Day 122 - 05 May 95 - Page 04
1 from working in excess of 39 hours per week" it then
2 changes. The original version said -- I am not sure which
3 is the original version actually -- "I and my successor
4 monitor this position by receiving monthly payroll reports
5 indicating the staff who worked in excess of 39 hours per
6 week, which position has been monitored since about 1986.
7 By these monthly reports Operations Supervisors and
8 Personnel Officers (now called Human Resource Officers) are
9 aware of those stores which may be working crew in excess
10 of 39 hours, and will take the necessary steps to correct
11 it if the occurrence is more than occasional."
12
13 It then goes back to paragraph 25 on yours where it
14 starts: "Naturally, in the event of sickness".
15
16 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Are there others?
17
18 MS. STEEL: Yes. The next change is a complete section has
19 been cut out. It is on page 20 of yours, after the
20 paragraphs about the Newcastle incident, after paragraph
21 52, and just before the disablement paragraph, there is a
22 whole section about electrocution. On page 5(G) of FBP2:
23 "It is alleged as an example of the Plaintiff's failure to
24 maintain a safe place of work and/or safe system of working
25 and/or causing or permitting employees to work in poor or
26 degrading conditions, that an employee, Mark Hopkins, was
27 killed by electrocution whilst at work. It is correct that
28 Mark Hopkins was killed tragically by electrocution, but it
29 is untrue that this was due to the failure of McDonald's as
30 alleged. The background to the incident" -----
31
32 MR. RAMPTON: My Lord, I do not think there is any need to read
33 this out. It is going to take ages; it is three pages.
34 Can I pass up mine?
35
36 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes, but that is the subject anyway of that.
37
38 MR. RAMPTON: Yes, the whole of this section which is
39 seven -----
40
41 MR. JUSTICE BELL: All I need to know is, it is all about Mark
42 Hopkins?
43
44 MS. STEEL: Yes.
45
46 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Right. Where else?
47
48 MS. STEEL: Going on to -----
49
50 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Could I ask you, are they all things which
51 were in the disclosed statement but not in the statement in
52 the bundle, or are there things which were in the statement
53 in the bundle which were not in the disclosed statement?
54
55 MS. STEEL: By and large, it is all things that were in the
56 disclosed statement and then were not in the bundle, but
57 there is one sentence that has been changed that is in the
58 one in the bundle, as opposed to just being something that
59 has been cut out.
60