Day 174 - 17 Oct 95 - Page 51


     
     1        -- that is Mr. White --"'Go off and talk to John Burke.'"
     2        He is ITGW, Mr. Burke, is he not?
     3        A.  Yes.
     4
     5   Q.  "'.....and convey what I said'" -- that is Margaret Long,
     6        I suppose. "Surely he was not intimating that Mr. Mehigan
     7        was lying in what he said in his letter and verbal
     8        suggestions, and surely it was not too much to ask to have
     9        a meeting and to put proposals they (that is the union)
    10        might have in writing."
    11
    12        I have two questions about that.  What Margaret Long has
    13        written there, did that at this stage represent your
    14        position faithfully or not?
    15        A.  Yes, it did.
    16
    17   Q.   The second question:  did the union ever come back and
    18        say: "Here are our written proposals.  Now we would like to
    19        have a meeting"?
    20        A.  No, they did not.
    21
    22   Q.   Then please turn back in the file, forwards in time, in the
    23        previous tab, to page 1060, where you should find a letter
    24        from the Labour Court dated 19th March and addressed to
    25        you.  Have you got that?
    26        A.  Yes, I have.
    27
    28   Q.   This is from Mr. Pompret, who says: "I am directed by the
    29        Labour Court to inform you that the Irish Transport and
    30        General Workers Union again on 8th March 1980 referred to
    31        the court a dispute with Pantry Franchise Ireland
    32        concerning implementation of the National Understanding."
    33
    34        At the date of this letter, or when you received it, as it
    35        appears in the top righthand corner, on 21st March 1980,
    36        were you conscious that you were in dispute with the ITGWU
    37        or not?
    38        A.  No, I was not aware of the dispute.
    39
    40   Q.   Please turn, then, to page 1062, which is your response
    41        three days after receiving Mr. Pompret's letter,
    42        24th March 1980.
    43
    44        "Dear Mr. Pompret, we acknowledge receipt", and so on. "We
    45        are at a loss as to why the ITGWU are referring any dispute
    46        to you, as they have not indicated to us that they have a
    47        dispute with this Company."
    48
    49        Was that sentence true or false at the time when you wrote
    50        it? 
    51        A.  It is true. 
    52 
    53   Q.   Following this letter of 24th March 1980, was the matter
    54        ever referred to the Labour Court; was there ever a hearing
    55        before the Labour Court?
    56        A.  No, not that I can recollect.
    57
    58   Q.   One final thing, then, Mr. Mehigan.  You told his Lordship
    59        that at some stage during, at the end of or after -- you
    60        were not sure -- the strike during the summer and early

Prev Next Index