What is the role of a workers' cooperative in

turning around sick enterprises in the

current context of increasing corporate
sickness?
Based on the turnaround experience of
Kamani Tubes Limited, Surya Mookherjee
analyses the phenomenon of workers'
takeover and turnaround of a sick enterprise
and the policy initiatives required in order
to add fillip to such efforts.

Surya Mookherjee is a member of the faculty at

the Gandhi Labour Institute, Ahmedabad.

The contemporary corporate observers in India are perturbed by the increasing incidence of industrial sickness. The magnitude of corporate sickness has evoked
considerable public concern and media attention. The
number of sick units as of December 1990 is estimated
to have reached a staggering figure of 3.46 lakh. Also, a
large number of sick units have been found to be nonviable. The ratio of viable to non-viable units is 1:16 in
1990. Sickness is more pronounced in the private sector
especially the small scale sector. Of late, however, many
public sector units have also turned sick. Out of a total
of 244 public sector undertakings, 98 are loss making
units with an accumulated loss of Rs 10052.8 crore. Out
of these 98 units, 58 are identified as chronically sick
units with an accumulated loss of Rs 8536.76 crore.
These units are on the brink of winding up (Mehta,
1992).
The responsibility for evolving suitable action
plans to revive and turn around the sick unit lies as
much on the employer as it is incumbent upon the
government. It is also equally important that labour be
assigned an important role in the process. We have
many instances in recent years of workers bearing the
burden of turnaround and on many occasions successfully performing this role.
This paper is an attempt to examine the role of a
workers' cooperative in the turnaround of a sick
enterprise based on the turnaround experience of
Kamani Tubes Limited (KTL). Experiences of other
workers' cooperatives in our country are also highlighted to provide the backdrop (Box 1).

Conceptual Background of a Workers'

Cooperative
Cooperative as a form of organization promotes the
concept of self- management and collective ownership.
An important organizational characteristic of a
cooperative is that the members who form the cooperative often perform a combination of roles: owner,
promoter, investor, producer, manager, and employee.
These roles often overlap and are not easily distinguishable. Ownership of capital by workers influences the
style of functioning of the worker-owned enterprise.
Vol.18, No.l, January-March 1993

15

Theoretically, worker ownership at a macro level is

viewed as an instrument of a new form of gradual
transformation into a factory level social system. The
proponent of this argument is Dandekar (1987) who
goes to the extent of saying: "let the workers own and
manage." According to Dandekar, in the framework of
the capitalist economic system, the relationship between capital and labour is characterized by antagonism. Worker ownership is an appropriate
response to capitalist antagonism. This can be achieved
by bringing about a change in the mode of production
which in turn will ensure appropriate change in the
structure of capital. The conflict between capital and
labour can be resolved by bringing to an end the separation between the two. This situation is possible when
the workers of each firm are made owners of its capital.
Dandekar advocates transfer of the yearly allocations to
the Provident Fund into workers' share so that the
workers will become the major and ultimately the sole
shareholders in the company. Stock ownership, according to him, is a means to establish worker ownership
and control.

Role of Workers' Cooperatives in

Turnaround: European Experience
A cross-country study (Paton et al. 1989) of workers'
takeover in some European countries such as Italy,
Spain, France, United Kingdom, West Germany, and
Denmark indicates the following main features:

Workers' takeover of sick enterprises has taken

place not by choice but by necessity in the context
of viable or potentially viable enterprises and
plants. In most cases, the takeover was necessitated
by adverse economic circumstances and an instinct
of job preservation or preserving workers' live
lihood and work places.

After the takeover, the enterprise passes through

two phases: the recovery phase and the develop
mental phase. In the recovery phase, an attempt is
made to restart commercial production, restore
profitability, ensure customer support, obtain
resources, and democratize management structure.
The development phase is characterized by efforts
aimed at strengthening and consolidating the
enterprise by introduction of new production
methods, modernization of plants and machinery,
development of new products, and exploration of
new financial support.

16

In the newly formed enterprise, several questions

crop up pertaining to the structure of authority,

functional specialization, division of activities, formation of new work groups, allocation of responsibilities, and ensuring group cohesion. In the initial
stages, the enterprise tends to be under managed in
terms of quantity and quality especially in critical
areas of production, finance, and marketing. This
situation arises due to the managerial vacuum
created by the exodus of key persons who seek
alternative placements in more prosperous organizations. Under workers' regime, the enterprise
often finds it difficult to recruit from external
market new managers who are competent as well
as sympathetic to the aspirations of workers and
who are ready to manage the new organization in
a democratic and participatory manner.

The mainstream trade union movement has not

been sympathetic towards workers' takeover or
workers' cooperative. It has remained indifferent
and at worst hostile to workers' cooperative.

Three factors contribute towards the success of

workers' takeover. First, the characteristics of the
workforce. A cohesive, homogenous group of
skilled workers equipped with self- confidence and
latent ability to undertake managerial work
facilitates successful running of the new enterprise.
Second, competent leadership provided by either a
single individual or a group of individuals com
mitted to both commercial and social objectives of
the workers and able to strike a balance between the
short-term, immediate concerns of the workers and
the long-term, commercial considerations of the
enterprise. Third, existence of effective and con
tinuous external support. The kind of support may
be financial, advisory, consultative, managerial,
and work orders for goods and services.

The Turnaround of Kamani Tubes Limited

The concept of a workers' cooperative as a strategy for
turning around a sick enterprise gained prominence
ever since the employees of the closed Kamani Tubes
Limited (KTL) took over the management and ownership of the company and resumed operations. The
scheme prepared by the Kamani Employees Union
(KEU) for reviving the unit was subsequently proved to
be viable.
Apart from KTL, workers' cooperatives have come
into existence in the Tea Estates of West Bengal and
Tripura, the New Central Jute Mills, Calcutta, the
Gujarat Tractor Corporation, Baroda, etc. More details
about these cooperatives are available in Box 1.
Vikalpa

Background of Kamani Tubes Limited

Kamani Tubes Limited, a family enterprise, came into
existence in 1959 as one of the units of Kamani Group
of industries and is located in Kurla, a Bombay suburb.
A pioneer in manufacturing non-ferrous tubes and
rods, it produced copper and copper-based alloys; brass
sugar tubes, and admiralty aluminium tubes. KTL
tubes and rods were supplied to key sectors like power
generation, defence, oil refining, sugar, fertilizer, shipbuilding, automobiles, refrigeration, and light electricals.
Although the Kamani Group had set up several
units, the management had todeal with only one union,
viz. the Kamani Employees Union (KEU) which
covered all the units. The KEU was registered in 1951
as a staff union of the employees of the Kamani Group,
numbering approximately 4,500. The Union was initially affiliated to the Indian National Trade Union Congress (1NTUC). Subsequently, a change in Union
leadership took place through secret ballot, resulting in
a shift of affiliation from 1NTUC to the All India Trade
Union Congress (AITUC).
In the beginning of 1960s, KTL accounted for nearly
60 per cent of the total domestic output of non-ferrous
tubes. However, the premier position of the company
started eroding from the beginning of 1970s and it
slowly started incurring losses due to mismanagement
and legal feud. By the middle of 1985, the accumulated
losses were estimated to be Rs 4.42 crore as against the
paid up capital and reserve of Rs 97 lakh only. By the
beginning of 1985, the bankers refused to provide credit
to KTL. From December 1984 onwards, KTL employees
had not received their wages.
On behalf of the employees, KEU filed a complaint
in the Industrial Court, Bombay, under the
Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Practices Act, 1971. KEU sought an order
from the Industrial Court directing KTL to pay the
arrears of wages due to the workmen and staff. The
Industrial Court adjudged non-payment of wages as an
unfair practice and directed KTL by its order dated
February 28,1985, to pay, within three weeks of the date
of the order, the arrears of wages for the months of
December 1984 and January 1985. The Court further
ordered that KTL should continue to pay future wages
regularly. Despite the order, KTL did not pay either the
arrears or the regular wages. Even statutory dues such
as Provident Fund were not deposited with the appropriate authority. By August 1985, the unpaid wages

Vol.18, No.1, January-March 1993

and allowances of the KTL employees were nearly Rs 2

crore. In September 1985, the owners abandoned KTL.
The closure took place violating all provisions of law.
Nearly 800 workers were rendered jobless at one Stroke.
(Joseph, 1989,1991; Mookhcrjcc, 1988).
Faced with closure, KEU approached the Supreme
Court in April 1986 for a solution. Meanwhile, it explored other options such as (i) requesting the Government of Maharashtra to declare KTL as a Relief
Undertaking and leave the management of the unit
with the financial institutions or other bodies which
have a stake and start the company under the new set
up or (ii) finding out another management who could
buy and take over KTL. However, the government did
not show willingness to declare KTL as a Relief Undertaking and no private management responded positively to KEU's request to take over the crises-ridden KTL.
At this juncture, a new idea was sparked off in the
minds of some of the KEU leaders: Form a producer's
cooperative of the employees of KTL and run the organization. Before the idea concretized, a series of meetings and discussions were held among the KEU leaders
as well as between the leaders and the rank and file
employees. After thorough deliberations regarding the
pros and cons of workers' takeover of KTL, the General
Body favoured the proposal of running KTL under
worker management. The workers expressed full confidence and trust on the KEU leaders who inspired
confidence and possessed leadership capabilities. The
background of the KEU leaders and the external support they could derive from professional managers,
financial consultants, and technical experts further reinforced the workers' favourable attitude towards the
proposal of takeover.
As a gesture of support for the takeover bid and
expression of confidence upon the KEU leaders, the
workers agreed to pay in the meeting itself a token
amount of Rs 11 towards a fund for the cooperative. The
overwhelming support of the workers gave a boost to
the KEU leaders' morale for proceeding further and
working out details about the takeover and formation
of a workers' cooperative. Accordingly, the KTL Kamdar Audyogik Utpadak~Sahakar Society (KTLSS) was
formed with a paid up capital of Rs 10 lakh. Each
member contributed Rs 2,000 from his own and Rs
10,000 by taking loan from IDBI towards the share
capital of the society. The cooperative was registered in
April 1988.
The Process of Takeover
The evolution of workers' takeover of KTL could be
traced through seven important phases:
17

Phase I : Conceptualization of the action plan by

KEU for revival and turnaround
Phase II : Testing out the workability of the plan
and ensuring adequate support through
informal discussion and meetings with
union leaders, rank and file workers, experts, and well wishers
Phase III : Preparation of the blueprint for turnaround
Phase IV : Identification of the source of finance and
working capital and other infrastructural
requirement
Phase V : Lobbying, dialogue, and persuasion at
different levels of the government,
banks, and financial institutions
Phase VI : Submitting the revival plan to BIFR and,
after its approval, obtaining legal sanction from the Supreme Court for takeover
Phase VII: Recalling earlier employees, resume production, and attain take-off.

Action Plan for Turnaround

Management Structure
Consequent upon the release of the Supreme Court
order (dated September 19, 1988) permitting the
employees to take over KTL, it was imperative for the
new management to ensure compliance with the
provisions of the approved revival scheme. This called
for: (i) reconstitution of the Board of Directors so as to
enable the employees to be represented in the Board, (ii)
constitution of a Management Committee to facilitate
and accelerate the day to day management of the company. As per the Supreme Court order, the shares of
Kamani's (about 91.6%) and others in KTL of the face
value aggregating to Rs 96 lakh were transferred and
allotted to the workers' cooperative (KTLSS) at a
reduced value of Rs 1 per share. KTLSS thus became the
owner of KTL.
The structure of KTLSS was different from KTL. It
was a separately registered body under the Cooperative
Act and had a Managing Committee elected by the
workers through the ballot. Each member was empowered to cast only one vote. Each worker had contributed an equal amount towards the share capital of
the cooperative. Its Managing Committee comprised of
some rank and file workers and the key leaders of KEU.
It reviewed the working of KTL and suggested
guidelines on such issues as marketing, outstanding of

18

recoverables, role of sales officers, procedures adopted

for purchases, and any other matter as it deemed necessary.
As regards the management structure of KTL, the
Board of Directors was reconstituted. The members
included two representatives from the Government of
Maharashtra, one from the Industries Department, and
one from the Cooperative Department. There was one
representative each from IDBI, Bank of India, and BIFR
and two representatives from KTLSSthe Working
President and the President of KEU who were also
elected to the Managing Committee of KTLSS, three
experts, and the Managing Director of the newly
formed KTL as per the recommendations of KEU. The
last four persons were sympathetic to workers and were
associated with the preparation of the revival plan from
the very beginning and extended to KEU considerable
technical advice and help in matters of production and
financial planning. In other words, out of the eleven
members of the Board, six were nominated by the
workers.
The choice of the Managing Director was based on
several considerations: (i) he was a former executive of
one of the units of Kamani Group of industries; (ii) he
had a thorough knowledge about the products and
processes involved in non-ferrous metal trade; (iii) he
was well conversant with the technical intricacies of
non-ferrous metal market; (iv) he had extended considerable help, cooperation, and advice to KEU in preparing the revival scheme from the beginning; (v) he
enjoyed the trust and confidence of the workers and the
leaders of KEU who believed that he was competent
and capable enough to take up the challenge of managing KTL under the workers' regime.
A Management Committee was constituted in KTL
which had the Managing Director as its Chairman and
two representatives of KTLSS and one representative of
Bank of India as its members. In all probability, this
Committee, constituted at the instance of the financial
institutions, was a means to resolve conflicts of interests.
This Committee was entrusted with the responsibility of monitoring and reviewing the progress of
work, ensuring product development, formulating
marketing strategy, ensuring fund flow, and developing personnel systems. The Committee met every
month to take stock of the situation, monitor the working, and ensure achievement of organizational objectives.
Plant Level Committee
A Plant Level Committee (PLC) was constituted which
had the following functionaries: Managing Director

Vikalpa

(Chairman), Works Manager, Plant Manager, Production Manager, Materials Manager, Quality Control
Manager, Personnel Officer, two representatives of
KEU, three workmen representatives from the shopfloor, and one staff representative.
The functions of PLC which met in the first week of
every month, included monitoring day-to-day working
of the plant, supervising the progress of work, and
ensuring achievement of production targets. The scope
of PLC was restricted to the operational and personnel
aspects of the plant; the commercial aspects were kept
outside its purview.
Immediate Tasks after Takeover
After takeover, the Managing Director identified the
following tasks as critical and initiated suitable steps
accordingly:

mobilizing working capital

restoring infrastructural services

organizing repairs and overhauling activities

updating status report regarding assets and

liabilities

initiating commencement of commercial opera

tions

streamlining personnel.

As regards personnel, the Supreme Court restricted

the total number to be re-employed to 600.
In order to build up a team of competent supervisory and administrative staff, it was decided to limit
the re-employment of existing workers to 575 and to
induct them in a phased manner as per operational
requirements. It was decided to recruit the remaining
25 people afresh in the category of senior manager,
engineers, supervisors, and administrative staff.
The personnel recruited by the new management of
KTL increased from 118 in November 1988 to 245 in
March 1989 and to 588 in November 1989. KTL had also
engaged the services of professionals for functional
requirements such as Income-tax, Sales-tax, Excise
Duty, Internal Audit, Company Law, Secretarial matters, and legal advice.
Regarding personnel, four important steps were
taken: (i) Enlargement of the supervisor's role in the
plant, (ii) Induction of a group leader from among the
workmen, (iii) Reduction in the number of peons and
attendants, (iv) Ensuring regularity/punctuality in attendance for officers, staff, and workmen.
Vol.18, No.l, January-March 1993

As a departure from the earlier practice, the supervisors were advised to devote a major part of their time
in product development and quality improvement instead of routine supervision. Further, a set of 20
workmen were chosen to become group leaders who,
in addition to attending to their own machine, helped
in supervision work. The need for routine supervision
was gradually de-emphasized. Contrary to the earlier
practice, the number of peons was reduced from 15 to
five. The peons were assigned the tasks of filing,
despatch, and other routine clerical work. By this step,
KTL was able to rationalize manpower at the lowest
level and improve the morale of the peons.
Marketing and Product Development
Two important areas in which KTL laid special emphasis were the formulation of a marketing strategy
and development of new products. In the meetings of
the Board of Directors, the Chairman emphasized the
urgency of evolving a clear and definite marketing
policy at KTL and also observed that the company's
excessive dependence on sugar tubes was not likely to
fetch sustained profits. He, therefore, felt it was high
time the emphasis was shifted to developing new
products. KTL had identified two products for
development: brass wires in ball pen industry and finning quality copper tubes for air-conditioning and
refrigeration industries.
Training and Orientation
In order to elicit appropriate response from workmen
and motivate them to put in their best, it was felt that
upgrading of workers' technical knowledge and skills
would be necessary. Accordingly, a series of training
programmes for the workers were organized which
were conducted by a professional body. The main objective of training was to make the workmen understand and comprehend the overall framework of
managing the manufacturing organization. The
programme focused on: principles of economic theory
and finance, principles of work method and value engineering, and principles of management.
Role of KEU
In the context of workers' management and ownership,
the role and functions of trade unions assume new
dimensions. The KTL experience suggests that KEU
had undergone a role reversal from a conflict model to
that of cooperation. KEU had also enlarged its role to
encompass the welfare of workers' family and children.
In the new situation, the role ascribed to KEU was that
of a vigilant organization which would put appropriate
checks on undesirable management practices. The col19

lective bargaining role of KEU was underemphasized.

KEU leaders had recognized that in the formative years
after takeover, it should restrict its role to cooperation
and help KTL achieve its stated goals. In compliance
with the approved revival package, KEU had persuaded the workers to agree to the following: (i) wage
freeze for the next three years (ii) deferment of annual
increment for the next two years (iii) cooperation with
management to enforce strict discipline (iv) help curb
absenteeism, overtime, and late attendance (v) ban on
strike/go-slow, etc. Further, KEU also tackled larger
organizational issues such as crew-scheduling, conformity to production norms, quality improvement,
promotion of internal discipline, and overall target
achievement. It advocated the ideology that as workers
acquired the right to share the prosperity of the
enterprise, they had to remain accountable to the organization for their wrong doings. Accordingly, KEU
laid special emphasis on educating the workers about
the adverse effect of absenteeism, restrictive work practices, indiscipline, and improper conduct and behaviour in the workplace on the performance of KTL.
Operational Highlights
Production: KTL manufactured two major products
rods and tubes. The total annual production as well as
gross sales of rods and tubesthe two major products
manufactured by the companyrecorded an increase
in 1990-91 as compared to 1989-90 (Table 1).
Profit: KTL increased its turnover from Rs 10.53 crore
in 1989-90 to Rs 14.30 crore in 1990-91 and the company
made a net profit of Rs 34.00 lakh in the very first year
of operations. The KTL workers received benefits of Rs
1.2 crore and Rs 1.55 crore in the first and second years
respectively.

Learning from the

Turnaround Experience
The KTL experience suggests that its workers' cooperative came into being as a last option in the face of closure
and displacement of labour. The need to survive and
sustain had provided the initial impetus to form a
workers' cooperative. In this respect, the KTL model
resembles the European experience mentioned by
Paton (1989).
The process of turnaround at KTL corresponds to
the democratic mode of decision making. Democratization of the work process has been ensured by developing a suitable participatory structure in the form of
inclusion of representatives of KTLSS, KEU, and the
shopfloor workers in the Board of Directors, Manage-

20

ment Committee, and the Plant Level Committee. By

participating in the Board level deliberations, the
KTLSS representatives got opportunities to make significant contribution to the policy making process of the
company. At every stage of decision making with
regard to commercial, operational, and personnel matters, worker involvement was adequately ensured.
Even the selection of the Managing Director was made
in accordance with the recommendation of KEU and
KTLSS. On all major issues, discussions and negotiations with KEU and KTLSS leaders were accorded utmost priority. Open communication at all levels made
information sharing and consultation possible at KTL.
Even shopfloor workers knew some vital information
about the company which was not possible under the
earlier management. The democratic process also
brought about significant changes in the work habits
and work attitudes of the employees. The employees
became more responsive to the needs of the organization and were determined to achieve a turnaround. The
performance of KTL after the takeover lends credence
to the devotion and commitment of the entire organization.
Some important features at KTL under workers'
management were: conformity to ethical management
practices, introduction of some innovations with
regard to product development, diversification of new
product lines, minimizing supervisor's role, and
making supervisors more creative by involving them
in product development.

Prospects for a Workers' Cooperative

Despite the fact that a few workers' cooperatives have
attained reasonable success in turning around companies, the concept of a workers' cooperative is yet to
take a comprehensive shape. There are many grey areas
and critical factors which require attention such as: (i)
absence of workers' predisposition towards ownership
and share participation (Lieten, 1987), (ii) apathy of the
banks and financial institutions to extend loan services,
(iii) procedural and bureaucratic delays in clearing
workers' proposals, (iv) non-availability of professional
managers ready to serve workers' cooperatives, (v) indifferent and lukewarm response of mainstream trade
union movement to workers' cooperatives (Goswami,
1992, Ramaswamy, 1992), and (vi) absence of public
policy to help such cooperatives in a big way.
In order to facilitate the formation of more workers'
cooperatives and add fillip to such efforts of the
workers, it is imperative that the Government of India
lends adequate support and constitute a National Board

Vikalpa

for Workers' Management (NBWM). The NBWM

should be accorded statutory status under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provision) Act, 1985, or
any other suitable legislation. The government should
ensure adequate finance for running the activities of the
Board through regular budgetary allotment. The
management of NBWM could be vested with a tripartite body comprising of: (i) representatives from the
government (ii) representatives of those trade unions
who are instrumental in the formation of workers'
cooperatives and who have been successful in their
efforts (iii) technical experts in the areas of management, finance, production, marketing, and related
spheres (iv) representatives from banks and financial
institutions (v) professionals and academicians who are
ready to volunteer their services to the Board.
The main task of NBWM should be to extend advice
to the workers of closed units who desire to revive the
enterprise through workers' cooperatives. The NBWM
should carefully study the feasibility of workers'
cooperatives as an alternative for turnaround of sick
enterprises. It should also advise on the availability of
initial working capital and finance for starting the
cooperative. Continuous monitoring and review of the
workers' cooperative formed under its guidance would
also be an important task of the Board. The Board itself
may not offer any financial support but can help the
concerned cooperative to find out the sources of
finance. The constitution of NBWM is at present limited
to the conceptual level. To concretize the idea, detailed
modalities have to be worked out after considerable
debate and discussion.

4. Moderate size (600 employees) of KTL which

facilitated closer interaction between different
work groups which in turn gave rise to a feeling
of togetherness and homogenity.
5. Presence of a single union (KEU) unaffected by
inter-union rivalry and its consequent damages.
6. Strong leadership provided by both KEU leaders
and the Managing Director.
External
1. Continued external support from banks and finan
cial institutions and professionals in the areas of
finance, marketing, production, etc.
2. Consistent sympathy and judicial support from
the Supreme Court of India.
3. Media coverage and publicity which helped
opinion building in favour of workers' takeover
and acted as a morale booster for the workers.
These factors combined together helped KTL succeed in the turnaround. It is hoped that the experiential
learning emerging from the KTL experience would provide a framework for handling other similar situations.

Conclusions
The KTL experience lends credence to the argument
that in the event of increasing sickness and closure of
an enterprise, a viable alternative of restructuring
would be to allow workers to form cooperatives and
provide necessary financial and infrastructure support
to enable them turn around the enterprise. The factors
which contributed to KTL's turnaround are both internal arid external which can be summarized as follows:
Internal

1. Workers' strong urge for survival.

2. Workers' readiness to undergo suffering and
sacrifice.
3. Ownership of capital which infused self-con
fidence in the workers' mind and made them
responsive to the needs of the organization.
Vol.18, No. l, January-March 1993

21

References
Bhowmik, Sharit Kumar (1988a). "Ideology and the Cooperative Movement: Workers Cooperatives in the Tea Industry/' Economic and Political Weekly, Vol XXIII No 51,
December 17, pp 2703-2708.

________ (1988b). "Strangling Workers' Initiative: Fate of

Worker Cooperative in Tripura," Economic and Political
Weekly, Vol XXIII, No 49, December 3, pp 2566-2567.
Dandekar, V M (1987). "Let the Workers Own and Manage,"
Economic and Political Weekly, Vol XXII, No 9, February 28,
ppM-27M-31.

Mookherjce, Surya (1988). "Industrial Sickness and Revival:

A Study of Select Organizations," Decision, Vol 15, Nos
3/4, July/October, pp 213-234.

___________ (1992). "Labour: Towards Self- Reliance," The

Economic Times, Ahmcdabad, March 31.
Paton, Rob, et al. (1989). Reluctant Entrepreneurs. Philadelphia:
Open University Press.
Ramaswamy, E A (1992). "Can Workers be Owners?" Business
India, March 30 - April 12, p 106.
Setalvad, Teesta and Bose, Madhumita (1992). "Let the Worker Take Over," Business India, April 13-26, pp 110-111.

Goswami, Rahul (1992). "Workers' Cooperatives: A New

Management Agenda," Sunday Observer, April 19-25,
p!3.
Joseph, Jerome (1989). Human Resources Regeneration: The KTL
Experience. Ahmedabad: Indian Institute of Management,
Working Paper.

_________(1991). Strategic Industrial Relations Management.

New Delhi: Global Business Press, Unit 12, pp 202-218.

____________ (1992). 'The JMEL Experience A,B,C,D"

in
Pramod Verma (ed.) Emerging Issues in Human Resources
Management. New Delhi: Oxford & IBH, pp 261-288.
Lieten, G K (1987). "Fallacies of Workers' Ownership,"
Economic and Political Weekly, Vol XXII, Nos 36/37, September 5-12, pp 1563-1566.
Mehta, S S (1992). 'The Implications of Exit Policy," Paper
presented at the Seminar on Exit Policy held at the
Gandhi Labour Institute, March 12.

24

Vikalpa