Day 128 - 24 May 95 - Page 39
1
2 Q. -- to anyone at all until the EHO got to hear of it,
3 somehow or other?
4 A. That is correct. It is possible the store did not
5 advise the regional office, but certainly an investigation
6 would have been carried out. There is no way that
7 something that went to court, or we had a summons for,
8 would not have been investigated and -- but I guess that is
9 one of the main reasons why we might not have reported it.
10
11 MS. STEEL: This was when you were in charge?
12 A. I suspect if it came to court in May 1991 the accident
13 was actually in 1990. So, yes, I would have been appointed
14 but not actively involved in those things at that stage.
15
16 Q. Why would that be? Would a court case not be serious
17 enough for you to become involved with?
18 A. Yes, serious but, remember, my focus then was on the
19 three pieces of legislation we spoke about, and also my
20 going away and learning about health and safety management,
21 which, as you rightly pointed out, at that stage I had not
22 any experience in, and I needed to go away and learn. In
23 effect, the Security Department and Personnel Department
24 would have been the right departments to get involved
25 because at that stage they had a lot more experience and
26 knowledge than I did.
27
28 Q. At tab 57J there is a reference to prosecution for failing
29 to maintain a place of work in a safe condition without
30 risk of health to employees, and that was supposed to have
31 occurred on January 7th 1991. That would have been into
32 the time when you would have had involvement in this area,
33 would it not?
34 A. That was six months after I was appointed. Again I did
35 not get involved in the investigation.
36
37 Q. So you do not know anything about that case?
38 A. I do know about the case.
39
40 Q. You do know about the case?
41 A. Well, in terms of what I have been told about it.
42
43 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Keep your voice up again, please?
44 A. It involved, I believe, two crew members having
45 accidents, slipping accidents, in the grill area.
46
47 MS. STEEL: Right.
48 A. And it was a floor in the grill area that was in
49 question.
50
51 Q. Right.
52 A. Although we fitted slip-resistant tiles, going as far
53 as that, and we took which we considered to be the best on
54 the market at the time, what we found was in our
55 environment, particularly in a heavy use area, like the
56 grill area, the slip-resistant coating on the tiles wore
57 down over time. That is, as I believe, what had happened
58 in that restaurant.
59
60 Q. The Company was fined for that?
