 0.20

Above 55 104 27.38 3.45 0.34 Total 825 27.14 3.65 0.13

Source: Computed from Primary Data


ISSN: 2320-5504, E-ISSN-2347-4793


The calculated F value of 0.099, 0.528, 0.685, 1.350, 0.753, 1.367, 1.045, 1.156, 1.207, and 0.499 to the

above respective variables is not significant. The values indicate that there is no significant difference between

the age and the intramural facility provided by the corporation. Therefore, the stated hypothesis of there is no

significant difference between the age and the intramural facility provided by the corporation is accepted.

Testing the significant difference between marital status and the intramural welfare facilities provided

by the corporation

One way ANOVA is applied to ascertain if there were any significant difference between marital status

and the intramural welfare facilities provided by the corporation and the following null hypotheses has been

framed:

Ho1C: There is no significant difference between the marital status and the intramural welfare facility

provided by the corporation.

Table 3: ANOVA for Intramural Welfare Facility provided by the Corporation on the basis of Marital

Status

Variables Marital Status N Mean Std.

Deviation S.E.

Mean F –

Value P-Value

Canteen Facility

Married 790 22.10 3.37 0.12

0.213 0.808 Un Married 18 21.72 4.00 0.94

Widower/Separated/ Divorce

17 22.47 3.52 0.85

Total 825 22.10 3.39 0.12

Family Welfare

Married 790 14.60 2.79 0.10

0.505 0.604 Un Married 18 14.11 2.91 0.69


17 15.06 2.68 0.65

Total 825 14.60 2.79 0.10

Special Incentive Schemes for Small

Family norms

Married 790 11.49 1.41 0.05

0.310 0.734 Un Married 18 11.67 1.24 0.29


17 11.29 0.99 0.24

Total 825 11.49 1.40 0.05

Health Facilities

Married 790 23.96 3.67 0.13

0.740 0.478 Un Married 18 23.00 4.33 1.02


17 23.47 3.34 0.81

Total 825 23.93 3.68 0.13

Recreation Facilities

Married 790 10.98 2.73 0.10

0.352 0.703 Un Married 18 10.44 2.79 0.66


17 11.06 2.88 0.70

Total 825 10.97 2.73 0.10

Sports Facilities

Married 790 20.72 5.34 0.19

0.009 0.991 Un Married 18 20.56 5.74 1.35

Widower/Separated/Divorce

17 20.71 4.31 1.05

Total 825 20.72 5.32 0.19

Post Retirement Medical

Assistance

Married 790 18.37 3.41 0.12

0.489 0.614 Un Married 18 17.89 2.65 0.63


17 17.71 2.82 0.68

Total 825 18.35 3.38 0.12

Crèches

Married 790 7.84 2.47 0.09

1.297 0.274 Un Married 18 7.06 2.39 0.56


17 7.29 1.76 0.43

Total 825 7.82 2.46 0.09


ISSN: 2320-5504, E-ISSN-2347-4793


Uniform and Shoe

Married 790 10.99 1.94 0.07

0.715 0.489 Un Married 18 11.17 2.41 0.57


17 11.53 1.81 0.44

Total 825 11.00 1.94 0.07

Safety Measurements for

the Workers

Married 790 27.17 3.66 0.13

0.542 0.582 Un Married 18 26.50 3.90 0.92

Widower/Separated/Divorce

17 26.53 2.83 0.69

Total 825 27.14 3.65 0.13


The calculated F value of 0.213, 0.505, 0.310, 0.740, 0.352, 0.009, 0.489, 1.297, 0.715, and 0.542 to the

above respective variables is not significant. The values indicate that there is no significant difference between

the marital status and the intramural facility provided by the corporation. Therefore, the stated hypothesis of

there is no significant difference between the marital status and the intramural facility provided by the

corporation is accepted.

Testing the significant difference between number of dependents and the intramural welfare facilities

provided by the corporation

One way ANOVA is applied to ascertain if there were any significant differences between number of

dependents and the intramural welfare facilities provided by the corporation and the following null hypotheses

has been framed:

Ho1d: There is no significant difference between the number of dependents and the intramural welfare facility

provided by the corporation.

REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF INTRAMURAL FACILITY

The relationship between two or more variables is analysed by way of statistical tolls. When there are

two or more independent variables, the analysis that describes such relationship among the variables in called

regression analysis. This analysis is also adopted when one dependent variable is performing the function of

two or more variables.

The following null hypothesis has been formulated:

Ho2: There is no significant different between intramural facility and the place of work of the employees.

Table 3(a): Model Summary for Place of the Employee

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 0.350a 0.123 0.112 1.58420


Table 3 (b): ANOVAa

Model Sum of

Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.

1

Regression 285.977 10 28.598 11.395 .000b

Residual 2042.876 814 2.510

Total 2328.853 824

a. Dependent Variable: place of work



ISSN: 2320-5504, E-ISSN-2347-4793


Table 3 (c): Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t

Sig.

1

(Constant) B Std. Error Beta

-.796 .743 -1.071 .285

Canteen Facility -.029 .018 -.058 -1.560 .119

Family Welfare -.001 .021 -.002 -.057 .954

Special Incentive Schemes for

Small Family norms -.073 .040 -.060 -1.831 0.067

Health Facilities .054 .020 .119 2.716* 0.007

Recreation Facilities .009 .027 .015 0.340 0.734

Sports Facilities -.026 .014 -.081 -1.803 .072

Post Retirement Medical

Assistance .111 .017 .223 6.348* 0.000

Crèches -.066 .025 -.096 -2.642* 0.008

Uniform and Shoe -.011 .030 -.013 -.358 0.721

Safety Measurements for the

Workers .087 .016 .188 5.527* 0.000

a. Dependent Variable: place of work

Source: Computed from Primary Data * Significant at 5 per cent level

The results of regression analysis such as cumulative R2, adjusted R square and step t and p value have

been given in Table 5.63, 5.64 and 5.65. From the Table 5.65 the calculated t values of -1.560, -.057, -1.831,

0.340, -1.803, and -0.358 to the respective variables of canteen facility, family welfare, special incentive for

small family, recreation facilities, sports facilities, and uniform and shoe are not significant. Hence, the stated

hypothesis of there is no significant different between intramural facility and the place of work of the

employees is accepted.

However, the calculated t value of 2.716, 6.348, -2.642, and 5.527 to the respective variables of health

facilities, post retirement medical assistance, crèches, and safety measurements for the workers are significant

at 5 per cent level. Hence the stated hypothesis of there is no significant different between intramural facility

and the place of work of the employees is rejected.

REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF (EXTRAMURAL FACILITY)

Ho3: There is no significant different between extramural facility and cadre of work of the employees.

Table 4 (a): Model Summary for Cadre of the Employees and Extramural Factors

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .115a .013 .002 1.11253

Table 4 (b): ANOVAa

Model Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.

1

Regression 13.512 9 1.501 1.213 .283b

Residual 1008.750 815 1.238

Total 1022.262 824

a. Dependent Variable: Cadre or designation of the employee


ISSN: 2320-5504, E-ISSN-2347-4793


Table 4 (c): Coefficientsa

t Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t

Sig.

1

(Constant) 2.901 0.534

Township administration 0.014 0.010 0.056 1.452 0.147

Subsidised transport -0.016 0.020 -0.029 -0.821 0.412

Medical facility 0.006 0.009 0.026 0.644 0.520

Educational facilities -0.026 0.018 -0.055 -1.492 0.136

Health care programmes for

school children 0.010 0.022 0.017 0.457 0.648

Death relief fund -0.010 0.022 -0.015 -0.428 0.669

Maternity benefits -0.011 0.020 -0.019 -0.523 0.601

Vocational training -0.046 0.023 -0.072 -2.026 0.043*

Holiday homes 0.007 0.029 0.008 0.223 0.823

a. Dependent Variable: Cadre of the employee

Source: Computed from Primary Data * Significant at 5 per cent level

The results of regression analysis such as cumulative R2, adjusted R square and step t and p value have

been given in Table 5.74, 5.75 and 5.76. Table 76 explores the calculated t value1.452, -0.821, 0.644, -1.492,

0.457, -0.428, -0.523, and 0.223 to the above respective variables not significant. Hence, the stated hypothesis

of there is no significant difference between cadre of the employee and extramural facilities provided by the

corporation is accepted. However, the calculated t value of vocational training to the employees (t -2.026) is

significant at 5 per cent level. Hence, the stated hypothesis of there is no significant difference between cadre

of the employee and extramural facilities provided by the corporation is rejected.

Table 5(a): KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy .706

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity

Approx. Chi-Square 479.919

Df 36

Sig. .000


It is clear from the Table 5.77 that the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of sampling adequacy measure of

sampling adequacy is 0.706 and the chi square value Bartlett‟s test of sphericity is 479.919 which is statically

significant. Communalities are used to find out the how much of the variance in each of the original variables

is explained by the extracted factors. Higher communalities are desirable.

Table 5(b): Communalities

S. No. Extramural facilities Initial Extraction

1. Township administration 1.000 0.516

2. Subsidised transport 1.000 0.530

3. Medical facility 1.000 0.575

4. Educational facilities 1.000 0.498

5. Health care programmes for school children 1.000 0.438

6. Death relief fund 1.000 0.343

7. Maternity benefits 1.000 0.341

8. Vocational training 1.000 0.457

9. Holiday homes 1.000 0.557

Source: Computed from Primary, Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis

The Table 5(b) shows the communalities for motivational factors of investments. It is seen from the table that individual variance of the contributory variables ranges from 0.3413 to 0.575. In other words, it


ISSN: 2320-5504, E-ISSN-2347-4793


implies that the level of motivational factors varies from 34.1 per cent to 57.5 per cent. A causal perusal of table shows that medical facility (0.575), holiday homes (0.557), subsidised transport (0.530), township administration (0.516) educational facilities (0.498) and vocational training 0.457 are the important factors for the employees. The factors of health care programmes for school children (0.438), death relief fund (0.343) and maternity benefits (0.341) are not much more importance to the employee welfare measures towards productivity.

Table 5(b): Total Variance Explained

Component Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings

Total % of

Variance Cumulative % Total

% of Variance

Cumulative %

1 2.082 23.137 23.137 2.082 23.137 23.137 2 1.103 12.257 35.394 1.103 12.257 35.394 3 1.068 11.871 47.265 1.068 11.871 47.265 4 .944 10.491 57.756 5 .904 10.041 67.796 6 .843 9.368 77.164 7 .768 8.535 85.699 8 .702 7.796 93.495 9 .585 6.505 100.000

Source: Computed from Primary Data, Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Table 5(b) shows the percentage of variance in respect of nine factors of welfare measure towards productivity in employees of Neyveli Lignite Corporation Limited. The overall three factors contribute Eigen values greater than 1.0, which is a common criterion for a factor to be useful. When the Eigen value is less than 1.0 the factor explains less information than a single item would have explained. These variables have been rotated to ascertain cumulative percentage of variance. The factor 1, factor 2, and factor 3 causes 23.137, 12.257, and 11.871 per cent of variance influencing the welfare measures towards productivity. The overall three factors cumulatively contribute 47.265 per cent.

Table 5(c): Component Matrix

S. No. Extramural facilities Component

1 1 1

3. Medical facility 0.702 1. Township administration 0.615 7. Maternity benefits 0.550 4. Educational facilities 0.525

5. Health care programmes for school

children 0.521

9. Holiday homes 0.534 2. Subsidised transport -0.484 6. Death relief fund -0.399 8. Vocational training 0.614

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis, a. 3 components extracted Table 5(c) shows the strong and positive loading of the medical facility provided by the corporation (0.702), township administration (0.615), maternity benefits (0.550), educational facilities (0.525) and Health care programmes for school children (0.521) are significant. Factor two loading on holiday homes (0.5340, subsidized transport (-0.484), and death relief fund (-0.399) has moderately significant towards the extramural facilities provided by the corporation. The factor three loading on vocational training (0.614) has less significant loading on the extramural facilities provided by the corporation. SUGGESTIONS

The corporation has to improve the hygienic condition in the canteen and also to increase the nutrition food to the employees.

The transport facility provided by the corporation has to increase the frequency of services and also to improve the facilities available in the bus terminal. It also suggested that to construct new terminal for obligatory places.


ISSN: 2320-5504, E-ISSN-2347-4793


The employees are stated that there exists quality of first aid has to enhanced in the critical places of the thermal power station and mines. It is also suggested that considerable attention should be given for first aid appliances with quality of drugs and necessary medicines.

A safety committee to be constitute in the areas of thermal power station and mines to educate the employees about their responsibility during the hazardous situations. In order to render quality safety service, the members of the safety committee should undergo first aid training.

The employees of the Neyveli Lignite Corporation are more expected for their dependant benefits. Hence, it is suggested the reasonable benefits could be extended to the dependants of the employees.

The rest and lunch rooms provided by the corporation help to reduce tiredness. The rest rooms are provided for relaxation during the breaks for rest or meal.

It is suggested that recreational and crèche centers should be established outside the place of work and should be well-equipped to attract sufficient female employees.

It suggested that the female employees are less satisfied with majority of the employee welfare measures. This should be considered seriously and provide the reasonable facility the female employees.

The safety facility provided by the township administration is to increased to the welfare of the employees.

CONCLUSION The present study observed that, welfare measures are having positive and significant effect on

productivity at the Nyeveli Lignite Corporation. The intramural welfare facilities will directly influence employee productivity. Once this relationship is established, high employee productivity may lead to high satisfaction. The discussions with employees of different places of working in the corporation we have found that intramural facilities in addition to providing the improved medical facilities, colleges education facility should be improved. The present study identified the employees working in the mines and thermal power station is more affected with the health facilities, and safety measurements for the workers provided by the corporation. The female employees are less satisfied with the recreational facility and the crèches in the provided by the corporation. The extramural like facilities of medical, township administration, education, and vocational training are also important factors among the employee productivity. The employees are to be continuously encouraged and be able to contribute to the overall effectiveness of the corporation. REFERENCES

1. Banu, Vijaya, C., & Ashifa, J. M. (2012). A Study on Labour Welfare Measures in Public Sector Transport Corporation. International Journal of Business Economics and Managment Research ,Vol. 2, pp. 129-140.

2. Cheyne, A., Thomas, S. M., Cox, S., & Oliver, A. (2003). Perceptions of safety climate at different employment levels work and stress. 17, 21-37.

3. Christen, M., Iyer, G., & Suberman, D. (2006). Job Satisfaction, Job Performance, and effort: A reaxamination using agency theory. Journal of Marketing (70), 137-150.

4. Dye, C. F., & Garman, A. N. (2006). Exceptional Leadership: 16 Critical Competencies for health care Exicutives. Health Admi. Press Chicago.

5. Handzic, M., & Chaimungkalanont, M. (2003). the impact of socialisation on organisational creativity. proceedings of the 4th European conference on knowledge Managment (pp. 425-432). Oxford: ECKM-2004.

6. Hoffman, D. A., & Morgeson, F. P. (1999). safety related behaviour as a social exchange: The role of perceived orgaizational support and leader member exchange. Journal of Applied Psychology , 84 (2), pp. 286-296.

7. Manjulika, K. (1975). “Labour Welfare in India in J.S. Uppal (ED), India‟s Economic Problems, an analytical Approach”, Tata NC, Graw Hill Publishing Company Ltd., New Delhi, pp .203-219.

8. Neely, G. (1999). The Relationship between employee moral and employee productivity. National Fiere Academy As Part of the Executive Fire Officer Programme . tuka oldahoma.

9. Shobha Mishra and Manju Bhagat. (2010). Principles for Successful Implementation of Labour Welfare Activities from Public Theory to Functional Theory. Retrived from http://www.sesionline.com/intt/indepth.jsp?id=575 .

10. Zacharaiah, K. A. (1954). “Industrial Relations and Personnel Problems - A study with particular reference to Bombay”, Asia Publishing House, Bombay, p.28

Documents

EMPLOYEES WELFARE MEASURES TOWARDS PRODUCTIVITY