Day 174 - 17 Oct 95 - Page 17
1 17th October?
2 A. Yes, it is.
3
4 Q. The union is referring the matter to the Labour Court as a
5 dispute -- "concerning the refusal to apply the terms of
6 the first phase of the National Understanding", and asking
7 for a conciliation conference.
8
9 The question is: the National Understanding then was part
10 of the agreement that you made with the union at the end of
11 the -- when the recommendations of the Labour Court to
12 negotiate ---?
13 A. The National -----
14
15 Q. -- and recognise the union?
16 A. Yes. The National Understanding was a national pay
17 agreement that applied to everybody.
18
19 Q. Right. The union was concerned that they should be
20 involved in representing their members to ensure that this
21 National Understanding was implemented at McDonald's; is
22 that correct?
23 A. By way of this correspondence, that is correct, yes.
24
25 Q. Right. Part of the National Understanding is that the
26 unions be involved in negotiations and representing their
27 members; is that correct?
28 A. Yes, that is correct, in the negotiation of the
29 agreement.
30
31 Q. Then on page 13 of those documents on the -----
32
33 MR. JUSTICE BELL: What page is that, and I will number my own.
34 What page is 17th October?
35
36 THE WITNESS: Page 11, my Lord.
37
38 MR. MORRIS: Page 11, I think. (To the witness) You said in
39 your second paragraph, responding to that previous
40 letter: "It is quite correct to say the ITGWU had a
41 discussion with our Company in relation to the National
42 Understanding at our last meeting."
43
44 Then you have said there that you had explained to the
45 union that you had already implemented the National
46 Understanding and, therefore, there was no problem, but
47 obviously the union did not agree.
48
49 So why did you not meet up with the union afterwards, as
50 would be traditional, so that they could represent their
51 members and ensure that the National Understanding that had
52 been agreed was implemented properly?
53 A. I did not consider it necessary, when I had implemented
54 what they wanted implemented.
55
56 Q. But they did not agree that you had implemented what they
57 wanted implement; and they had a right to put that view to
58 you, did they not, to meet with you?
59 A. Sorry, can you point me to where they indicated they
60 did not agree.
