Day 151 - 10 Jul 95 - Page 27


     
     1        I mean, just looking here now, I would say that -- well,
     2        I cannot.  In fact, if I turn over the page, I get 63, 77,
     3        hours, 65 hours, so -----
     4
     5   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Just pause a moment.  The ones you have been
     6        asked to look at cover 16 weeks in all.
     7        A.  Right.
     8
     9   Q.   Because there are eight of them.
    10        A.  Right.  Sorry, can I ask you to repeat the question?
    11
    12   Q.    No.  I just want you to take stock.
    13        A.  Sorry.
    14
    15   Q.   Those eight payslips cover 16 weeks.  Since six of them
    16        have more than 78 hours on them, he must have worked at
    17        least six weeks of more than 39 hours, and it may very well
    18        be that he worked 12 weeks at more than 39 hours.  All
    19        I say is, it may very well be because if he worked more or
    20        less the same hours in each of the weeks in the fortnight,
    21        he would work more than 39 in both.  In the first one, for
    22        instance, if he only worked 39 one week, he would have to
    23        work 49, nearly 50, the next.
    24        A.  Certainly.
    25
    26   Q.   So it might be thought, and the Defendants say, in the
    27        fortnights he worked 76. something and 73. something, one
    28        of those weeks he may have worked more than 39 hours.  But
    29        if we put that aside completely, in 16 weeks he has worked
    30        at least six weeks for more than 39 hours, and he may very
    31        well have worked 12 weeks for more than 39 hours.  That is
    32        three-quarters of the weeks for more than 39 hours.
    33        A.  Right.
    34
    35   Q.   Even if one took a number of weeks halfway in between, the
    36        six and the 12, if one took nine weeks of the 16, that
    37        would mean slightly more than half his weeks he is working
    38        more than 39 hours, which it might be thought, in anyone's
    39        terminology, is regularly working more than 39 hours.  Do
    40        you see?
    41        A.  Yes, I do.
    42
    43   MR. JUSTICE STEEL:  You can ask the question again if you want,
    44        but that is what the payslips appear to show.  I can pose
    45        the question for you, but I would rather you did it
    46        yourself.  That being so, you ask the question.
    47
    48   MISS STEEL:  You would accept, would you not, that over a period
    49        of three months, round about three months, Mr. Alimi was
    50        regularly working more than 39 hours? 
    51        A.  I have a problem here with 5/4/86; there is what looks 
    52        like two Bank Holidays in there, 16 hours and 4.66.  Now, 
    53        again, I have to recollect how we paid Bank Holiday pay,
    54        for example.  But in terms of the premium standard there,
    55        there were some hours -- I think, if you were scheduled,
    56        you got eight hours automatically, plus the hours you
    57        actually worked on the day.  I would have to be guided by
    58        the HR people.  That would then strike me as 93 hours
    59        there.  That one would be disproportionate.  73
    60        thereafterwards seems OK.  I can give no reason for

Prev Next Index