Day 149 - 06 Jul 95 - Page 28
1
2 We have the document for the whole of the United Kingdom
3 because, apparently, the British computer is a more
4 effective instrument than its American counterpart.
5
6 My Lord, then I do not think I need say anything more about
7 the turnover figures. I do not know whether for the years
8 1988 to 1990 it is possible to produce the kind of hard
9 data which Lyn Mead produced for this country. Remember,
10 my Lord, the last of her computer printout sheets not only
11 gave turnover figures and percentages, but it actually gave
12 the hard numbers underlying those percentages.
13
14 My Lord, again, quite aside from the question of whether
15 I can in any way get round that (to save people the
16 trouble) by the Civil Evidence Act -- which I probably
17 can -- one does really ask: what is the point, except of
18 course, so far as the Defendants are concerned, to cost the
19 Plaintiffs time and money?
20
21 I say that for this reason, that the question at the end
22 the case for your Lordship -- I nearly said the end of the
23 day, but I checked myself -- is really this, we would
24 submit: again, it is perfectly apparent on the existing
25 percentage given for the United States at, I think,
26 volume XII tab 41, the percentages are for all years
27 (though declining) well in excess of 100 per cent,
28 sometimes nearly 200 per cent in the earlier years. The
29 first question: what inference can be drawn from that
30 fact? This is what matters in the case: is it legitimate
31 to draw from those figures an inference that a significant
32 number of the people represented by those percentages left
33 McDonald's because they were dissatisfied with their
34 conditions? That is the only relevant consideration, after
35 all, in the turnover figures. Aside from that, they have
36 no meaning whatsoever; they are mere fact.
37
38 That being so, my Lord, whether the turnover figures are
39 150 per cent, 170 per cent, 130 per cent, really does not
40 matter one way or the other.
41
42 Again, I am not saying that if such figures were
43 recoverable they would not be relevant in approving -- in
44 one sense, I am sure they would be. I question, however,
45 whether that kind of discovery at this stage of the case is
46 necessary for the fair disposal of the action or the saving
47 of costs.
48
49 MR. JUSTICE BELL: What was the reference for the equivalent
50 document for the UK; that is, one set of figures back from
51 the turnover sheet, as it were?
52
53 MR. RAMPTON: The computer printout document, is that what
54 your Lordship is asking?
55
56 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I just wanted reminding generally. Was it
57 the figures which were sent to Oak Brook? Do you remember
58 there was a series of memos?
59
60 MR. RAMPTON: No. They are the same, really, as the American
