ANLAYSIS OF SURVEY DATA

The results of the analysis of the survey data are presented in the following passages.

TABLE: 1
Age Wise of the Respondents
S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

below 25 years

18

12.0

25-35 years

43

28.7

35-45 years

63

42.0

45-55 years

26

17.3

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out of 150 respondents 18(12.0%) are belong to the age group of below 25
years,43(28.7%) come under the age group of 25-35 years,63(42.0%)are age group of
35-45years and 26(17.3%)fall under the age group of 45-55years. Figure 1 shows this
event.

FIGURE: 1.AGE

TABLE: 2

Educational Qualification Wise of the Respondents

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

School level

62

41.3

ITI

31

20.7

Diploma

34

22.7

Graduate

13

8.7

Others

10

6.7

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION: Out of 150 respondents 62 (41.3%) are school level,

31(20.7%) are ITI, 34(22.7) are Diploma holders, 13(8.7%) are graduate, 10(6.7%) are
others .Figure 2 shows this event.

FIGURE: 2 Educational Qualifications

TABLE: 3
Income Wise of the Respondents

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

lessthanRs5000

1.3

Rs5000-10000

31

20.7

More than Rs10000

117

78.0

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out of 150 respondents, 2(1.3%) have less than 5000,31(20.7%) respondents, are
earning in the range of Rs5000-10000,117(78.0%) have under the range of
Morethan10000. Figure 3 shows this event.

FIGURE: 3 INCOME

TABLE: 4

Marital status Wise of the Respondents

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Married

129

86.0

Unmarried

21

14.0

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out of 150 respondents, 129(86.0%) are married, and the remaining 21(14.0%) are
Unmarried. Figure 4 shows this event.

FIGURE: 4 MARITAL STATUS

TABLE: 5

Years of work experience

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

below 1 year

12

8.0

1-5 years

15

10.0

5-10 years

16

10.7

Above 10 years

107

71.3

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out of 150 respondents, 12(8.0%) have experience below 1 year,15(10.0%) have
1-5years,16(10.7%)have5-10years,Another 107(71.3%) have above 10 years experience.
Figure 5 shows this event

FIGURE: 5

TABLE: 6

Table shows the opinion of respondents towards the person safety measures of
the company.

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

67

44.7

Agree

71

47.3

Neutral

3.3

Disagree

4.7

Strongly Disagree

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION: Out of 150 respondents, 71(47.3%) have agreed that,

67(44.7%) have strongly agreed, 7(4.7%) are disagreed,5(3.3%) respondents are neutral,0
are strongly disagreed to this factor.
Figure 6 shows this event

FIGURE: 6

TABLE: 7
Table shows the opinion of respondents towards the person working conditions of
the respondents

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

43

28.7

Agree

76

50.7

Neutral

29

19.3

Disagree

0.7

Strongly Disagree

0.7

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION: Out of 150 respondents 76(50.7%) have agree, 43(28.7%)

have strongly agree, 29(19.3%) have neutral, 1(0.7%)have disagree,1(0.7%) have
strongly disagree. Figure 7 shows this event.

FIGURE: 7

TABLE: 8

Table shows the opinion of respondents towards the person workplace is

overcrowded of the respondents

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

49

32.7

Agree

61

40.7

Neutral

28

18.7

Disagree

5.3

Strongly Disagree

2.7

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out of 150 respondents, 61(40.7%) have agreed that, they were given space to express
their views 49(32.7%) have strongly agreed 28(18.7%) are neutral,8(5.3%) respondents
are disagreed, 4(2.7%) strongly disagreed to this factor. Figure 8 show this event.

FIGURE: 8

TABLE: 9

Table shows the opinion of respondents towards the person working

Environment of the respondents

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

33

22.0

Agree

59

39.3

Neutral

40

26.7

Disagree

16

10.7

Strongly Disagree

1.3

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION: out of 150 respondents 59(39.3%) have agreed that they

were given space to express their views 40(26.7%) Neutral, 33(22.0%) have strongly
agree that 16(10.7%) disagree, 2(1.3%) are strongly disagree to this factor. Figure 9
show this event.

FIGURE:9

TABLE: 10
Table shows the opinion employees are free from occupational accidents in the
work place of the respondents

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

42

28.0

Agree

69

46.0

Neutral

35

23.3

Disagree

1.3

Strongly Disagree

1.3

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out of respondents 69(46.0%) are agreed, 42(28.0%) strongly agree, 35(23.3%)
neutral,2(1.3%) disagree,2(1.3%) strongly disagreed. Figure 10 shows this event.

FIGURE: 10

TABLE: 11

Table shows the opinion employees are appreciating for innovative ideas of the
respondents

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

27

18.0

Agree

50

33.3

Neutral

69

46.0

Disagree

1.3

Strongly Disagree

1.3

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out of 150 respondents 69(46.0%) have neutral, 50(33.3%) are agreed,27(18.0%) are
agree,2(1.3%) disagree,2(1.3%) disagree. Figure 11 shows in this event.

FIGURE: 10

TABLE: 12

Table showing employees relationship with co workers is good of the

respondents

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

48

32.0

Agree

55

36.7

Neutral

47

31.3

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION: out of 150 respodents, 55(36.7%) have agree,48

(32.0%)strongly agree,47 (31.3%) neutral,0(0%) disagree,0(0)strongly
disagree. Figure 12 shows this event.

FIGURE :12

TABLE: 13

Table showing employees encouraged to give suggestions for best practice of the
respondents
S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

32

21.3

Agree

49

32.7

Neutral

64

42.7

Disagree

2.0

Strongly Disagree

1.3

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out of 150 respondents 64(42.7%) have neutral, 49(32.7%) have agree,
32(21.3%) strongly agree,3(2.0%) disagree,2(1.3%) strongly disagree. Figure
13 show this event.

FIGURE: 13

TABLE: 14

Table showing employees are given proper drinking facilities of the respondents

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

45

30.0

Agree

62

41.3

Neutral

42

28.0

Disagree

0.7

Strongly Disagree

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
agreed,45(30.0%)

have

out

of

strongly

150

respondents

agreed,42(28.0%)

62(41.3%)
neutral,1(0.7%)

disagree,0(0%) are strongly disagree. Figure 14 shows this event.

FIGURE: 14

have
are

TABLE: 15

Table showing employees are given First aid facilities of the respondents

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

30

20.0

Agree

56

37.3

Neutral

60

40.0

Disagree

2.7

Strongly Disagree

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION: out of respondents 60(40.0%) have neutral,56(37.3%)

have agree,30(20.0%) have strongly agree, 4(2.7%) have disagree,0(0%) are
strongly disagree. Figure 15 shows this event.

FIGURE: 15

TABLE: 16

Table showing opinion of employees saniation facilities good of the in the

factory

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

21

14.0

Agree

54

36.0

Neutral

58

38.7

Disagree

14

9.3

Strongly Disagree

2.0

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out

of

150

respondents,

58(38.7%)

have

neutral,54(36.0%)

have

agreed,21(14.0%) strongly agree, 14(9.3%) disagree,3(2.0%) have strongly

disagree. Figure 16 shows this event.

FIGURE: 16

TABLE: 17

Table showing opinion of respondents towards disposal of waste of the factory

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

18

12.0

Agree

56

37.3

Neutral

55

36.7

Disagree

12

8.0

Strongly Disagree

6.0

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out of respondents 56(37.3%) have agree, 55(36.7%) neutral, 18(12.0%)
strongly agree, 12(8.0%) disagree, 9(6.0%) strongly disagree. Figure 17 shows
this event.

FIGURE: 17

TABLE: 18

Table showing employees are satisfied with work schedule of the respondents

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

25

16.7

Agree

64

42.7

Neutral

54

36.0

Disagree

2.7

Strongly Disagree

2.0

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out

of

150

respondents

64(42.7%)

have

agree,

54(36.0%)

have

neutral,25(16.7%) strongly agree,4(2.7%) disagree,3(2.0%) have strongly

disagree. Figure 18 shows this event.

FIGURE: 18

TABLE: 19

Table showing employees counseling facilities

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

16

10.7

Agree

52

34.7

Neutral

66

44.0

Disagree

6.0

Strongly Disagree

4.7

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:

Out

of

150

respondents

66(44.0%)

have

neutral,52(34.7%) have agree,16(10.7%) have strongly agree,9(6.0%) have

disagree,7(4.7%) strongly disagree. Figure 19 show this event

FIGURE 19

TABLE: 20

Table showing employees Relationship with superior

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

14

9.3

Agree

49

32.7

Neutral

73

48.7

Disagree

13

8.7

Strongly Disagree

0.7

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION: Out of respondents 73(48.7%) have neutral, 49(32.7%)

have agree, 14(9.3%) have strongly agree,13(8.7%) have disagree,1(0.7%) have
strongly disagree. Figure 20 shows this event.

FIGURE: 20

TABLE: 21

Table showing employees Welfare facilities

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

13

8.7

Agree

32

21.3

Neutral

98

65.3

Disagree

4.7

Strongly Disagree

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out of respondents 98(65.3%) have neutral, 32(21.3%) have agree, 13(8.7%)
have strongly agree, 7(4.7%) have disagree, 0(0%) have disagree. Figure 21
shows this event.

FIGURE: 21

TABLE: 22

Table showing job stress minimized of the respondents

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

10

6.7

Agree

55

36.7

Neutral

77

51.3

Disagree

4.0

Strongly Disagree

1.3

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out of respondents 77(51.3%) have neutral, 55(36.7%) have agree, 10(6.7%)
have strongly agree, 6(4.0%) have disagree, 2(1.3%) have strongly disagree.
Figure 22 shows this event.

FIGURE: 22

TABLE: 23

Table showing job secured of the respondents

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

18

12.0

Agree

45

30.0

Neutral

84

56.0

Disagree

0.7

Strongly Disagree

1.3

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out

of

150

respondents,

84(56.0%)

have

neutral,45(30.0%)

have

agreed,18(12.0%) have strongly agree, 2(1.3%) have strongly disagree,1(0.7%)

have disagree. Figure 23 shows this event.

FIGURE: 23

TABLE: 24

Table showing chances to update their knowledge

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

18

12.0

Agree

50

33.3

Neutral

75

50.0

Disagree

4.0

Strongly Disagree

0.7

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out of 150 respondents 75(50.0%) have neutral, 50(33.3%) have agree,
18(12.0%) have strongly agree, 6(4.0%) have disagree 1(0.7%) have strongly
disagree. Figure 24 shows this event.

FIGURE: 24

TABLE: 25
Table showing given free dom in executing work of the respondents

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

21

14.0

Agree

43

28.7

Neutral

84

56.0

Disagree

1.3

Strongly Disagree

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out of 150 respondents 84(56.0%) have neutral, 43(28.7%) have agree,
21(14.0%) have strongly agree, disagree 2(1.3%) have disagree 0(0%) are
strongly disagree. Figure 25 shows this event.

FIGURE :25

TABLE: 26

Table showing the employees grievance of the respondents

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

23

15.3

Agree

46

30.7

Neutral

63

42.0

Disagree

11

7.3

Strongly Disagree

4.7

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
out of 150 respondents 63(42.0%) have neutral, 46(30.7%) have agree,
23(15.3%) have strongly agree, 11(7.3%) have disagree,7(4.7%) have strongly
disagree. Figure 26 shows this event.

FIGURE: 26

TABLE: 27

Table showing opportunity to develop new skills of the employees

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

23

15.3

Agree

46

30.7

Neutral

63

42.0

Disagree

11

7.3

Strongly Disagree

4.7

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out of respondents 63(42.0%) have neutral 46(30.7%) 23(15.3%) have
strongly agree 11(7.3%) disagree 7(4.7%) have strongly disagree. Figure 27
shows this event.

Figure: 27

TABLE: 28
Table showing employees are recognized for their achievements of the respondents

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

13

8.7

Agree

49

32.7

Neutral

81

54.0

Disagree

3.3

Strongly Disagree

1.3

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out

of

150

respondents

81(54.0%)

have

neutral,

49(32.7%)

have

agree,13(8.7%) have strongly agree,5(3.3%) have disagree, 2(1.3%) have

strongly disagree. Figure 28 shows this event.

FIGURE: 28

TABLE: 29

Table showing employees can finish work time

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

14

9.3

Agree

58

38.7

Neutral

74

49.3

Disagree

2.0

Strongly Disagree

0.7

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out of 150 respondents 74(49.3%) have neutral, 58(38.7%) have agree,
14(9.3%) have strongly agree 3(2.0%) have disagree,1(0.7%) have strongly
disagree. Figure 29 shows this event.

FIGURE: 29

TABLE: 30

Table showing feed back given by the superior

S.No

Particulars

Frequency

Percent

Strongly agree

10

6.7

Agree

32

21.3

Neutral

94

62.7

Disagree

12

8.0

Strongly Disagree

1.3

Total

150

100.0

Source: Primary data

INTERPRETATION:
Out of 150 respondents 94(62.7%) neutral, 32(21.3%) have agree,12(8.0%)
have disagree,10(6.7%) have strongly agree, 2(1.3%) have strongly disagree.
Figure 30 shows this event.

FIGURE: 30

Rank the factors of influencing the quality of work life among employees?

TABLE: 31

Work load

S.NO

PARTICULARS

FREQUENCY

PERCENT

10th Rank

15

10.0

9th Rank

2.7

8th Rank

2.0

7th Rank

2.7

6th Rank

4.7

5th Rank

2.7

4th Rank

18

12.0

3rd Rank

21

14.0

2 nd Rank

16

10.7

10

1st Rank

58

38.7

Total

150

100.0

Interpretation: Out of 150 respondents 58(38.7%) have 1st rank ,21(14.0%) 3rd
rank,18(12.0%) 4th rank,16(10.7%) 2nd rank,15(10.0%) have 10th rank,7(4.7%) 6th rank
4(2.7%) have 5th rank,4(2.7%) 7th rank,4(2.7%) 9th rank,3(2.0%) 8th rank. Figure 31
shows this event.

FIGURE: 31

TABLE: 32
Compensation benefits
S.NO

PARTICULARS

FREQUENCY

PERCENT

10th Rank

6.0

9th Rank

11

7.3

8th Rank

4.7

7th Rank

14

9.3

6th Rank

27

18.0

5th Rank

13

8.7

4th Rank

20

13.3

3rd Rank

16

10.7

2 nd Rank

25

16.7

10

1st Rank

5.3

Total

150

100.0

Intrepretation : out of 150 respondents,27(18.0%) have 6th rank,25(16.7%) 2nd

rank,20(13.3%) 4th rank,16(10.7%) 3rd rank,14(9.3%) 7th rank,13(8.7)5th rank,11(7.3%)
9th rank,9(6.0%) 10th rank 8(5.3%) 1st rank 7(4.7%) 8th rank. Figure 32 shows this
event.

FIGURE : 32

TABLE: 33
Working Environment
S.NO

PARTICULARS

FREQUENCY

PERCENT

10th Rank

6.0

9th Rank

2.7

8th Rank

13

8.7

7th Rank

12

8.0

6th Rank

36

24.0

5th Rank

13

8.7

4th Rank

20

13.3

3rd Rank

25

16.7

2 nd Rank

2.0

10

1st Rank

15

10.0

Total

150

100.0

Interpretation : out of 150 respodents,36(24.0%) 6th rank,25(16.7%) 3rd

rank,20(13.3%) 4th rank,
15(10.0%) 1st rank13(8.7%) 5th rank,13(8.7%) 8th rank12(8.0%)7th rank,9(6.0%) 10th
rank4(2.7) 9th rank,3(2.0%) 2nd rank. Figure 33 shows this event.

FIGURE: 33

TABLE: 34
Relationship with colleagues
S.NO

PARTICULARS

FREQUENCY

PERCENT

10th Rank

22

14.7

9th Rank

15

10.0

8th Rank

16

10.7

7th Rank

6.0

6th Rank

21

14.0

5th Rank

14

9.3

4th Rank

18

12.0

3rd Rank

14

9.3

2 nd Rank

4.7

10

1st Rank

14

9.3

Total

150

100.0

Intrepretation:
Out of 150 respondents,22(14.7%) have 10th rank,21(14.0%) 6th rank,
16(10.7%) 8th rank,15(10.0%) 9th rank,14(9.3%) 5th rank,14(9.3%) 3rd rank,14(9.3%)
1st rank,9(6.0%)7th rank,7(4.7) 2nd rank. Figure 34 shows this event.

FIGURE: 34

TABLE: 35

Career Growth

S.NO

PARTICULARS

FREQUENCY

PERCENT

10th Rank

24

16.0

9th Rank

20

13.3

8th Rank

14

9.3

7th Rank

18

12.0

6th Rank

18

12.0

5th Rank

13

8.7

4th Rank

4.0

3rd Rank

12

8.0

2 nd Rank

11

7.3

10

1st Rank

14

9.3

Total

150

100.0

Interpretation: out of 150 respondents,24(16.0%) have 10th rank,20(13.3%) 9th

rank,18(12.0%) 7th rank,18(12.0%)6th rank,14(9.3%) 9th rank14(9.3%) 1st
rank,13(8.7%)12(8.0%)3rd rank11(7.3%)2nd rank, 6(4.0%)4th rank. Figure 35 shows
this event

FIGURE: 35

TABLE: 36
Training Programmes
S.NO

PARTICULARS

FREQUENCY

PERCENT

10th Rank

17

11.3

9th Rank

16

10.7

8th Rank

23

15.3

7th Rank

22

14.7

6th Rank

17

11.3

5th Rank

13

8.7

4th Rank

11

7.3

3rd Rank

14

9.3

2 nd Rank

6.0

10

1st Rank

5.3

Total

150

100.0

Intrepretation: out of 150 respondents 23(15.3%) have8th rank,22(14.7%) 7th

rank17(11.3%)10th rank,17(11.3%) 6th rank,16(10.7%) 9th rank14(9.3%)3rd
rank,13(8.7%)5th rank,11(7.3%)4th rank,9(6.0%) 2nd rank,8(5.3%) 1st rank. Figure 36
shows this event

FIGURE: 36

TABLE: 37
Job Security

S.NO

PARTICULARS

FREQUENCY

PERCENT

10th Rank

21

14.0

9th Rank

19

12.7

8th Rank

17

11.3

7th Rank

15

10.0

6th Rank

26

17.3

5th Rank

11

7.3

4th Rank

11

7.3

3rd Rank

12

8.0

2 nd Rank

10

6.7

10

1st Rank

5.3

Total

150

100.0

Interpretation : Out of 150 respondents,26(17.3%) have 6th rank,21(14.0%) 10th

rank.19(12.7%)9th rank,17(11.3%) 8th rank,15(10.0)7th rank,12(8.0%) 3rd
rank,11(7.3%)5th rank,11(7.3%) 4th rank,10(6.7%)2nd rank,8(5.3%) 1st rank. . Figure 37
shows this event

FIGURE: 37

TABLE: 38
Relationship with superior

S.NO

PARTICULARS

FREQUENCY

PERCENT

10th Rank

15

10.0

9th Rank

6.0

8th Rank

6.0

7th Rank

15

10.0

6th Rank

30

20.0

5th Rank

20

13.3

4th Rank

17

11.3

3rd Rank

15

10.0

2 nd Rank

5.3

10

1st Rank

12

8.0

Total

150

100.0

Intrepretation: Out of 150 respondents,30(20.0%) have 6th rank,20(13.3%) 5th

rank,17(11.3%) 4th rank,15(10.0%)10th rank,15(10.0%) 7th rank,15(10.0%) 3rd
rank,12(8.0%) 1st rank 9,(6.0%)9th rank,9(6.0%)8th rank. Figure 38 shows this
event

FIGURE: 38

TABLE: 39

Grievance Handling Procedure

S.NO

PARTICULARS

FREQUENCY

PERCENT

10th Rank

6.0

9th Rank

5.3

8th Rank

6.0

7th Rank

10

6.7

6th Rank

32

21.3

5th Rank

23

15.3

4th Rank

21

14.0

3rd Rank

15

10.0

2 nd Rank

11

7.3

10

1st Rank

12

8.0

Total

150

100.0

Interpretation: out of 150 respondents,32(21.3%) 6th rank,23(15.3%) 5th

rank,21(14.0%)4th rank,15(10.0%)3rd rank,12(8.0%)1st rank,11(7.3%) 2nd
rank,10(6.7%)7th rank9(6.0%)10th rank,9(6.0%) 8th rank,8(5.3%)9th rank. Figure 39
shows this event

FIGURE: 39

TABLE: 40
Respect at Work Place

S.NO

PARTICULARS

FREQUENCY

PERCENT

10th Rank

4.7

9th Rank

3.3

8th Rank

5.3

7th Rank

3.3

6th Rank

22

14.7

5th Rank

6.0

4th Rank

16

10.7

3rd Rank

31

20.7

2 nd Rank

23

15.3

10

1st Rank

24

16.0

Total

150

100.0

Intrepretation: Out of 150 respondents,31(20.7%) 3rd rank,24(16.0%) 1st

rank,23(15.3%)2nd rank22(14.7%)6th rank,16(10.7%)4th rank,9(6.0)5th rank,8(5.3%) 8th
rank,7(4.7%)10th rank,5(3.3%)9th rank,9(3.3%) 7th rank. Figure 40 shows this event

FIGURE: 40

FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

Out of 150 respondents, 63(42.0%) belong to the are age group of 35-45years.
62 (41.3%) are school level employees,
117(78.0%) have under the range of Morethan10000.
129(86.0%) are married,

107(71.3%) have above 10 years experience.

71(47.3%) have opinion of employees given safety measures.

76(50.7%) have opinion working conditions of the employees.

61(40.7%) have opinion overcrowded of the workplace of employees.

59(39.3%) have opinion work environment of the employees.

69(46.0%) have opinion of employees are free from occupational accidents from
workplace.

69(46.0%) opinion of employees are appreciating for innovative ideas.

55(36.7%) opinion of relationship with coworker of the employees.

64(42.7%) opinion of employees encouraged to give suggestions for best practice of

the respondents.

62(41.3%) opinion of employees are given proper drinking facilities of the

respondents

60(40.0%) opinion of employees are given First aid facilities of the respondents.
58(38.7%) opinion of employees saniation facilities good of the in the factory.
56(37.3%) opinion of respondents towards disposal of waste of the factory.
64(42.7%) opinion employees are satisfied with work schedule of the respondents.
66(44.0%) opinion of employees counseling facilities.
73(48.7%) opinion of employees Relationship with superior.
98(65.3%) opinion of employees Welfare facilities.
77(51.3%)opinion of employees job stress minimized.
84(56.0%) Opinion of job secured of the respondents.
75(50.0%) opinion of employees chances to update their knowledge.
84(56.0%) opinion of given free dom in executing work of the respondents.
63(42.0%) opinion of employees grievance.
63(42.0%) opportunity to develop new skills of the employees.

81(54.0%) employees are recognized for their achievements.

74(49.3%) opinion of employees can finish work time.
94(62.7%) feed back given by the superior.
58(38.7%) employees ranked workload
27(18.0%) employees ranked compensation benefits.
36(24.0%)employees ranked work environment.
22(14.7%) employees ranked Relationship with colleagues.
24(16.0%) employees ranked career growth.
23(15.3%) employees ranked training programme.
26(17.3%) employees ranked job security.

30(20.0%) employees ranked relationship with superior.

32(21.3%) employees rank grievance handling procedure.
31(20.7%) employees ranked respect at work place.

SUGGESTIONS

To improve the Quality of Work Life of the employees in hi tech arai Ltd., Quality of
Work Life and, employees welfare facilities are found significantly and negatively
correlated. So reducing the levels of stress is one of the best ways to enhance QWL.
Hence it is suggested that, on the basis of the outcome of the study, good facilities

have arranged may be adopted in hi tech industries to maintain clean and work
environment at reasonable and acceptable levels.