From world.std.com!mclibel-approval Wed Sep 27 19:54:21 1995 remote from byteback Received: by byteback.dircon.co.uk (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Wed, 27 Sep 95 21:56:23 1 for will Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [192.74.137.10]) by newsgate.dircon.co.uk (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id TAA21115 for ; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 19:54:21 +0100 Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.6.12/Spike-8-1.0) id OAA01840; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 14:25:02 -0400 Received: by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA01186; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 14:24:35 -0400 Received: by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA01158; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 14:24:33 -0400 Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 14:24:33 -0400 From: dbriars@world.std.com Message-Id: <199509271824.AA01158@world.std.com> To: mclibel@world.std.com Subject: Trial Summary Jan 95 to Sept 95, Part 2 Sender: mclibel-approval@world.std.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: mclibel@world.std.com Subject: Trial Summary Jan 95 to Sept 95, Part 2 Date: Sept 27, 1995 From: McLibel Support Campaign, London McLibel Support Campaign c/o 5 Caledonian Road London N1 9DX UK Tel/Fax +44-171 713 1269 Trial Summary Jan 95 to Sept 95, Part 2 (Trial Summary up to January 95 is also available) Contents: Part 1 GENERAL NUTRITION & ADVERTISING DAMAGE TO THE ENVIRONMENT PACKAGING - LITTER - FORESTS RAINFORESTS ANIMALS CATTLE CHICKENS Part 2 FOOD SAFETY EMPLOYEES AND TRADE UNIONS --------------------------------------------------------------- FOOD SAFETY Food poisoning - John Atherton (responsible for food and employee safety in McDonald's UK) admitted that McDonald's receives between 1500-2750 customer complaints of food poisoning a year, maybe more than that. The company also received complaints of 'foreign bodies' in food sold. Mr Walker had estimated 800 complaints regarding hamburgers, mostly concerning bits of plastic. Mr Atherton stated it was 'slightly more' for chicken, mostly concerning pieces of bone. The court heard that there had been several occasions when the authorities had taken action against McDonald's for selling raw or undercooked meat products including an incident in November 1994 when a 3 year old girl was served undercooked Chicken McNuggets containing salmonella. The McNuggets were tested by local health officials and declared unfit for human consumption. The court also heard how the company now admitted responsibility for a serious food poisoning outbreak in Preston in 1991, when several customers were hospitalised as a result of eating undercooked burgers contaminated by potentially deadly E.Coli 0157H bacteria. They also admitted responsibility for a similar outbreak in 1982 caused by the same type of bacteria, which affected 47 people in Oregon and Michigan, USA. NB: McDonald's have refused to call their own expert witness on food poisoning, Colin Clarke, who prepared a detailed report following a visit he made to three company stores. The court heard that, regarding the cooking of hamburgers (which he had tested), Mr Clark "recommends that 73 degrees Celsius be the internal minimum temperature of the final product, and that their temperatures were not reaching that in all cases. The minimum was, in fact, 70 degrees Celsius." The Corporation's confidential Operations Manual for all stores world-wide was quoted. It set a minimum internal temperature to be reached of 64 degrees Celsius for a cooked burger. Robert Beavers said the company was "maybe 99.8%" sure this temperature was safe. But he believed it had been raised a degree or two following the deaths of two customers of Jack-In-The-Box a couple of years back, in a similar incident to the 1982 McDonald's one. He admitted that this recent incident had "heightened the awareness of everyone in the industry" and agreed that the US Government "was concerned" about internal temperatures of cooked burgers and was considering introducing regulations 'if necessary'. Dr Pattison said that so far as chicken products are concerned, the principal hazards to human health are campylobacter and salmonella food poisoning organisms. Campylobacter was generally found on 70% of raw poultry. Whilst, he claimed, salmonella was now only found in 1% of chickens coming into the plant, 25% of samples of their deboned meat contained salmonella organisms. He said that particularly for the very young and very old, "a very low number of organisms can cause food poisoning". The company did not test raw chicken for listeria, but Dr Pattison accepted that 60% of raw chickens were contaminated with listeria monocytogenes, which can also cause illness in people. He said that the bacteria would be killed when cooked, if the meat itself reached 70 degrees Celsius for 2 minutes. Bacteriological Contamination of beef products - McDonald's are supplied with beef from a large percentage of UK abattoirs. Timothy Chambers (Quality Assurance Manager from Midland Meat Packers Ltd) expressed his concern that the widespread use of water sprays in abattoirs to 'clean' carcasses merely spread bacterial contamination around. He said he would be concerned about "health risks" from any batch of tested meat containing over 5 million bacteria per gram. David Walker of McKeys explained how all raw beef supplies to McKey process plants were sampled, microbiologically tested, and categorised as 'satisfactory', 'passable', and 'unsatisfactory'. He stated that 'unsatisfactory' related to beef which had a total colony of more than 10 million bacteria per gram. He then admitted that such consignments were, in fact, not rejected and were used for McDonald's hamburgers. On top of this, he claimed that any raw meat supplies arriving at over 4 degrees Celsius would receive 'a cast iron rejection'. But on being challenged with McKeys own forms showing acceptance of beef arriving over 4 degrees Celsius, he admitted this happened and explained that instead "the quality control officer receiving the meat would make a management decision which was right for the company". In January 1995, following months of effort by the Defendants to compel McDonald's to hand over vital 1994 documents regarding the bacterial content of their hamburgers, the court was told that a small snag had just come to light. Richard Rampton QC, for McDonald's, said that the documents had been held for safekeeping by Group 4 security but had inadvertently been destroyed by them in error. Growth promoters - McDonald's UK company documents state that "McDonald's will not accept beef from cattle subjected growth promoters or hormone treatment". Mr Kenny said it was "not desirable" to have hormones or antibiotics in the food chain. He believed that the concern with antibiotics was that "treatment resistant strains of bacteria may develop in the human body". The use of growth promoting hormones is illegal in the UK, but McDonald's have acknowledged that they are widely used in the USA and the company uses meat from animals subjected to growth promoters. Mr Kenny also acknowledged 'public concerns' over pesticide residues in food and stated that McDonald's "would not want them in the food chain" because of health risks. The Defendants referred to a 1987 US National Research Council major report on pesticide residues which found that beef ranked second of the list of foods with the greatest estimated 'oncogenic' (carcinogenic) risk. Mr Kenny admitted that their lettuce contained pesticide residues, although he believed the residue levels were within government 'limits'. EMPLOYEES AND TRADE UNIONS Low Pay and No Guaranteed Hours - Sid Nicholson, McDonald's UK Vice President, (who was Head of Personnel from 1984 - 1991, combining this for most of the time with the job of Head of Security) admitted that McDonald's set their starting rates for crew employees for most of the country "consistently either exactly the same as the minimum rates of pay set by the Wages Council or just a few pence over them". He agreed that for crew aged 21 or over the company "couldn't actually pay any lower wages without falling foul of the law". He stated that when the Wages Council abolished the legal protection of a minimum wage for under-21s (in 1986) "I was quite content..because it simplified things". However, he said "I do not accept that McDonald's crew are low paid" and he denied that wages in the catering industry were low compared to other industries. Robert Beavers (US Senior Vice-President) admitted that McDonald's US workers started at the legal minimum wage of $3.35 per hour. He agreed the company "would not be allowed to pay less". "I do not consider it ($3 - $4 p.h.) to be low pay. It is a fair wage for the work that is expected" he stated. He refused to reveal his own salary. There were "no hours guaranteed" and 80% of the jobs were part time. Pay, Mr Nicholson admitted, "would be one of the things that is often mentioned" when staff were asked what improvements they would like at McDonald's, but, he said "you show me any working man who feels he is getting enough pay"..."I do not feel I am getting enough pay". He admitted that in 1993 McDonald's senior management levels had salaries over 75,000 pounds p.a. plus benefits and perks. At that time the starting rate for crew members outside London was 3 pounds per hour for over 18's and 2.65 pounds per hour for 16 & 17 year olds. Mr Nicholson said that these were the basic rates and that crew could increase their pay rates by passing 'Performance Reviews'. Company documents revealed that in order to obtain a 5p per hour rise the crew member would have to score at least 76%, for a 10p per hour rise 87%, and for a 15p per hour rise 93.5%. The guideline for attaining 87% or over was that employee "performance consistently exceeds job requirements and expectations". About 80% of crew people are 'part-time', averaging about 20 hours per week. Mr Nicholson admitted that employees do not have any guaranteed hours or pay at McDonald's. He agreed that managers have the power, while any crew person is working their scheduled shift, to compulsorily cut or extend the hours being worked (the crew handbook states: "On occasions you may be asked to continue working past your normal finishing time. You will be released as soon as the need for your service has passed"). Even breaks could be cut. In any event, crew are not paid for meal breaks. McDonald's, Mr Nicholson admitted, has never paid overtime rates, despite the Wages Council setting minimum overtime rates for all hours worked over 39 hours in a week. He said overtime pay was unnecessary because of company policy setting a maximum of 39 hours a week for all crew. But the Defendants showed from disclosed Payroll reports that at least 5% of hourly-paid staff in London & the South worked over 39 hours each week. This, Mr Nicholson claimed, showed it was a 'rare' occurrence. Payroll records for one store indicated that 9 out of 53 employees worked over 78 hours in a fortnight (39 hrs p.w.). When asked if it would concern him if 17% of employees were working more than 39 hours a week, in breach of policy, he said "It would not concern me". He also stated "it is only policy". Mr Beavers (McDonald's US) agreed that in the US it would be illegal not to pay overtime to employees working more than 40 hrs p.w. He said he thought this was a "fair" law for the employees, but agreed that McDonald's would only pay overtime if forced to by law. Mr Beavers admitted that Ray Kroc, McDonald's founder and Chair, had made a $250,000 donation to the controversial 1972 presidential campaign of Richard Nixon, a donation which was 'perhaps' a subject of investigation during the Watergate corruption scandal. The Defendants referred to passages of the 'Behind The Arches' book (written with McDonald's backing and assistance) which admitted that the donation came around the very time that McDonald's franchisees were lobbying to prevent an increase in the minimum wage, and to get legislation (dubbed 'The McDonald's Bill') passed to be able to pay a sub-minimum wage to some young workers. Exploiting Young Workers - Approximately two thirds of McDonald's crew are under 21, and nearly one third are under 18. But Mr Nicholson denied McDonald's "chose to employ a high percentage of young workers so that they could exploit them for lower wages and make greater profits". McDonald's UK has admitted that it was convicted of 73 offences in relation to the employment of young people in the early 1980's. Mr Nicholson said that "since that time I have no knowledge of any infringements of the regulations". He was quizzed by the Defendants about the statement of a forthcoming company witness who admitted that under-18s had worked illegal hours at Swindon McDonald's, but 'only' on 'one or two' occasions. Additionally, time sheets obtained by the Defendants revealed five breaches of the law relating to the employment of young people in one week at Orpington in 1987. Other documents revealed that as recently as 1993, on average 2-3 under 18's were showing up on company records as working in excess of 96 hours in a fortnight (48 hours a week) which until 1990 was illegal, and was still, according to Mr Nicholson, against company policy. McDonald's, Mr Beavers accepted "depends for their profits (over $1 billion p.a.) on the labour of young people." He agreed the majority of people working for McDonald's in the USA were under 21 and admitted they positively recruit youth. He admitted that in 1988/9, Pennsylvania authorities cited 466 violations of child labour laws at 8 Philadelphia McDonald's stores (run by a franchisee), but the owner/manager was not sacked. The Defendants accused the Corporation of 'double standards' when comparing this with crew members who can face summary dismissal for a single 'offence' against company rules. In fact, despite claiming earlier that higher standards of 'honesty' and 'ethics' applied to those in the Company's hierarchy, he could not think of a single example of any officials being sacked for violating Company policy. Pressure to Boost Profits - The Defendants showed a documentary 'One Every Mile', filmed with McDonald's permission inside two London stores, which portrayed the reality of the high-pressure working conditions for employees. Mr Nicholson agreed the conditions shown were 'typical' of high volume stores. Crew were filmed complaining about pay, of pay rises being delayed, about 'hours worked being under-recorded' and that the pressure of the work 'does your brain in'. The documentary, made for Channel 4, was never broadcast. Commenting on the fact that there was a preponderance in the film of managers with an ex-military background, the witness said that such people bring a "sense of discipline" to McDonald's. Mr Nicholson admitted that store managers were under pressure from higher up to keep labour costs down. Company documents revealed that a former manager in Newcastle (and witness for the Defendants) had been ordered amongst other things to get his labour costs down "within targeted labour guidelines" (of between 14-16% of sales) or face dismissal. Internal company documents showing profit and loss projections for 1992 revealed that the company had planned to reduce the overall crew labour costs nationally as a percentage of turnover (at about 15% of sales) whilst increasing the management percentage. Meanwhile, in 1992, the manager of another Newcastle store was jailed for 6 months for inducing a crew member to phone through a hoax bomb threat to nearby Burger King in order to boost sales at McDonald's. Each year a McDonald's 'Store of the Year' is chosen by the company because of its "consistently high standards" in all areas, including personnel matters. It is used as an example to others. In 1987, Colchester was chosen. A statement of the company's own witness - an Operations Manager at McDonald's with responsibility for 20 stores - revealed that special clean-ups were ordered at the Colchester store when senior management were due to visit, some employees having to work through the night to complete the clean-up. Further, breaks were sometimes shortened and hours could be compulsorily cut or extended. The manager admitted that crew sometimes worked up to 50 hours a week (which Mr Nicholson said indicated the store was under-crewed), or did double shifts (about which he commented "they would be exhausted"). When challenged over these practices at their so-called 'exemplary' store, Mr Nicholson stated that if they were happening in all McDonald's stores in the country "it would not concern me". Employee safety - On October 12th 1992, Mark Hopkins, a McDonald's worker in Manchester, was electrocuted on touching a 'fat filtering unit' machine in the 'wash-up' area of the store. A McDonald's memo from the north west region dated 17/2/92, was quoted which revealed that "there have been several recent instances in our restaurants where members of staff have received severe shocks from faulty items of electrical equipment". Following an investigation of the death, the Manchester Environmental Health Department issued a Prohibition Order forcing McDonald's to install 'Residual Current Devices' on all electrical equipment in wash-up areas. In their view, accepted by Mr Atherton, without such devices there was 'a risk of serious personal injury'. The devices were fitted nationally following Mr Hopkins' death. Jill Barnes (McDonald's UK Hygiene and Safety Officer) was challenged over a previously confidential internal report into Mark Hopkins' death. It had catalogued a number of company failures and problems, and had made the damning conclusion: "Safety is not seen as being important at store level". In addition, a confidential Health & Safety Executive report of 1992 made 23 recommendations for improvements. One of its conclusions was "The application of McDonald's hustle policy [ie. getting staff to work at speed] in many restaurants was, in effect, putting the service of the customer before the safety of employees". The Defendants referred to McDonald's Crew Training Programme which stated "When do you use hustle? (All the time)". Mr Beavers stated that the 'hustle' policy of fast working emanated from the US and applied to their (over a million) workers all over the world. But he was unaware that the 'hustle' policy had been lambasted by the UK Health & Safety Executive. MANAGEMENT MANIPULATION McDonald's produces a bi-monthly magazine - 'McNews' - which, Mr Nicholson said, is "targeted at restaurant crew" "to portray a kind of corporate identity to the crew". On their first day, all new crew people are shown an official McDonald's 'orientation' video to, he said, 'inject' a 'family feeling'. He denied this was 'brainwashing' and said "If they do not like it they do not need to stay". As part of the performance reviews (needed to obtain a pay rise) crew were marked on their "attitude" "towards store success" and their "desire to progress". Crew people failing to have the right attitude "could probably be terminated" he stated. Mr Beavers explained how management are trained to motivate staff - "We introduced psychology in some of our personnel courses" he said, (at their so-called Hamburger University). Asked if their workers "are taught to identify with the goals of the company" he replied "hopefully they do,". They are given an 'orientation' "so that they understand how their work efforts fit into the big picture". 'Discipline', he said, is one of their 'basic values'. But he denied that McDonald's "wish to take advantage of a vulnerable, inexperienced sector of society" or that what a young worker is really taught "is to be a cog in a machine, to be obedient, not to question the idiocy of the job which you are doing, and to basically be a slave for the Company". Mr Nicholson accepted that despite working in a fast moving and hot environment, workers had to get permission to have a drink. Whilst management can change crew hours of work at will, and the Crew Handbook lists dozens of examples where management can direct, restrict or ban employees activity and behaviour (under threat of disciplinary action and summary dismissal) Mr Nicholson couldn't, when asked, think of a single right that workers had except where there was statutory protection. In the US "no notice is required" to "terminate" an employee, Mr Beavers said, and the Company would "reserve the right to change any term or condition of the employment without prior consultation or agreement". "They have no guaranteed employment rights. They do not have guaranteed employment or guaranteed conditions of employment" Beavers stated. Company figures showed that in December 1989, annualised crew turnover at McDonald's in both the UK and USA was approx 190%. During 1986 it reached as high as 241% in the USA. Mr Beavers admitted that "consistent and important" reasons given by McDonald's workers for quitting their jobs included (as revealed in the Company's Operations Manual): "poor treatment - lack of recognition, poor people practices, dissatisfaction with pay, low and/or infrequent raises", "no job enjoyment or satisfaction" and "poor working conditions - faulty and missing equipment". Many of these were "the by-products of understaffing". Anti-Union Practices - Mr Beavers agreed that in the early 1970's McDonald's employed an official, John Cooke, who had a responsibility "to keep the Unions out". The Defendants referred to a quote by John Cooke in the book, 'Behind The Arches' (written with McDonald's backing and assistance): "Unions are inimical to what we stand for and how we operate. They peddle the line to their members that the boss will be forevermore against their interests." The book also stated that "of the 400 serious organisation attempts in the early 1970's, none was successful", and Mr Beavers admitted this was due to 'steps' taken by McDonald's "to try to prevent trade union organisation...around that time when it was actually a problem." Mr Beavers admitted that, in the 1970's, he and company managers around the USA had used "lie detectors" (half-hour polygraph tests) on current or potential employees. The practice only ceased "when it was obvious that the law was going to be passed making it illegal". Prior to this John Cooke had sent a memo to top executives stating "I think the union was effective in terms of reaching the public with the information that we do use polygraph tests in a gestapo type manner" and suggesting stopping their use. Mr Beavers admitted that in some cases, refusal to take such a test would have led to dismissal. He claimed not to know about a 1974 San Francisco Labor Board hearing at which McDonald's workers testified that lie-detectors had been used to ask about union sympathies, following which the company was threatened with legal action. Stan Stein (McDonald's US Senior Vice-President, Head of Personnel & Labour Relations) was questioned about the company's worldwide hostility to trade unions (TUs). Mr Stein said that he had worked for McDonald's since 1974 and during that time none of the company's restaurants in the USA had been unionised. Whenever TUs in any corner of the globe made serious attempts to organise McDonald's workers, Mr Stein himself seems to have jetted into town. The court heard about a number of disputes including: Mexico 1985 - a union seized and occupied for 3 weeks the first McDonald's store (which had opened with non-union labour). McDonald's agreed to recognise a different union, and all McDonald's stores are still unionised. Puerto Rico 1970's - up to 1974, McDonald's employees were unionised, but the company was sold to a new franchisee. A dispute followed, closing all the stores and McDonald's pulled out of Puerto Rico. They reopened in 1980 with non-union labour. Chicago 1978 - in one store, a majority of McDonald's workers joined a union. The company then took legal action to stop recognition for the union unless they could get a majority in the 8 stores run by the franchisee. Detroit 1980 - after workers in a store joined a union, the company's organised a visit by a top baseball star, staff disco, and 'McBingo' prior to elections for union representation Arkansas, USA 1983 - the UFCW union, which was interested in recruiting McDonald's workers, was involved in a union dispute at a chicken processing plant supplying McDonald's. The union launched a boycott of McDonald's 'McNuggets' and picketed many of its stores. Mr Stein spent up to '80%' of a whole year fighting the union's campaign. Ireland 1979 - a 7 month strike lead to recognition of the ITGWU union. In 1985, two union activists won a victory at a labour court after claiming victimisation and unfair dismissal. Denmark 1980-90 - throughout the 1980's, unions attempted to negotiate with McDonald's the standard 'collective agreement' for food service companies. After protracted legal disputes and boycotts, McDonald's recognised the union in 1989. Germany 1979-90 - in 1979, a letter was sent from McDonald's personnel office with instructions to store managers not to hire any union sympathisers. In the 1980's, there were disputes with the NGG union, and eventually the company signed a union agreement in 1990. Philadelphia 1989 - McDonald's stores in Philadelphia were independently surveyed and accused of having racist differential wage rates between the inner-city stores (mostly black workers) and the suburbs (mostly white workers). Mr Stein had intervened and believed the campaign to be a front for a union recruitment effort. Madrid 1986 - four workers who had called for union elections were sacked by McDonald's. The company was forced to reinstate the workers after the labour court ruled that the dismissals were illegal. China 1993 - in Beijing, protest leaflets were circulated about conditions Iceland 1993 - when they opened their first store, McDonald's refused to negotiate with TUs, but after a strike and boycott threat, the company conceded. Canary Islands 1993 - McDonald's were fined 13 million pesetas for falsely claiming state subsidies for 'staff training'. Canada 1993/4 - workers in an Ontario store joined a union, but the company managed to avoid recognition by ensuring victory in Labour Board sponsored elections. Mr Stein was also questioned about other disputes with Trade Unions in France, New Zealand, Norway, Australia, and the Netherlands. Mr Nicholson said the company was not anti-union and all staff had a right to join one. However, he said that the company was "very, very much in support of performance related pay. Those who work well are paid well. For that reason we would rather not deal with Trade Unions." Under questioning he admitted that any McDonald's workers interested in union membership "would not be allowed to collect subscriptions...put up notices...pass out any leaflets...to organise a meeting for staff to discuss conditions at the store on the premises"...or "to inform the union about conditions inside the stores" (which would be deemed 'Gross Misconduct' and as such a 'summary sackable offence'). In fact, Mr Nicholson agreed, "they would not be allowed to carry out any overt union activity on McDonald's premises". Mr Nicholson appeared confused as to the what the company would do if a majority of crew demanded union recognition, first stating "If a majority of the staff of a restaurant had an election and voted to be represented by a trade union, then they would be represented by a trade union" but he later agreed that "if every single member of crew in a particular restaurant joined a union [McDonald's] would still not negotiate with the union". However, he did recognise that "if of course there was a massive national drive" and a "very large proportion of McDonald's employees joined a union" and took industrial action, McDonald's "might be left with no short alternative but to negotiate". On 3 occasions, in Hackney 1985, East Ham 1986 and Liverpool 1988, Mr Nicholson was informed by store management that employees were interested in union representation. Mr Nicholson said he then visited the stores accompanied by other management or Security officials to talk to the crew "to explain our point of view to them". He denied that people could have felt intimidated by his presence or that of management/security. (He said that he took an Area Security Manager to Hackney only to help him find a place to park his car). He denied that the company's refusal to negotiate with Trade Unions was because "they would be more effective at arguing for better wages and conditions than individual workers". He claimed that company 'rap sessions' (meetings for workers to give their views to a manager or supervisor) meant there was no need for unions, and he denied any crew felt 'exploited', 'pushed around' or felt they got 'low pay', because "no-one has said to me they do". Mr Nicholson remembered banning a Union official from leafleting or talking to staff inside a London store, even during their breaks, but claimed he had 'no objection' to him leafleting or recruiting outside - "We are quite used to people outside our stores giving out leaflets". He stated "I want to know everything that happens at a store. I want to know when members of London Greenpeace stand outside of a store and distribute literature and I want to know when they leave". All quotes are taken directly from the court transcripts. Campaign Statement: The McLibel Support Campaign was set up to generate solidarity and financial backing for the McLibel Defendants, who are not themselves responsible for Campaign publicity. The Campaign is also supportive of, but independent from, general, worldwide, grassroots anti-McDonald's activities and protests.