Day 151 - 10 Jul 95 - Page 31


     
     1
     2   Q.   Does that concern you?
     3        A.  It concerns me in terms of it would appear that his
     4        hours are going up and down.  I mean, the intervening ones
     5        you have not mentioned suggest -- I have one here, I think,
     6        dated the 10th of the 1st; for some reason, there is only
     7        27 hours on that payslip.  It would concern me in case
     8        there was a reason why Siamak, sort of every fortnight or
     9        so, was working more hours and in the intervening pay
    10        periods was not.
    11
    12   Q.   Would it actually concern you that on at least four
    13        occasions -- very probably more than that -- Mr. Alimi was
    14        working more than 39 hours in a week?
    15        A.  Well, it would concern me in so much as I suppose there
    16        are four pay periods out of a possible, what, 14 or 15,
    17        that he may have been working more hours.  So that again
    18        would suggest that, rather than a regular scheduling or a
    19        store that was regularly scheduling its crew to do those
    20        hours, as an indication there must have been some reason
    21        specific to Mr. Alimi about why his hours were going up and
    22        down, because of the intervening ones.  So I presume,
    23        I could naturally assume those in between that are not
    24        being presented were good.  So I would suggest there to the
    25        store manager, I was the supervisor, just to find out if
    26        those four out of 14 or 15 pay periods why specifically
    27        Siamak was working those hours; again, was there something
    28        wrong; were we looking at people who were not available?
    29        But to suggest that four out of 15 suggests a major problem
    30        with scheduling, one out of 55 people, again, only what I
    31        have in front of me would suggest there is not a problem
    32        endemic with the scheduling, more of something specific to
    33        Siamak.
    34
    35   Q.   For all we know, Mr. Stanton, it could be that if we had
    36        the payslips of the other 55 people, they would all be
    37        working over 39 hours a week.
    38        A.  For all I know, they could show they are not.
    39
    40   Q.   The point is that you said in your evidence that it does
    41        not happen that people work over 39 hours a week, that it
    42        is against Company policy; they would not be scheduled to
    43        work more than 39 hours a week, and you would check that
    44        they were not working more than 39 hours a week; and, in
    45        fact, it was happening, was it not?
    46        A.  They were not being scheduled for more than 39 hours,
    47        and I did check, that I know, as my job and
    48        responsibilities would entail.  The fact that I cannot
    49        remember this specific one does not, to me, suggest a
    50        complete failing of a policy or a system -- one out of 55. 
    51 
    52   Q.   When you were checking the records, did you just check one 
    53        out of 55 and then say:  "Well, I can assume all the others
    54        are" -----
    55        A.  Not at all, but I -----
    56
    57   Q.   If you found one -----
    58
    59   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Let him finish.
    60

Prev Next Index