Day 259 - 10 Jun 96 - Page 58


     
     1
     2   Q.   Here we have a company that was systematically, while the
     3        overtime laws were in force, failing to pay overtime
     4        payments; none of the payslips mention overtime payments;
     5        and, according to your evidence, he took no action about
     6        it?
     7        A.  He would have been given -----
     8
     9   Q.   If your evidence is true, that is?
    10        A.  I am under oath.
    11
    12   Q.   Well, a lot of people are under oath -----
    13        A.  Thank you.  I find that very insulting.
    14
    15   Q.   I am saying, if your evidence is true ---
    16        A.  My evidence is true.
    17
    18   Q.  -- he is completely incompetent, is he not?
    19        A.  No, I do not believe so.
    20
    21   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  That begs the question of whether, in fact,
    22        it was unlawful to do it this way; and no doubt if you are
    23        going to press it, we will look carefully at the Act and
    24        the regulations and decide.  It as matter of law, anyway.
    25
    26   MS. STEEL:  I could put an example to the witness.  However,
    27        bearing in mind that she says she does not know anything
    28        about overtime payments, I do not know whether it is worth
    29        it.
    30
    31   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  The only question for me at the end of the
    32        day is to decide whether, on the balance of probability,
    33        Mr. Mills, the wages inspector who was responsible for
    34        McDonald's -- or the area at least in which their
    35        headquarters stood -- must have appreciated that they did
    36        not pay more than standard rate during overtime hours and
    37        apparently thought that was not worth taking up with the
    38        Company.  My answer may be that he, on the balance of
    39        probabilities, must have realised or, on balance of
    40        probabilities, he did not.  It is just one component in a
    41        body of evidence on the topic, quite apart from the
    42        question of law, which is for me.
    43
    44   MR. MORRIS:  He was not shocked that the only source of
    45        information that would percolate through to the payroll
    46        department about irregularities was from employees; the
    47        only possibility was getting it from employees who
    48        complained to their supervisors, the very people who may be
    49        causing the problem, who were then expected to pass on that
    50        information higher up and get themselves in trouble for 
    51        payment irregularities?  Was he not shocked by that kind of 
    52        totally inadequate, no independent representation ----- 
    53
    54   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I am sorry.  You see, you are going back to
    55        comment.  That is your comment.  It is a question which
    56        only packs any punch if it was shocking behaviour; and we
    57        are right back where we started from:  that is for me to
    58        decide.
    59
    60   MR. MORRIS:  OK.  No further questions, then.

Prev Next Index