Day 131 - 06 Jun 95 - Page 08

     
     1   Q.   During your time advising McDonald's, have you ever felt,
     2        either from Mrs. Barnes or from anyone else within the
     3        organisation, any pressure to sacrifice health and safety
     4        of the employees for the sake of saving money?
     5        A.  Certainly not.
     6
     7   Q.   Have there been things that you have advised them to do, or
     8        not to do, which have been costly in terms of money?
     9        A.  I have talked about design and planning with their
    10        design and planning teams, and I know that their design
    11        plan teams have taken on board some of things that we have
    12        discussed, which would obviously have cost implications.
    13        There has never been any question, as far as I am
    14        concerned, of safety being compromised in terms of cost.
    15
    16   Q.   Mrs. Barnes told us that she has a NEBOSH diploma?
    17        A.  Yes, indeed
    18
    19   Q.   That is an acronym:  NEBOSH.  What does that stand for?
    20        A.  It is the National Examining Board in Occupational
         Safety and Health.
    22
    23   Q.   In your view, is that a qualification which is valuable for
    24        the work she does?
    25        A.  Indeed.  It is now seen as the, if you like, basic
    26        qualification in occupational safety and health, and it is
    27        accepted nationally.
    28
    29   Q.   One preliminary question before I ask you some more general
    30        matters:  the law in this case, Mr. Purslow, is essentially
    31        and exclusively, really, for his Lord, but what is your
    32        understanding of the underlying legal standard which is
    33        applied to protect employees at work?
    34        A.  Well, the legal standard is, essentially, set out in
    35        the general duty of care in section 2 of the Health and
    36        Safety at Work Act; and that of course is qualified by the
    37        term "reasonably practicable".
    38
    39   Q.   So the employer must take whatever measures are reasonably
    40        practicable to protect his employees; is that right?
         A.  That is right, yes.
    42
    43   Q.   From your experience at McDonald's over the last five
    44        years, knowing what you do both from observation and from
    45        reading the documents about their health and safety, how do
    46        you think that McDonald's measure up to that legal
    47        standard?
    48        A.  It would be impossible to say that any company complies
    49        100 per cent.  What I can say is that it seems to me that
    50        McDonald's take a most responsible attitude to health and 
    51        safety, and I believe that they go further than most 
    52        companies in a similar situation. 
    53
    54   Q.   Do you have any other direct experience of the fast-food
    55        catering ---
    56        A.  I do, yes.
    57
    58   Q.   -- sector.  Do you also have experience -- I think you told
    59        us a moment ago that you do -- of conditions in, let us
    60        say, the kitchens of a large hotel chain?