Day 182 - 02 Nov 95 - Page 42
1 moment I am not inclined to allow any further questions to
2 be asked in chief of the French witnesses unless the
3 appropriate five day notice has been given. They can be
4 called as Civil Evidence Act witnesses; they can be called
5 into the witness box, if you want to take advantage of
6 that, so that you can cross-examine. But I can see all
7 sorts of problems in getting any instructions on further
8 matters, unless the appropriate notice which I spoke of in
9 my ruling is abided by.
10
11 I take a very different attitude to the French witnesses --
12 whom, as I see it, there is absolutely no need for the
13 Defendants to call into the witness box at all, bearing in
14 mind the provisions of the Civil Evidence Act -- to the
15 attitude I take to Norway, when I know that virtually every
16 educated Norwegian speaks excellent English.
17
18 MR. RAMPTON: Yes. There is no problem about my getting
19 instructions.
20
21 MR. JUSTICE BELL: You realise what I am doing. I am letting
22 people the way I think about French witnesses in advance,
23 so that it can be raised in good time. At the moment, I am
24 not contemplating at all any further evidence-in-chief from
25 the French witnesses beyond acceptance of their statements,
26 unless the notice which I spoke of in my ruling is abided
27 by. I do not think Norway is an intractable problem, but
28 I think France may be. Yes.
29
30 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Can you come forward again, Mr. Jenssen? None
31 of that concerns you.
32
33 Cross-examined by MR. RAMPTON Q.C.
34
35 MR. RAMPTON: Mr. Jenssen, you -- I think I am right, you tell
36 me if I am wrong -- have had a number of discussions with
37 management of McDonald's Norge S/A about this union
38 agreement and its consequences; is that right?
39 A. Yes.
40
41 Q. Have you discussed them in particular with -- I have not
42 got his second name; his first name in English would be
43 Richard.
44 A. Richard Rietsson (?).
45
46 Q. Thank you. Have those discussions been friendly, peaceful
47 and productive?
48 A. I would say they have been friendly and peaceful and
49 sometimes productive.
50
51 Q. Am I right that the main difference between the system of
52 payment which McDonald's favours and the system of payment
53 which the agreement obliges McDonald's to adopt is this,
54 that McDonald's system is, largely speaking,
55 performance-related, on the one hand, but that the union
56 system is related to length of service?
57 A. Well, that is not the main difference. There is a
58 difference. McDonald's, as long as there is no agreement,
59 can pay their employees anything they like, and they have
60 had schemes for performance-related pay which have been in
