Statement: A large number of employees have gone on mass casual leave to protest the company’s new recruitment policy.\nCourses of Action:\nI. Immediately withdraw the recruitment policy.\nII. Immediately suspend all such employees from service.

Introduction / Context:
Industrial relations require balanced action that protects business continuity while respecting legitimate worker concerns. The statement reports a protest via mass casual leave. We evaluate whether knee-jerk policy withdrawal (I) or mass suspension (II) is justified as an immediate course of action.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• The policy’s merits/demerits are not yet established on record.
• No mention of illegality or violence—only a protest.
• Casual leave is being used en masse, possibly violating leave rules.

Concept / Approach:
Proportionality and due process are key. Immediate reversal (I) ignores analysis and sets a harmful precedent (policy-making by pressure). Blanket suspension (II) escalates conflict, invites litigation, and may cripple operations.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Maintain essential services via contingency staffing; record attendance and leave misuse, if any.2) Initiate dialogue with employee representatives; set up a joint committee to review policy concerns on timeline.3) Conduct a rapid impact, legal, and market benchmarking review of the recruitment policy; issue an official clarificatory note if required.4) Apply discipline on proven misconduct individually (not mass punishment), following show-cause and inquiry procedures.

Verification / Alternative check:
Either I or II, taken immediately, risks reputational and operational fallout. A structured process better aligns with corporate governance and labour law.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only I: capitulation without review undermines management credibility. Only II: overbroad punishment violates due process. Either/Both: both are extreme; neither is a sound first move.

Common Pitfalls:
Reacting punitively or capitulating instantly; ignoring statutory conciliation mechanisms.

Final Answer:
Neither I nor II follows.