Day 197 - 07 Dec 95 - Page 63
1 turnover which help me while Mr. Davies was Manager or any
2 figures, I can be referred to them.
3
4 We will take the five minutes.
5
6
7 (Short Adjournment)
8
9 MR. RAMPTON: Mr. Coton, we were on page 49. I would like you
10 to look at the paragraph immediately above the section
11 "Managers' Development", Mr. Davis writes: "You must look
12 at this area seriously", that is PRs, "because it is the
13 key to your future success. Problems with QSC are often
14 directly related to the quality of your people, Managers
15 and crew, which in turn can be traced back to turnover and
16 retention," that is to say, you need a lower turnover but
17 more experienced people. That is what it means, is it
18 not?
19 A. That is the case, yes.
20
21 Q. That means it costs more?
22 A. It does.
23
24 Q. It does not look, does it, from what we have seen so far,
25 Mr. Coton, that this Supervisor, Mr. Davis, was a
26 fanatical cost-cutter, does it?
27 A. I think far from it. It is evident from all evidence
28 that I have read and seen that -- I think in one statement
29 it says you lead the region, possibly the country in this
30 area. We were known for performing high figures. We were
31 known for producing good PACs. We were held up as an
32 example to the rest of the country on how to operate
33 profitable stores. It is right the way through. That was
34 the case. Profit was the motivation behind what we did.
35
36 Q. Forgive me, but what he is telling you here is that the
37 way to profit is through increased sales, and the way to
38 increased sales is an efficient, well-run restaurant that
39 gives a good service to the customer?
40 A. I agree, but we get the contradiction in terms, is it
41 not, where for us to do the job as we should be doing it
42 it would actually cost the Company more. If we go back to
43 the question of high labour figures, why is it that when
44 we had a visit or we did a full field labour costs were so
45 high, food costs were so high? If that was the figure
46 that we should be running at all the time, that should be
47 standard, not 2 or 3 per cent below that all the time. It
48 must have been obvious to everybody above us that if they
49 are coming down and visiting us and we are running at 17,
50 18 per cent and then the next two or three days we are
51 running at 12, 13 per cent, there is a big difference.
52
53 Q. You got a ticking off for that, did you not?
54 A. I have never been ticked off officially or been told
55 off for running labour too tight.
56
57 Q. I thought we saw one a little bit earlier, did we not?
58 A. Where was that?
59
60 Q. We can go back.
