INTRODUCTION:

Locke gives a comprehensive definition of job satisfaction as “a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job experience. Job Satisfaction is a result of employees’ perception of how well their job provides those things which are viewed as important. It is generally recognized in the organizational behaviour felt that job satisfaction is the most important and frequently studied attitude.

There are three important dimensions to job satisfaction. First, job satisfaction is an emotional response to a job situation. As such, it cannot be seen; it can only be inferred. Second, job satisfaction is often determined by how well outcomes meet or exceed expectations. For example, if organizational participants feel that they are working much harder than others in the department but are receiving fewer rewards, they will probably have a negative attitude toward the work, the boss, and / or co-workers. They will be dissatisfied. On the other hand, if they feel they are being treated very well and are being paid equitably, they are likely to have a positive attitude toward the job. They will be job-satisfied. Third, job satisfaction represents several related attitudes. Smith, Kendall, and Hulin have suggested that there are five job dimensions that represent the most important characteristics of a job about which people have affective responses. There are

1. The work itself-the extent to which the job provides the individual with interesting tasks, opportunities for learning, and the chance to accept responsibility.

2. Pay – the amount of financial remuneration that is received and the degree to which this is viewed as equitable vis-à-vis others in the organization.

3. Promotion opportunities – the chances for advancement in the hierarchy.

4. Supervision – the abilities of the superior to provide technical assistance and behavioural support.

5. Co-workers – the degree to which fellow workers are technically proficient and socially supportive.

RESEARCH DESIGN:

The present study is descriptive and analytical in Nature.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM:

Organization is a social unit wherein people work together for a common goal. Organization has its own set of goals such as task performance, goal achievement, change, growth and development. It can be achieved only through association with each other.

Job satisfaction is a highly subjective feeling of the benefits that one derives from the job. Clearly the variable is critically linked to perception. If the job satisfaction is to be improved, the worker’s perception, job characteristics, supervision and the organization as a whole must be positive.

Under this study, RLS Alloys (P) Ltd becomes the centre of discussions, for the study analysis in relation to job-satisfaction among the employees of the said centre located in Trichy.

SAMPLE:

Total number of employees in the above industrial unit is 240. Out of which 60 employees are interviewed that is 25% of total employees. It is selected at simple random method.

DATA COLLECTION:

Primary data collected from 60 respondents with pre tested Questionnaire. Discussion and interaction were held with the employees and staff members to collect other relevant information for this study. To get respondents opinion, a four point scale with response categories. 1. Very good 2. Good 3. Satisfied 4. Dissatisfied were suffixed to all questions on Job Satisfaction.

ANALYSIS:

Collected data were analysed and tabulated on various titles such as facilities available, pay & perks, welfare measures, participation etc. Based on the discussions and analysis the following findings are made.

Ÿ 88.33 percentage of respondents had the work experience of below 5 years.

Ÿ 73.33 percentage of respondents were satisfied with the working hours in the organization.

Ÿ 68.33 percentage of respondents were satisfied with the working conditions in the organization.

Ÿ 71.67 percentage of respondents were satisfied with the usage of the safety equipments of the organization and they were given shoes, gloves, eye glass and safe uniforms. Around 80 percentage of respondents felt that they were useful to them.

Ÿ All the respondents revealed that they need more number of safety equipments like quality shoes, uniforms and helmets.

Ÿ 66.7 percentage of respondents were satisfied towards the welfare measures of the organization.

Ÿ 93.34 percentage of respondents were satisfied with transport facilities of the organization.

Ÿ 61.67 percentage of respondents were satisfied with drinking water facilities in the organization.

Ÿ 50.67 percentage of respondents were satisfied with the canteen facilities in the organization.

Ÿ 66.67 percentage of respondents were satisfied about the parking facilities in the organization.

Ÿ 50 percentage of respondents who were satisfied and dissatisfied about the toilet facilities in the organization were almost equal in number.

Ÿ 71.67 percentage of respondents were dissatisfied about the other facilities in the organization

Ÿ 58.33 percentage of respondents felt good about the salary / compensation provided to them in the organization.

Ÿ 55 percentage of respondents were dissatisfied about the reward system practised in the organization.

Ÿ 50 percentage of respondents were satisfied about the fringe benefits provided to them in the organization.

Ÿ 80 percentage of respondents felt that they were partially aware of policies of the organization.

Ÿ 50 percentage of respondents were satisfied that the salary and the other benefits provided to them met their daily requirements.

Ÿ 53.33 percentage of respondents were satisfied about the policies followed towards promotion in the organization.

Ÿ 76.67 percentage of respondents were satisfied about the policies related to training in the organization.

Ÿ 65 percentage of respondents were satisfied about the current grievance redressal procedure in the organization

Ÿ 80 percentage of respondents were satisfied with their jobs

Ÿ 63.33 percentage of respondents were revealed that encouraged by the higher officials to give suggestions for the development of their departments.

Ÿ 91.67 percentage of respondents felt that they were happy to continue the present jobs in the organization.

Ÿ 83.33 percentage of respondents felt that the work load was moderate

Ÿ 79.67 percentage of respondents were satisfied with the administration of the departments.

Ÿ 55 percentage of respondents had good relationship with their co-workers in the organization

Ÿ 81.67 percentage of respondents were satisfied with the relationship with their immediate superiors in the organization

Ÿ 75 percentage of respondents were satisfied with their relationship with the top level management in the organization.

CONCLUSION:

Most of the findings are at more than 60 % and some of them are at 90%. Hence, it is concluded that satisfaction level of the employees in the above industrial unit is very good.

REFERENCES:

1. Do- (1992) Organizational Behaviour, V. edition, McGraw- Hill international edition, New York.

2. Jerald Greenberg & Robert A. Baron, Behaviour in Organizations – Understanding and Managing the Human Side of Work, Prentice – hall of India Private Limited, New Delhi, 2003

3. Stephen P. Robbins, Organizational Behaviour – Concepts, Controversies and Applications, Prentice – Hall of India Pvt. Ltd, New Delh, 1993.

4. Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge, Organizational Behaviour, PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi – 2008.

5. James Lawrence R; Jones, Allan P. ‘Perceived Job characteristics and job satisfaction: An examination of Reciprocal causation’, Personnel Psychology, Vol.33, No.1 1980, pp.97-135

6. Nelson, Adrian; Cooper, Cary L; Jackson, Paul R. “Uncertainty amidst change; the impact of privatization on employee job satisfaction and wellbeing’, Journal of occupational and organizational Psychology, Vol.68, No. 1, March,1995, pp. 57-71.

7. Orpen, Christopher, “The effects of need for achievement and need for independence on the relationship between perceived job attributes and managerial satisfaction and performance’ Industrial Journal of Psychology, Vol.20, No.2, April, 1985, pp. 207-219.

Received on 12.01.2018 Modified on 24.02.2018

Asian Journal of Management. 2018; 9(3):1043-1045.

DOI: 10.5958/2321-5763.2018.00163.4