Day 152 - 11 Jul 95 - Page 64
1 A. Only that they all, sort of, went round in a group
2 together and were very friendly. Therefore, if one person
3 catalysed them into coming forward, then that may be the
4 reason. But as to motive I am perplexed.
5
6 Q. What about the accusation that when you ran out of diet
7 cola you would habitually replace it with normal cola, thus
8 endangering -- I think this is what it is supposed to mean
9 -- thus endangering the health of diabetics in treating
10 the customers who wanted to have less sugar in their diet?
11 A. That is totally wrong. The only instance of anything
12 even barely resembling that statement was somebody did
13 actually put normal cola into a diet cola tank on one
14 occasion. As soon as we found out, we completely rinsed
15 out the tank and flushed the lines through and replaced it
16 with the correct diet cola. We actually had cleaner sticks
17 that we tested on a daily basis, test it for sugar, to
18 ensure that this did not happen.
19
20 Q. Then this, Mr. Davis, an accusation, I think made only by
21 Mr. Kevin Harrison in a postscript to his statement, that
22 it was normal practice to manipulate the till results or
23 the receipts or the till themselves so as to disguise cash
24 discrepancies or to increase the apparent profitability of
25 the restaurant; have you ever done that?
26 A. No, I do not know exactly what he means.
27
28 Q. No, I do not either, but we will have to wait for him to
29 tell us about that. Have you ever manipulated a till for
30 any of those purposes?
31 A. No.
32
33 Q. Have any of your assistants, to your knowledge, or upon
34 your authority done such a thing?
35 A. No.
36
37 Q. Have you ever come across anybody in the McDonald's
38 organisation that has done such a thing?
39 A. Yes.
40
41 Q. Naming no names, if you would not mind, what were the
42 circumstances where that occurred and what happened to the
43 person who did it?
44 A. The circumstances were that one instance I can recall
45 the Manager was putting employee meals through a till
46 which, instead of -- he was taking money for employee meals
47 which meant that no sales were registered through the
48 tills. Consequently, these did not appear as net sales but
49 appeared as a surplus cash amount, because when the
50 employee meals were put through the till it came up as a
51 nought reading, and the Manager, we assumed, was pocketing
52 the money or was using it to his own ends. That Manager
53 was, the one I am thinking of, dismissed for that fact.
54
55 Q. There is one other thing that occurs to me, Mr. Davis.
56 I am sorry to take you by surprise. Have got yellow bundle
57 ten still?
58 A. Yes.
59
60 Q. If you could go back, please, to tab 7 in that file and
