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

Prev Next Index