Day 174 - 17 Oct 95 - Page 39
1 relation to?
2
3 Q. In 1979.
4 A. Yes -- their feelings, in relation to their feelings
5 about the strike.
6
7 Q. Incidentally, the reason that was given, according to
8 Mr. Trimble, for sacking Mr. McCann was changing his
9 schedule. There is not a specific one of that in the crew
10 Handbook. What would that come under?
11 A. I would imagine it would come under "insubordination".
12
13 Q. If you just look at page 1154, please?
14 A. Yes.
15
16 Q. A letter from the Irish Transport and General Workers Union
17 on 4th July, 1985, stating that they are representing
18 Mr. Connor McCann and Mr. Anthony Brian, and that they were
19 requesting a meeting to discuss the dismissals of those
20 members, which they regard as unfair; and they say: "We
21 feel that a discussion would assist us in establishing the
22 reason or reasons for the dismissals prior to a possible
23 reference by us of these cases through the unfair dismissal
24 legislation." Then, on the following page -- you remember
25 this letter, yes?
26 A. Well, I -----
27
28 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Do you remember it?
29 A. I am sorry, your Lordship?
30
31 MS. STEEL: Do you remember the letter?
32 A. I remember it now, yes, yes.
33
34 Q. Right. On the following page, page 1155, a letter dated
35 26th July, 1985, again from the Irish Transport and General
36 Workers Union: "We refer to our letter dated 4th July 1985
37 concerning the dismissal of our above members and to now
38 ask you, are you in a position to respond to the request
39 for a meeting. Your earliest attention to this matter
40 would be appreciated." Do you recall that, as well?
41 A. Yes, I recall seeing it.
42
43 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Is it right, as is suggested in the
44 22nd August letter, that you did not reply to either of
45 them?
46 A. Yes, it would appear to be correct.
47
48 Q. Why was that?
49 A. Well, the manager, Mr. Trimble, he did not advise me of
50 this correspondence at the immediate time he received it.
51
52 MS. STEEL: So when do you say you became aware of this
53 correspondence?
54 A. I cannot tell you exactly, but I know that he did not
55 refer it to me at the time that he received it. So how
56 long it was, I am not sure. So, when the second letter was
57 received, I believe I was possibly advised of it at that
58 stage.
59
60 Q. Did you suggest to Mr. Trimble that he immediately respond
