Day 142 - 26 Jun 95 - Page 61


     
     1   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Mr. Morris, if you have a case to put, put it
     2        but you cannot -----
     3
     4   MR. MORRIS:  I just did not understand what he meant.
     5
     6   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  No, I know, but then I am not interested.  If
     7        you do not know what they mean, you cannot have some
     8        allegation to make about them.
     9
    10   MR. MORRIS:  We have said we talk about industrial awards,
    11        minimum wage and work conditions in the pleading, and
    12        Mr. Stein mentioned "proportion clauses", is that the same
    13        thing?
    14
    15   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes, but, look, the allegation I take there
    16        is another entirely.  I am not going to assume that any
    17        company is antipathetic to unions because it falls into
    18        dispute with them from time to time and some independent
    19        body, be it a court or a Board of some kind, has to make a
    20        ruling.  If I were to conclude otherwise, it would be
    21        tantamount to saying that the union is always right and I
    22        do not know that it is.
    23
    24        The allegation in the second part of "M" is that
    25        restaurants with staff subject to prescribed industrial
    26        award minimum work conditions were closed and later
    27        reopened with staff not covered by the awards.  I take that
    28        to be a particular that McDonald's were hostile to unions
    29        to the point of closing down restaurants if staff got the
    30        benefit of an industrial award at the union's initiative,
    31        and then re-opened with staff who were not covered by the
    32        awards.  In other words, action taken to avoid the affect
    33        of the award, but that is what I take the allegation in "M"
    34        to be.
    35
    36   MR. MORRIS (To the witness):  Maybe this helps then, where we
    37        have pleaded:  "In another State", Mr. Stein, "McDonald's
    38        were hostile to a Building Workers Union who were mounting
    39        a solidarity campaign with McDonald's staff.  McDonald's
    40        took legal action to stop the campaign".  Is that the
    41        reference you made to the construction unions?
    42        A.  It had nothing to do with McDonald's employees.
    43
    44   Q.   No, but you made a reference that you were aware of
    45        construction unions mounting some boycott activities of
    46        McDonald's?
    47        A.  That had to do with the construction of restaurants --
    48        nothing to do with our employees.
    49
    50   Q.   Yes, so was it the case then that -- I cannot remember if 
    51        Nancy Leahy mentions it in her statement.  She has already 
    52        dealt with that anyway.  So that was around the time that 
    53        you were there that something like that was going on with
    54        construction unions?
    55        A.  No.  I am generally aware that there have been from
    56        time to time some issues with construction unions over what
    57        contractors should be building our restaurants and which
    58        ones should not be building our restaurants.  The
    59        construction unions have nothing to do with McDonald's crew
    60        people or McDonald's employees; it has to do with the

Prev Next Index