Day 173 - 16 Oct 95 - Page 20
1 A. No. The probationary period is now one year.
2
3 Q. When did that change?
4 A. I cannot say exactly. It would have been three or four
5 years ago.
6
7 Q. Was the system that you have outlined here on page 13 still
8 in operation in 1985?
9 A. I cannot recollect.
10
11 Q. Just one thing on page 155, which is the crew handbook,
12 about breaks. It says:
13
14 "You are paid for your courtesy breaks. This is a common
15 McDonald's policy. However, you must punch in and out for
16 your breaks. In the event the store is very busy, there is
17 a possibility of you getting called in from the break.
18 Should this occur you may of course get the remainder of
19 your time later."
20
21 So that was not automatic, that crew would get the rest of
22 their break if their break was curtailed?
23 A. No. It would have been automatic that they would not
24 lose any time on their scheduled work hours.
25
26 Q. It says here it is optional.
27 A. Sorry, can you just point that out to me, please?
28
29 Q. Right at the bottom of page 8, the small page 8 within the
30 page numbering.
31 A. Yes. Well, it certainly would have been the policy of
32 the Company to ensure that everybody got paid fully.
33
34 Q. But they might not get their whole break?
35 A. No. Normally speaking, what would happen, they would
36 go back on a break, if they were needed for short space of
37 time; they would go back and finish their break.
38
39 Q. But sometimes they did not?
40 A. I beg your pardon?
41
42 Q. Sometimes they did not? It says "may" there, so -----
43 A. Well, I cannot say for sure, but the policy would have
44 been that they would have come back on their break after
45 they finished the time that they were required.
46
47 Q. Up to four hours, the crew would not get any break at all?
48 A. That is correct.
49
50 MR. JUSTICE BELL: We will take our five minute break there.
51 I am reluctant to stop you cross-examining Mr. Mehigan
52 about breaks and performance reviews and things like that
53 but, on the statements of your witnesses which I have read
54 and the allegations which you have made in respect of
55 Dublin which appear in the abstract of pleadings, there
56 really seem to me to be three things you are aiming at in
57 relation to Dublin, which you may say urge me to look upon
58 as typical of the McDonald's system: there is the question
59 of hostility to trade unions; there is the question of
60 sacking for union activities, or discrimination in some
