Gough v Schweppes Cottees [2001] NSWCC 129

Compensation Court of New South Wales

CITATION : Gough v Schweppes Cottees [2001] NSWCC 129 PARTIES : Jenny Gough Schweppes Cottees Pty Limited MATTER NUMBER(S) : 35752 of 1998 JUDGMENT OF: Walker J at 1 CATCHWORDS: Statutes & Delegated Legislation :- LEGISLATION CITED: CASES CITED: DATES OF HEARING: 14/12/00, 10/4/01, 11/4/01 DATE OF JUDGMENT: 06/20/2001

FOR APPLICANT: Mr Ingram instructed by Hilton King Solicitors appeared for the applicant LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: FOR RESPONDENT: Mr T Small instructed by Connery & Partners appeared for the respondent

JUDGMENT: THE CLAIM 1. Jenny Gough claims lump sum compensation in respect of injuries to her back, neck and both arms and related medical expenses. The basis of her claim is that arising out of and in the course of her employment with the respondent as a team leader on Jam production lines on 21 and 22 March 1995 and 11 September 1995 the nature and conditions of the work caused injury to her neck, back and both shoulders and consequential psychological injury. THE ISSUES 2. The respondent puts injury in issue, disputes the quantum of the s 66 claims and asserts that the medical expenses claimed do not fall within the definition in s 59(f). MATTERS FOR DETERMINATION 1. Did the worker arising out of and in the course of her employment with the respondent sustain injuries to her: (a) back? (b) neck? (c) either arm? (d) psyche? 2. If so, did she sustain a permanent impairment of her back and neck and a permanent loss of efficient use of both arms? 3. If so what is the appropriate lump sum compensation pursuant to s 66? 4. Does s 68A apply to reduce the applicants s 66 entitlements? 5. If the threshold is exceeded what is her s 67 entitlement? 6. Do the s 60 expenses claimed fall within the definition in s 59(f)? THE EVIDENCE THE APPLICANTS EVIDENCE 3. Jenny Gough gave evidence that she is 36 years of age and is divorced with two dependant sons. 4. She commenced employment with the Respondent on 24 January 1990 as a process worker. Her hours of work were 4am to 3.30pm. 5. Her task was to work on production lines processing jars of Cottees jam and cordials. In January 1991 she became a team leader which meant that in addition to process work on the line she had supervisory and administrative functions rotating workers during the shift, filling in gaps on the line and keeping production records. 6. The applicants evidence was that her injury was first sustained over two days namely 21 and 22 March 1995 when break downs in the J1 production line forced her to do some highly repetitive stacking and unstacking of jam jars. The procedure she was engaged in was called bright stacking. 7. Mrs Gough said that the J1 line had broken down on the night shift before she started work at 4am on 21 March 1995. She was advised that the jars on the line had to be bright stacked from the moving conveyor belt. This task involved during the course of the day taking 500g jars of jam off the conveyor belt and stacking them on a pallet. This was achieved by stacking them on a pallet in levels of 127 jars by using dividing sheets. Each pallet was stacked to about 7 levels high then another pallet commenced. When the machinery was fixed the jars had to be replaced onto the conveyor belt from the pallets. Mrs Gough estimated that through the day on 21 March 1995 some 3,000 jars had to be bright stacked. 8. That day she only took one 10 minute break. During the day she noticed her neck, shoulders and lower back were very sore. She spoke to her supervisor Mr Jackson on a number of occasions asking him to stop the line but he refused. 9. Mrs Gough said that on 22 March 1995 the line continued to break down and more bright stacking was required. She had to stack 10 pallets or about 1220 jars. Bright stacking involved working quickly with both hands. She also had to operate the labeller. She again spoke to Mr Jackson explaining the problems she was having and asked him to stop the line but again he refused. 10. Mrs Gough said her pain became so bad that she had to stop. Someone came to relieve her and she went to see Dr Ahmed her local GP who referred her for physiotherapy. Mrs Gough also attended Dr Chan the respondents company doctor who certified her fit for light duties. There were none available. Eventually Dr Chan certified her fit for normal duties from 13 June 1995. 11. Mrs Gough said that the pain was still bad when she returned to work although on some days it felt better. She described soreness and pain in her neck, in her shoulders extending across her breasts into her thoracic spine and in her low back. 12. The applicant said the respondent asked her to train another worker to do her job. When she had done so she was then removed to another line putting lids on jam jars. She was removed as team leader and the woman she had trained took over that position. 13. On 11 September 1995 the applicant was working on a production line filling 1.25kg buckets of jam. Her task was to fit a plastic lid to the buckets as they passed. She had difficulty because she was too short for the conveyor belt. She had to stand on her tip toes to put the lids on. 14. She found the work hard on her arms. She also had to bright stack when the machine broke down. This involved removing about 1000 buckets of jam. By the middle of the day her arms had no feeling in them. She went to see the nursing sister who gave her pain killers. They did not help. She stopped work at 12 noon and went to see her doctor. She has not worked since. 15. The applicant said she was paid workers compensation for the period of work between 22 March 1995 and 13 June 1995 and has been paid weekly benefits from 11 September 1995. 16. The applicant then told the Court of the subsequent medical treatment. She saw Dr Sheehan on 10 September 1995 and had an ultra sound. She was referred by Dr Ahmed to Dr Dave who sent her for Xrays and an MRI Scan and a bone scan. On 1 March 1996 the respondent sent her to Occupational Health Professionals for occupational rehabilitation. They carried out a work place assessment at the respondents factory. 17. The applicant said that in March 1996 she was unable to properly attend to her personal hygiene and unable to properly do her housework because of the pain in her neck, arms and back. She had a lot of problems sleeping. She said that prior to her injury she had regularly attended aerobics and trained a girls netball team. She also went water skiing and cycling. She had no previous neck or arm problems. She did have a minor injury to her back which resolved. 18. In April 1996 Dr Ahmed referred her to Dr Leslie a vascular surgeon because she was dropping things from her right hand. She could not grip cups of coffee. She favoured the right hand by using the left. 19. In May 1996 she was referred to Christina North a psychologist to assist her deal with her pain and with the emotional problems that had developed after her injury. She said her life had turned upside down. She could not believe what had happened to her. She felt she was too young to be so unhealthy. 20. On 20 May 1996 Dr Leslie operated on her right shoulder. The operation helped with her problem of dropping things. She could feel things again and the pain was reduced a bit. Her problems with lack of strength in the arm only improved marginally. The pain however returned about September 1996 and she now has 24 hour constant pain in the right arm. She cannot put clothes on the line or change the sheets on the bed or prepare food. Her 14 year old son does the cooking. She needs help to do the shopping. 21. Mrs Gough said that she had extensive physiotherapy after the operation and continues to be treated twice a week with massage. She said the physiotherapy helped by giving her some relief. Mrs Gough said that she saw Dr Oates for the insurer on 26 September 1996. She said she told him she would love to get back to work but denied she told him she was able to do so. She said her arms and her neck were pretty sore at the time. 22. On 20 November 1996 she was referred to Dr Salmon a pain specialist for treatment, He gave her pain killers. She last saw him just before she was admitted to St John of God Hospital in February 1997. Mrs Gough said she was in St John of God Hospital for about 10 days on Valium and Benzodiazepine. 23. Mrs Gough there said that one of the symptoms she has experienced was numbness in her mouth. That affects her speech. The applicant then told the Court that her marriage ended two weeks after her operation. 24. Mrs Gough said that she had a lot of physiotherapy after the operation on her shoulders, neck and lower back. In April 1999 she complained to Dr Leslie about problems she had with her left shoulder and left arm. She said the problem developed because she was favouring the right arm. On 24 May 1999 Dr Leslie operated on the left shoulder. The operation helped. 25. Mrs Gough said that since July 1999 she had to pay for assistance to clean her home and attend to the gardening. She has been receiving 6 hours a week assistance. 26. Mrs Gough then described her current condition. She said that she has constant pain and reduced strength in her right arm. Her left arm improved after the operation and is better than the right arm. Its strength is still reduced. She has difficulties doing some domestic chores such as hanging washing on the line. She has pins and needles in the fingers of both hands. She gets a sharp pain like a needle in the top of her right shoulder about twice daily. She also gets pain in the left shoulder but it is not as bad. She also endures a constant soreness in the arms. She has a tenderness in the side of her torso and her breasts. 27. Mrs Gough said she has difficulties driving a motor vehicle. Her precise words were I drive for no more than 10 minutes - after 10 minutes I have a lot of help from my kids, left and right. As soon as I get home I have pretty bad neck pains. She said she cannot wear a seat belt because it causes pain. Mrs Gough said she has intermittent pain in her low back particularly after she bends to pick something up or rises from a sitting position. She gets pain if she stands for too long. 28. Mrs Gough said she had problems turning her neck to either side or looking up or down. 29. Mrs Gough said she used a TENS machine after her operation and it relieves her pain on bad days. She said that she had received workers compensation for the cost of her operations and medical treatment including physiotherapy. She has not been paid for the home care. Mrs Gough said she stopped her psychiatric treatment about August 2000 because her children were being teased at school about it. She said she feels miserable and angry with herself about working too hard for the respondent. She said she is upset at the effect her injuries are having on her. 30. Mrs Gough said that she suffered from electric shock sensations in her shoulders for some time after the operations. She still gets an icy sensation in the shoulders. Her right arm twitches. 31. Mrs Gough said her medication was Prothiaden, Rivitrol Digesics and Panamax. CROSS EXAMINATION 32. Mrs Gough told Mr Small that her normal hours of work were 4am to 3.30pm. She was entitled one 15 minute break in the morning, half hour for lunch and another 15 minute break in the afternoon. However she never took the afternoon break because as team leader she relieved other on their breaks. 33. Mr Small put to the applicant that she never was a team leader. She denied the allegation. She agreed she applied for the job of team leader on 13 June 1995. Mr Small put to the applicant that she was a Line Leader not a team leader. She said she thought she was both. 34. Mr Small put to the applicant that there were 13 workers on each line. She disagreed saying she looked after 5 workers. 35. Mr Small asked the applicant what all the other people on her line were doing when the machine broke down and she had to do everything herself. She said some were away from work or on breaks. She disagreed that there were always a set number of workers on a line. Mr Small put to the applicant that she had never worked on a line by herself. She denied the allegation saying she had done so on two occasions. She said that they were 5 people short on that day. 36. Mr Small put to the applicant that she started work at 6.30am not 4am. She denied the suggestion saying she had to set up and she normally started about 4am. Sometimes she started at 3am. 37. Mr Small put to the applicant that she was not made a team leader because she was not good at her job. She vociferously denied that proposition. 38. Mr Small put to the applicant that she took cigarette breaks on the line. She agreed that was so but said she did not let it interfere with the work. 39. Mr Small put to the applicant that she was bitter with the respondent. She agreed. 40. Mr Small put to the applicant that all the production lines were the same height. She denied the proposition. Mr Small put to the applicant that when a line breaks down only the batches of jam in the system are bright stacked. She said that occurred most of the time but not all the time. Mr Small suggested that when there was a break down the conveyor belt would be stopped. Mrs Gough denied that allegation saying that she had asked her supervisor to stop the line but he refused. 41. Mr Small put to the applicant that on Friday 1 December 2000 she had driven her car for 28 minutes. She denied the proposition. He then put to her that the next day she drove her car for 27 minutes. She denied that proposition. The applicant subsequently admitted that in saying she could only drive for 10 minutes she may have been slightly exaggerating. 42. At that point in her evidence the applicant broke down and was unable to continue. Mr Small continued the cross examination on 10 April 2001. 43. Mr Small put to the applicant that her earlier evidence was that she was working by herself on 21 and 22 March 1995. She said she did work by herself. He put to her that there were 4 people working on the line on 21 March. She replied that was incorrect. Mrs Gough then made it clear that what she meant was that she was bright stacking by herself. She said there were four other people working on other parts of the line. Three of them downstairs. Normally there would have been 6 people working down stairs. 44. Mr Small put to the applicant that her superior Mr Jackson kept a record of what was done on the line in the day. She replied that it was her job to keep the record. 45. Mr Small then questioned the applicant about her tasks on 22 March. She said she had put bright stacked jars back on the line, ran the labeller and ran the packer. When the elevator broke down she asked to stop the line after a box had fallen on the ground. 46. Mr Small put to the applicant that she was bitter towards Mr Jackson. She said she was bitter because she had explained that she had problems with her hand and wanted to stop the line but he insisted she continue. 47. Mr Small asked whether the applicant remembered applying for the job of team leader. She said the job was filled by Yolanta Ploca at a time she was off work injured. She agreed she was bitter about that because she still had to train a woman who had been given her job when she was on light duties. 48. Mr Small put to the applicant that in September 1995 she was offered an office job. She said she told her superior she had a right hand injury and could not write. RE-EXAMINATION AND FURTHER CROSS EXAMINATION 49. Mrs Gough told Mr Ingram that she was right handed dominant and continued to have low back problems. She had back pain since her injury in March 1995. She said she had first complained about the low back problem to the company doctor. 50. Mrs Gough was recalled on 11 January 2001 to give further evidence after the videos were shown. She told the Court that the liquid to soften the bucket lids on the J2 line was not in use in September 1995. 51. I propose to leave the question of Mrs Gough's credibility until after I have dealt with the other lay witnesses. PATRICIA ANNE LEGGE 52. Patricia Legge gave evidence that she was Mrs Gough's next door neighbour and friend. She told the Court that they practically live in one anothers houses. 53. Mrs Legge said that until 1995 Mrs Gough was a happy person who played netball and took the kids to soccer and baseball. She was good fun. Since her injury in 1995 she couldn't do much with her right hand. It sort of hung there. She tried to do things left handed. She was losing her strength. 54. Mrs Legge said she helped do Mrs Gough's washing and made her beds. Since the operation in 1999 she has been very slow. Her boys and the Legge's have to do a lot of the housework. The boys do washing, ironing and cleaning. Mrs Legge said that Mrs Gough's arm just hangs. 55. Mrs Legge said that Mrs Gough's son Curtis does some cooking but mostly she does the cooking for them at her place. Her husband helps do Mrs Gough's gardening. Curtis mows the lawns. 56. Mrs Legge said she observed the applicant to be depressed and in constant pain. She takes medication but it does not seem to help. She is constantly pale. Mrs Gough asks for help to zip up her dress or button things. She cannot coordinate. 57. Mrs Legge said that Mrs Gough drives at times. The longest drive was an emergency trip to Mrs Gough's mother. It took about half an hour. Mrs Legge said she was worried about Mrs Gough's driving. VICKIE MEREDITH 58. Vickie Meredith gave evidence for the respondent she said she was a production clerk with the respondent having worked there some 20 years. 59. She said she does the timesheets. Mrs Meredith told the Court that over the years Mrs Gough worked on a number of production lines. She recalled speaking to the applicant after a new team leader was appointed. Mrs Gough was very upset. 60. She said that the company had decided to introduce a new grading system with four grades the top grade being a team leader. Mrs Meredith said that line leaders would relieve other production workers when they took their breaks. The lines were shut down for lunch for half an hour. There were two 15 minute breaks as well as toilet breaks. 61. Mrs Meredith remembered observing the applicant working on the J1 line during September 1995. She recalled Jenny was having problems with her shoulder. She was forever rubbing it. 62. She recalled an occasion when Mrs Gough was sent to the C5 line in the Cordial Division which was running jam buckets. She noticed Jenny was in a lot of pain and told her to get off the line immediately so she would not aggravate her shoulder. She said that Mrs Gough told her she had asked the manager but he did not care. She said she then saw the manager and arranged for Jenny to visit the nursing sister. CROSS EXAMINATION 63. Mrs Meredith told Mr Ingram that she was not aware of anyone working through their lunch hour because the factor is closed down then. The employees are only paid if they work in their tea breaks. Mrs Meredith later agreed that in cases of urgent orders people would work in the lunch break. 64. Mrs Meredith said that the applicant was a good worker, a very hard worker. 65. Mr Ingram asked Mrs Meredith if it was impossible to run a line without 13 people She replied No - yes yes it could be from 10 but anything under wouldn't be allowed. 66. Mrs Meredith agreed that there were a lot of breakdowns on the lines and that involved bright stacking. 67. Mrs Meredith agreed that some ladies and often line leaders came in and set up the lines at 4am. Mrs Meredith said that when the position of team leader was introduced it replaced the position of line leader. CAROL ANNE FAULKNER 68. Carol Anne Faulkner gave evidence on behalf of the respondent. She said she was the Occupational Health Safety and Rehabilitation Co-ordinator with the respondent. She first saw the applicant in March 1995 after receiving a note from Dr Ahmed. She produced to the Court clinical notes which had been completed by both Dr Chang and herself. 69. Mrs Faulkner told the Court that on 30 March 1995 Mrs Gough advised her she would be returning to work on 4 April 1995 with a certificate from Dr Ahmed recommending suitable duties. 70. Mrs Faulkner said that Mrs Gough was subsequently examined by Dr Wing Chan who recommend light duties involving a rehabilitation program. There was a meeting about the program in March 1996. The plan envisaged clerical duties. The idea was for Mrs Gough to write a manual on how to operate a production line. Dr Ahmed advised the applicant not to return to those duties. CROSS EXAMINATION 71. I asked Mrs Faulkner who had prepared the notes she had relied upon. She said they were a summary prepared by the firm Objective Claims Solutions. They included notes written by Mrs Faulkner and Dr Chan. 72. Mr Ingram asked Mrs Faulkner what the applicant told her on 22 March 1995. She said the applicant complained of pain in her back, shoulders and neck as a consequence of doing bright stacking all day. She then said that on 11 September 1995 Mrs Gough told her that her right shoulder was paining and right arm had had it. She said that the pain was caused by working on the bulk jam line placing lids on buckets. KIM RANDALL JACKSON 73. Kim Randall Jackson gave evidence on behalf of the respondent. He said that in 1995 he was the wet plant superintendent with the respondent. 74. He informed the Court that bright stacking involves taking jam jars off the conveyor system to lay them on pallets. The word bright is used because there is no label on the jar at that stage. The term refers more to cans than jars. Bright stacking occurs when there is equipment failure. Jam cannot be held on the conveyor for too long because it goes hard. Bright stacking occurs when the machines break down. 75. Mr Jackson said he recalled 21 March 1995. He recalled a download occurring on that day. Mr Jackson then referred to notes photocopied from two sources - the production book and line sheets. Mr Jackson said that bright stacking was done by the crew of 13 people. The 13 people include a cleaner, cooks and people on the packing line. To have the line running you need a crew of 12. A minimum of 10. To account for sickness and absenteeism people from other plants, other departments and casuals are brought in. When bright stacking occurs the line leader organises a crew of five. A minimum crew would be four people. He said it was impossible for one person to do the labelling and the bright stacking. He agreed one person could bright stack but said it was not fair. It was physically impossible if the line was running. 76. The purpose of the bright stacking of jars was to make room for product up the line that was not in jars and might become solid. 77. Mr Jackson said that it was physically impossible for one person to bright stack because the work was too physically hard. It was also too slow and inefficient. It is just not done. Mr Jackson said that the record on 21 March 1998 showed that the bright stacking did not start until 6am. There were break downs at 6.15am, 6.38am and 8.10am. There was a problem with the blender at 12.10pm. Mr Jackson said his records did not reveal who was working on the line but such records were available. Mr Jackson said that for one person to bright stack 1200 jars it could take 2 to 3 hours. 78. Mr Jackson agreed that on 21 March 1995 he was asked by the applicant to stop the line on a number of occasions. He said he consulted the manager Gary Lynch who refused the request. He felt that was a reasonable decision. 79. Mr Jackson said the records show that Danny Reiser and Danny Brunner were the only employees away from the line on 21 March 1995. 80. Mr Jackson resumed his evidence on 11 April 2001. Mr Jackson arrived in Court with two videos to present as evidence. The first was a video of the J1 line showing bright stacking in process. It was taken the previous evening at 5 pm at the factory. 81. Mr Ingram on the voir dire put to Mr Jackson that the line was different to what Mrs Gough worked on in that the workers were using a scissor lift. He did not recall when this device was introduced. The video was then played. Mr Jackson then told Mr Small that he had measured the height of the conveyor on the J1 line and found it to be 1.02 metres. That height included the guard at its edge. He was unsure as to whether it was the same height as in 1995. 82. Mr Small then asked Mr Jackson to explain the difference between a line leader and a team leader. He said the team leader had more responsibility. The things a team leader did that a line leader did not was to organise the line with future shifts in mind, to talk to people on other lines, get material in, put production figures in the computer, write the line sheets, write the time sheets. 83. Mr Small then asked Mr Jackson what records revealed whether a machine had broken down. He said there were down time sheets. He then produced a down time sheet for 21 March 1995 with the applicants name on it. He said the line involved was J1. He noted 155 minutes on the sheet of down time from 6.35am to 9.10am. There was a further 30 minutes from 9.20pm to 9.50am and 130 minutes from 9.50am to 12 noon. There was a further 20 minutes from 12.15pm to 12.35pm and another period from 1.50pm to 1.52pm and so on. 84. Mr Small then asked Mr Jackson to identify the down time that involved bright stacking on that day. 85. He said the break down of the braider between 9.20am and 12 noon and at 2.45pm would require bright stacking to occur. Mr Small then asked Mr Jackson to give details of break downs on 22 that would have necessitated bright stacking. Mr Jackson said 22 March 1995 was a good production day and there were only a couple of entries that indicated stacking by hand involving only 10 minutes. CROSS EXAMINATION 86. Mr Ingram showed Mr Jackson Exhibit 5. Mr Jackson confirmed his previous evidence that bright stacking was only necessary when the braider broke down on 21 March. Mr Ingram put to him that it would also be necessary if the labeller broke down. He said that was not always the case but it can. 87. Mr Ingram put to him that if the elevator broke down bright stacking was required. He agreed but said usually the men did it. He then agreed Mrs Gough could do it. Mr Jackson then explained to Mr Ingram the difference between lines J1 and J2. He said J2 was basically used for juices. 88. Mr Ingram put to Mr Jackson that J2 line was down on 21 March. He disagreed saying only on the afternoon shift. After further questioning he retracted that assertion agreeing the J2 line was down 113 minutes in the morning and 207 minutes in the afternoon. 89. Mr Ingram then put to Mr Jackson that if Mrs Gough said there were people missing from her line on 21 March that could be because of bright stacking on the J2 line. He said that could happen. 90. Mr Ingram put to Mr Jackson that contrary to his previous evidence the J1 line was actually down for 117 minutes not 10 minutes on 22 March 1995. He agreed that was the total. He also agreed that the J2 line was down 120 minutes on the of 22 March 1995. He said personnel could have been moved from J2 to J1 when J2 was down to do the bright staking. 91. Mr Ingram put to Mr Jackson that it was possible that at various times production workers could have been seconded to other parts of the factory and so limited the number of people bright stacking on J1. He said it was possible but that it would not be done. 92. Mr Ingram then asked Mr Jackson to explain why Dr Chan's measurement of the height of the J1 line in 1995 showed 1.20m which was 20 cm more than his measurement yesterday. He could not explain the difference. Mr Ingram asked Mr Jackson whether there was a 100mm stand that could be used by workers on the J2 line. He said that was so. He did not know whether the stand was available in September 1995. 93. Mr Ingram put to Mr Jackson that the technique used by current workers on the C5 line of softening the plastic lids in warm water to make them easy to put on was not used in September 1995. He didn't recall. 94. Mr Ingram asked Mr Jackson how many jam jars would be in a pallet stacked 7 levels high. He said about 600. JOLANTA PLOCKI 95. Jolanta Plocki gave evidence for the respondent. She said she worked for the respondent for 13 years. 96. She denied that the levels of the J2 or J1 lines had be altered since 1995. She said the platform had been there for a long time. Cross Examination 97. Ms Plocki told Mr Ingram she started work for the respondent in 1988. She agreed that the platform on the bulk jam line had been introduced later. She asserted it was before 1995. She recalled it being there 12 years. 98. She said she did not like the platform because it was too high for her and she had it moved. Mr Plocki said she was 162 centimetres tall. THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE THE RESPONDENTS PRODUCTION RECORDS 1. Jam Plan Labour Summary 21.3.95 99. A document entitled Jam line 1 labour summary 21.3.95 was tendered. It showed Jenny Gough working for 10 hours from 5 am to 3.30pm. It stated that she worked 7 hours on the line. 100. It also showed 11 other workers worked on the J1 line day shift. One worker Mr Williams was away but another Mr Rahmat only worked 6 hours. The J2 line for the same day only had 7 workers present on the day shift. 101. The summary on 22 March 1995 showed the applicant working 6 hours from 5am to 11am then going off on workers compensation. Two workers were absent from the line namely Mr Brunia and Mr Pesa. 102. The J2 line again had 7 workers on the day shift. THE LINE LEADERS PRODUCTION SHEETS 103. The applicant Production sheets for the J1 line on 21.3.95 shows the work starting at 6am and finishing at 3.30. Thirty four pallets of jam were produced on the day. The applicants production sheet for the J1 line on 22.6.95 showed 65 pallets being completed on the shift (ie almost double the previous day). THE STOPPAGE SHEETS 104. The stoppage sheets for 21.7.95 reveal the following information: Time of Stoppage Duration Reason Given 6.05 10 minutes Fitter adjusting jammed conveyor belt 6.35 155 minutes Changing Braider Monbulk to Cottees (Bright Stacking 9.20 30 minutes Braider problem 9.50 130 minutes Filter working on machine. Boxes not sealing. Bright Stacking 12.15 20 minutes Run out of production 1.50 3 minutes Caps jammed in hopper 2.00 4 minutes Caps jammed in the hopper 2.05 10 minutes Emptying out hopper 2.25 20 minutes Cleaning up broken jars 2.45 10 minutes Adjusting glue 105. In total the line was down for 392 minutes or six and a half hours in a ten hour shift.