McDonald’s Beats Back Workers’ Lawsuit

Photo of Paul Ausick
By Paul Ausick Updated Published
This post may contain links from our sponsors and affiliates, and Flywheel Publishing may receive compensation for actions taken through them.
McDonald’s Beats Back Workers’ Lawsuit

© courtesy of McDonald's Corp.

[cnxvideo id=”655415″ placement=”ros”]A U.S. District Court in Northern California ruled last Friday that McDonald’s Corp. (NYSE: MCD) does not control wages paid to workers at its franchised stores and is not liable for violations of the state’s labor laws. The judge in the case, Richard Seeborg, granted the company’s petition for summary judgment finding that the workers did not support their argument that the labor code’s definition of an employer extends to companies that “ostensibly” control wages through an agent.

The ruling ends a case brought in 2014 against a Northern California franchisee of McDonald’s, the parent company’s U.S. operating company, and McDonald’s itself. The suit was filed on behalf of more than 1,200 current and former employees in McDonald’s Oakland and San Leandro franchise stores operated by Bobby O. Haynes Sr. and Carol R. Haynes Family L.P.

Last July in a different case, a different judge in the same District Court granted McDonald’s bid for summary judgment on the company’s direct liability for specific labor law violations but denied it on the issue of “ostensible” agency. The parties concluded that lawsuit in November when McDonald’s agreed to pay a $3.75 million settlement, $1.75 million in back pay and $2 million in legal fees. The franchisees in that case — Smith Family L.P. — had already paid $700,000 to settle claims against it.

[nativounit]

One argument that workers have used is that by setting franchisees’ costs for supplies, McDonald’s is de facto setting the wages the franchisees pay to workers. In an editorial published at the time of the July 2016 decision, The New York Times wrote:

The district judge in California has now given lawyers for the McDonald’s employees the chance to prove in court what should be evident: that McDonald’s is responsible for ensuring that pay is fair and adequate and, as such, must be accountable when workers in its restaurants are stiffed.

McDonald’s has been the target of a coalition of fast-food and other low-paid workers who have been pressing for a minimum hourly wage of $15. The movement, now called the Fight for $15, began in 2012 with a demonstration outside McDonald’s locations in New York City.

A final determination is probably still years off, but the losers in last week’s decision already have announced plans to appeal the summary judgment to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

[wallst_email_signup]

Photo of Paul Ausick
About the Author Paul Ausick →

Paul Ausick has been writing for a673b.bigscoots-temp.com for more than a decade. He has written extensively on investing in the energy, defense, and technology sectors. In a previous life, he wrote technical documentation and managed a marketing communications group in Silicon Valley.

He has a bachelor's degree in English from the University of Chicago and now lives in Montana, where he fishes for trout in the summer and stays inside during the winter.

Featured Reads

Our top personal finance-related articles today. Your wallet will thank you later.

Continue Reading

Top Gaining Stocks

CBOE Vol: 1,568,143
PSKY Vol: 12,285,993
STX Vol: 7,378,346
ORCL Vol: 26,317,675
DDOG Vol: 6,247,779

Top Losing Stocks

LKQ
LKQ Vol: 4,367,433
CLX Vol: 13,260,523
SYK Vol: 4,519,455
MHK Vol: 1,859,865
AMGN Vol: 3,818,618