Hi Friends,

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

With regards,
Hemen Parekh
27 June 2013

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

Saturday, 10 December 1983

NEXT POWAI LEVEL PRODUCTIVITY COMMITTEE MEETING ON 13TH OCTOBER 1983

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

10 Dec 1983

To:
Deputy General Managers (Mfg.)


SUB -     NEXT  POWAI LEVEL  PRODUCTIVITY  COMMITTEE MEETING ON   13TH OCTOBER 1983                                                                  

You must have already  received my earlier circular dt,  29th September 1983 regarding this meeting.

I  would earnestly  request  you  to attend  the  forthcoming meeting in view of the following:

1.           In the  very first meeting with  the President &  Gen. Secretary (BKS
Union - Sena Bhavan) on  the Charter of Demands on  24th February 1983, 
I had  emphasised the aspect  of almost stagnation Productivity at  Powai
in  most of our operations since 1979,  despite the Clause in the  Agreement
providing  for a  25 point  rise.  I had also mentioned in my  opening
remarks that arising out of  1979 experience an  attempt should  be made to       
make 1983 agreement,

'A post-performance reward' type agreement.

All of us collectively  need to impress this  upon the Union.

2.        From the  information  made available  by the  Finance Department, I
gathered  that both the  sales price and  the  transfer price  of  Powai 
manufactured  products during  the Budget year  1983-84  is likely  to be 
as  much as 10% lower from  the actual production attained during  1982-
83.     If  the  transfer prices  taken  for computing this are higher  than those
taken for 82-83, the actual physical output may  be even as much as 15%       
to   20%  lower  than   the  comparable   figures  for 1982-83.  If this is so,  it
is quite  serious'. As it  is,  I  have,  through  my  earlier  circular  already       
requested the  production managers  to present  at the 13th October  1983
meeting,  1982-83  achievements and 1983-84 targets  product-wise in  physical quantities. This   should' highlight   the   problems   of  demand        slackness.

While presenting these figures, we should  also try to highlight whether 
the 83-84  physical quantities  are expected  to be achieved with  the same
number  of man hours  or with reduced/increased  number of man  hours
thereby   highlighting   the  level   of  productivity expected.
I  belive your  participation  would  help  in  generating  a constructive  dialogue  on  what  steps  could  be  taken  to increase our operational  productivity at Powai in  the years to come and thereby increase our competitiveness.

H.C. PAREKH