Day 143 - 27 Jun 95 - Page 18
1 you may be right, but that is not how a manager is going to
2 deal with his employees. That is not how they are going to
3 do it.
4
5 Q. The point is they have that power, which you have accepted
6 so .....
7 A. I consider the question to be -- I do not want to use
8 the word "silly" -----
9
10 MR. RAMPTON: Sorry, Mr. Morris, I did not hear that word --
11 "silly", oh, yes.
12
13 THE WITNESS: It is a silly question. They are going to work
14 it out.
15
16 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Look, I think you are really -- I am not sure
17 there is too much difference. The Company has the power to
18 tell its employees when they should work. It is Company
19 policy that you should not work more than so many hours in
20 24. Mr. Stein says that although the Company has the power
21 to tell its employees when to work, it is worked out by
22 agreement.
23
24 The world being what it is, I have no doubt there are
25 occasions when it may come to a crunch and the employee by
26 his contract of service then has to work the hours which
27 the manager says he should work, as long as they are not in
28 excess of Company policy. I do not see this as a conflict
29 between what Ms. Steel is asking and what the witness is
30 saying.
31
32 MR. MORRIS: Could I just clarify your position in this case?
33 The problem was that this Manager allowed a member of his
34 staff to work 12 hours in a 24-hour period, or shorter than
35 that, and for that reason the Manager was sacked?
36 A. And working nights ---
37
38 Q. Specially ------
39 A. -- because he is a student.
40
41 MR. JUSTICE BELL: It looks as if he would have allowed him to
42 work further on but the employee said: "I am feeling
43 tired2 so the Manager let him go home. That is on page 2
44 or 3 as well. You need not look at it. The court thought
45 that the Manager had let it go too far already. McDonald's
46 Corporation of Oregon wanted to shed part of the
47 responsibility for the accident on to the driver, Theurer,
48 no doubt because he was insured and they would like his
49 insurers to pay part of the damages to the Plaintiff as
50 well and the Court of Appeal -- that is what this part of
51 the judgment was about -- was saying, no.
52 A. My Lord, while I do not know the specifics, generally,
53 in the US on these things, it is because the driver of the
54 car, Theurer, may be did not have any insurance and -----
55
56 MR. JUSTICE BELL: May be. In this country we have a scheme
57 which covers that situation as well, but it does not help
58 if the uninsured driver is only partly to blame, but we
59 need not go into that.
60
