Day 132 - 07 Jun 95 - Page 15


     
     1        confer on the employees?
     2        A.  No, I think that the stated policy of McDonald's is
     3        entirely the right one for their type of operation.
     4
     5   Q.   To leave it up to the individual?
     6        A.  No, to say to the individual that they expect shoes
     7        with a slip resistant sole and stout uppers.  That is the
     8        sort of recommendation that is made throughout the
     9        business, throughout the hotel and catering industry.
    10
    11   Q.   Yes, and that throughout the hotel and catering industry
    12        workers are low paid, are they not?
    13        A.  That is not my expertise.
    14
    15   Q.   Some jobs in other industries give people an initial
    16        funding to buy necessary equipment?
    17        A.  No, in other industries it is provided and it has to be
    18        provided and you are not allowed to charge for it.
    19        However, that is for those instances where, for instance, a
    20        high impact resistant and totectors have to be worn, and
    21        that sort of thing, and under those circumstances it would
    22        normally be provided free of charge, but it is for a
    23        different issue than we are talking about here.
    24
    25   Q.   You claimed that McDonald's consults with its employees
    26        over safety and, therefore, trade unions or trade union
    27        safety reps would -- your words -- not necessarily lead to
    28        a disadvantage, the lack of a safety rep.  But, as a safety
    29        expert, anything that would empower employees to be able to
    30        act over safety themselves or have their own
    31        representatives act independently of management, would be
    32        encouraged, would be something to be encouraged?
    33        A.  Well, you are suggesting that they are not empowered at
    34        all so to do?
    35
    36   Q.   I am asking you -----
    37        A.  What I have said about safety representatives
    38        specifically is that safety representatives are there as a
    39        channel of communication, and the regulations were brought
    40        in under the joint consultation provisions of the Health &
    41        Safety at Work Act.  Now, there are other ways of achieving
    42        joint consultation.  What I have said is that safety
    43        representatives do not automatically confer a special
    44        advantage if you have a company that consults well.  I work
    45        with companies, both trade unionised and non-unionised
    46        companies.  The main thing is that you have a channel of
    47        communication.
    48
    49   Q.   Yes, but communication is not the same as taking employee
    50        concerns or grievances or proposals, or whatever, 
    51        seriously, is it? 
    52        A.  I am sorry, it is part of the same thing, as far as 
    53        I am concerned.  Communications are not just talking; it is
    54        actually acting on what has been said which is the essence
    55        of consultation.
    56
    57   Q.   Yes, but the power of an employee to take action over
    58        safety themselves in defiance of management is something
    59        that should be encouraged, should it not, in terms of
    60        safety?

Prev Next Index