Day 203 - 12 Jan 96 - Page 61


     
     1        A.  I do not understand your point.
     2
     3   Q.   It is not an accurate document, is it?
     4        A.  It is an accurate document, in that it records what was
     5        typed by the people who typed it at the time and what was
     6        about to take place.
     7
     8   MS. STEEL:  You said that the first performance review would
     9        have been on their file if you had sent it off.  Do you
    10        know whether or not you did send it off?
    11        A.  I cannot remember, but I cannot see any reason why I
    12        would not have done.  It is possible that I did not send it
    13        off, I have to be honest.
    14
    15   Q.   That would have been irresponsible, would it not?
    16        A.  It would have been a bit sloppy, yes.
    17
    18   Q.   The fact is, you did not carry out either of these
    19        performance reviews, did you?
    20        A.  I believe I carried out the first.  I have already told
    21        you three times now that I did not carry out the second.
    22        I believe I carried out the first.  In my performance
    23        review, John Atherton -- I mean, I cannot actually remember
    24        administering many of my Managers reviews at all, you
    25        know.  I thought, can I remember giving Ray this review; I
    26        thought, could I remember giving Tara reviews, or
    27        Mike Buckley or other Managers their reviews; and I could
    28        not.  But I have no reason to suspect that I did not.
    29        Just, the trouble is that my memory is, unfortunately,
    30        quite vague about this thing.  It says in my review that my
    31        performance review is on time.
    32
    33   Q.   Performance reviews would normally be carried out while the
    34        Manager was around, would they not?
    35        A.  Yes.  I mean, you must appraise someone's performance
    36        with them.  You would not necessary write it with them, but
    37        you must sit them down and talk them through it.
    38        Absolutely.
    39
    40   Q.   When you say that you recall that you had prepared the
    41        performance review in anticipation of his return in
    42        July 1991, that would not have been fair, would it, because
    43        you would have done it without him being there?
    44        A.  No, no, no, you have got me wrong.  You know, it is
    45        common practice to write the review in advance of the
    46        occasion.  You do not want to be sitting there -- you have
    47        not got all day to write someone's performance review; you
    48        have to get on with business.  You write the performance
    49        review.  If, however, the individual, when you are
    50        conducting the review, disagrees with it, then that is 
    51        fine; you have discussed that, and it may be amended.  So 
    52        whilst, you know, in this instance I may have gone into 
    53        that position armed with this letter and the review, if Ray
    54        had not resigned, you know, what the outcome of that
    55        conversation would have been, you know, it would have
    56        depended on the conversation that took place which,
    57        unfortunately, never took place.
    58
    59   Q.   You said that you had intended to give a performance review
    60        first followed by the warning.  So, what you decided -- is

Prev Next Index