Day 138 - 20 Jun 95 - Page 59


     
     1        A.  No.  No-one was singled out as troublesome.  Frankly,
     2        they were pretty well behaved -- everybody was well
     3        behaved.
     4
     5   Q.   Then the second prong, apparently, "Develop programmes that
     6        would increase employee support from management".  Do you
     7        know anything about that?
     8        A.  No, sir, nothing was created to do that.
     9
    10   Q.   "In the first case", that is, seeking out, isolating the
    11        trouble makers, "they", that is, McDonald's or Mr. Kelly,
    12        I assume, "fired a couple of outspoken, pro-union workers,
    13        Donald Hughes and Wendall Jones."   Do you know anything
    14        about that?
    15        A.  These guys were never fired.  I do not know who Donald
    16        Hughes was.  That name does not ring a bell at all.
    17
    18   Q.   What about Wendall Jones?
    19        A.  Wendall Jones does ring a bell because he was at the
    20        NLRB hearings but he was never fired.
    21
    22   Q.   He was never fired?
    23        A.  No.
    24
    25   Q.  "And", says Mr. Canter, "especially tried to isolate and
    26        undermine the efforts of a young black woman" -- you see
    27        the word "black" there again -- "named Stephanie Douglas.
    28        She was a star worker and could not be fired so they
    29        changed her shift and otherwise reduced her ability to talk
    30        with here co-workers".  Do you know anything about that?
    31        A.  I never received any claims or knowledge of something
    32        like this, no.  If this would have happened, I would have
    33        at least remembered the names.
    34
    35   Q.   At any rate, if this wicked plot was put into effect in
    36        this way, it is not something in which you for the
    37        Corporation had any role to play?
    38        A.  No.
    39
    40   Q.   "Hughes and I think Jones", says Mr. Canter, "eventually
    41        won back pay from the Company after filing a charge at the
    42        NLRB that they had been illegally fired".  Do you anything
    43        about that?
    44        A.  That never happened.
    45
    46   Q.   If it had happened, would you expect to have heard about
    47        it?
    48        A.  Yes, I would have, and the NLRB would have been very
    49        upset and would have ordered Mr. Kelly to recognise the
    50        union.  One thing that the NLRB will not countenance is 
    51        terminating someone for union activity.  If you do that, 
    52        you can expect to get certified. 
    53
    54   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I have difficulty understanding that because
    55        suppose you fired someone for union work, it would seem a
    56        nonsense to me for the NLRB to order that the union be
    57        certified when everyone else -- let us take an example
    58        which is, no doubt, extreme -- who might be working in the
    59        restaurant might positively not want to have a union?
    60        A.  That is correct.

Prev Next Index