McDonald's Labor Practices More Harmful Than Its Food?

Murky

Deity
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
7,216
Location
The Milky Way Galaxy
McDonald's Labor Practices More Harmful Than Its Food

When it comes to McDonald's, I'm NOT lovin' it. Don Thompson, President of McDonald's USA, issued a memo to the company's 2,400 franchisees at the end of November, urging them to oppose the Employee Free Choice Act. This legislation, as I've written previously, is vitally important for employees nationwide to obtain better wages, benefits, and working conditions. To make matters worse, McDonald's has even super-sized its anti-union ways by forming an internal response team to enable franchisees to "actively participate in the opposition to EFCA."

It seems that McDonald's labor practices are more harmful than the food it serves. The fast-food chain employs over 600,000 people in our country -- many of whom make less than $10 an hour -- and yet the company is thriving during this recession; CEO James Skinner made over $13 million last year alone. So why can't McDonald's afford to allow workers to unionize?

Perhaps the most feeble excuse comes from lobbyist slimeball Rick Berman, who said the Employee Free Choice Act "is a huge threat to fast food and has the ability to impact the long-term health of the industry." Berman should know better than to associate the words "fast food" and "health," just as McDonald's corporate should know better than to pick a fight on an issue that President-elect Obama has made a legislative priority for 2009.

In the meantime, you can tell McDonald's to give workers the free choice to unionize by dropping them a quick note on the SEIU's site.
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/111539/mcdonald's_labor_practices_more_harmful_than_its_food/
 
Sounds like a pretty biased article, 'slimeball?'

But back on topic, the company runs on a unskilled, high turnover, part-time workforce. Honestly (as a former worker) i think a union would be impossible to have anyway. Making money isn't a crime in the USA...and being anti-union isn't evil...
 
Sorry but it's fast food. If want to be rich then you probably should have made some better choices in life so that you wouldnt end up as a career burger flipper.
 
It seems that McDonald's labor practices are more harmful than the food it serves. The fast-food chain employs over 600,000 people in our country -- many of whom make less than $10 an hour -- and yet the company is thriving during this recession; CEO James Skinner made over $13 million last year alone.

And something is wrong with any of this why?
 
Hang on, a liberal website posts a rant against McDonalds because they dare to oppose the Employee "Free Choice" Act?

The only thing shocking is that someone actually considered that newsworthy. What next - a thread about some Neocon website believing we shouldn't bail out the auto companies?

-- Ravensfire
 
Hang on, a liberal website posts a rant against McDonalds because they dare to oppose the Employee "Free Choice" Act?

The only thing shocking is that someone actually considered that newsworthy. What next - a thread about some Neocon website believing we shouldn't bail out the auto companies?

-- Ravensfire

That's why I posted it as a question rather than a fact. Is it true? McDonald's food is pretty bad for health.
 
That's why I posted it as a question rather than a fact. Is it true? McDonald's food is pretty bad for health.

[insert Anecdote] I ate McDonald's food ALOT 9when working there) and i lost weight and felt healthy....so as long as you don't engorge yourself..
 
I don't understand why anybody would support the Employee Free Choice Act. There's nothing free about it. You don't cast a secret ballot. The entire premise of the legislation is to put people like me, who do not wanna work for a union, into a wrongful situation where I have to stare down a union boss when I vote "no" on the union.

Go McDonalds. Fight the good fight.
 
Wait. A fry-cook should get paid according to how much their employer profits and not according to the market value of a fry-cook? Is this some kind of a progressive salary system? The more successful the business, the smaller the profit margin - mandated by law? Minimum wage workers unionizing does not work, anyway. One can fire the lot of them and re-hire instantly.
 
The more successful the business, the smaller the profit margin - mandated by law?

Exactly, which is why GM/Ford works should be make $0.00.

Perhaps they should think this through a bit more :)
 
i can't believe i'm lining up behind/with the eagle guys here....scary..
 
i can't believe i'm lining up behind/with the eagle guys here....scary..

I think what we've got here is a bleeding heart, peacenik conservative :)

Welcome to the darkside. Don't worry, we can nerf your lightsabre so you don't hurt anyone.
 
oh another counter-argument of :unions R evil.

think about it, if employees earn more, they can spend more, pay more debt off. It's stimulating the economy. Screw trickle-down, spread the wealth.
 
think about it, if employees earn more, they can spend more, pay more debt off. It's stimulating the economy. Screw trickle-down, spread the wealth.

Not if the company collapses under the wight of forced wages...or is forced to shrink and fire people..and hire lawyers for strike and disputes...and so on
 
Not if the company collapses under the wight of forced wages...or is forced to shrink and fire people..and hire lawyers for strike and disputes...and so on

Or the owners and higher-ups could take pay hits and stop using the company's profits for enormous expenses like company trips and private jets and other uneeded nonsense.
 
Not if the company collapses under the wight of forced wages...or is forced to shrink and fire people..and hire lawyers for strike and disputes...and so on

think about this. with each year of inflation and the wages not rising, poeple are being less able to spend their money at junk like mcdonalds.

and could you give an example of a company that went bancrupt becuase of the "weight of forced wages"? (it's a fallacy)

would you see the big three got in trouble for having labour unions, or becuase their business strategy failed?

oh and cheezy brings up a good point. (but I believe in the end, the cost is marginal, after all, rich man deserve our adoration, our blood, our sweat and our lives, let's not criticize them. I'll be off now, worshipping my statue of Henry T. Ford.)
 
As long as McDoanld's gives the people working under them a fair deal, (and IMO they do, as a former worker) the owners can do whatever they want (within law). Why can't they? Isn't that the point of getting rich? Being wealthy isn't a crime or even a bad thing.
 
think about this. with each year of inflation and the wages not rising, poeple are being less able to spend their money at junk like mcdonalds.

and could you give an example of a company that went bancrupt becuase of the "weight of forced wages"? (it's a fallacy)

Excellent points. :goodjob:


would you see the big three got in trouble for having labour unions, or becuase their business strategy failed?

It was clearly because they were forced to pay their employees too much money. It threatened their ability to maximize profits for themselves, and they're not really worth the money they make for pushing buttons anyway.

oh and cheezy brings up a good point. (but I believe in the end, the cost is marginal, after all, rich man deserve our adoration, our blood, our sweat and our lives, let's not criticize them. I'll be off now, worshipping my statue of Henry T. Ford.)

Random fact having nothing to do with the topic at hand: Henry Ford helped to publish and distribute the Protocols of the Elders of Zion in the United States, along with his buddy Walt Disney.
 
Back
Top Bottom