Day 170 - 05 Oct 95 - Page 11


     
     1        to work on normal duties?
     2        A.  Yes.
     3
     4   Q.   Yes, she would?
     5        A.  She could -- there are certain parts of the store that
     6        she could work.
     7
     8   Q.   Which parts of the store ---
     9        A.  In the dining area.
    10
    11   Q.   -- which jobs could she be designated for?
    12        A.  In the dining area.
    13
    14   Q.   That is lobby hostess, is it?
    15        A.  Yes -- no, that is just working in the dining area.
    16
    17   Q.   Right.  Can I have some guidance?
    18
    19   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes.
    20
    21   MR. MORRIS:  Do we need to go into all the phone calls, and who
    22        spoke to who?
    23
    24   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  In fact, I was going to volunteer to you,
    25        I do not think that will help me on the general panorama of
    26        this case because probably whether one party or the other
    27        or both behaved in a way which, on reflection, they might
    28        regret is unlikely to help me as to what general work
    29        conditions are like at McDonald's.
    30
    31        What you should ask about is any question which you think
    32        may help on what seems to me to be the main thrust of this
    33        part of the case, whether or not she was on the payroll as
    34        a part-time worker, Melanie O'Riordon was working full-time
    35        at the time.  If she is going to be paid her pay during a
    36        period of only a few weeks when she was off work, you say:
    37        "Well, she should have been paid full-time hours, not just
    38        on the basis of part-time", and that it is penny pinching
    39        just to pay part-time hours if, in fact, she was paid at
    40        all rather than full-time hours.
    41
    42   MR. MORRIS:  Our case will be that she was not paid at all.
    43
    44   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Maybe, but if it turned out that she was, for
    45        instance, you would still have the argument which I have
    46        just put to you.
    47
    48        The other thing is whether the slip was because something
    49        was on the floor or not may strengthen your argument in
    50        that respect, that if she slipped on something on the 
    51        floor, whether or not that was negligent of McDonald's or 
    52        it might have been spilled not long before and they had 
    53        time to clear it up or not, may or may not be important.
    54        I do not see why we should get involved in that either.
    55
    56   MR. MORRIS:  The witness has put her case on that and we will
    57        see when our witness comes.
    58
    59   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes.  You will, no doubt, argue that although
    60        she thinks she saw it, she had no reason to look

Prev Next Index