Coalition of Franchisee Associations

September 18, 2023

Maze on CA Legislation

NOA estimates will cost a typical California location $250,000 in cashflow.


Anonymous said...

Less customers, less hours, higher check. It works.

Anonymous said...

Yet another glaring example of how today’s McDonald’s senior leadership works.

Identify a threat to their power, influence or money

Parachute in at the scene of the crime

Take charge

Make an announcement that sounds like it’s supportive of Owner Operators, gain limited O/O support, often a few who have other motivations such as operational difficulties, a next gen who is stuck, or simply who want to grow quickly and who are willing to publicly support, say or do what they’re encouraged/told to say or do

Disappear behind closed doors,, solve the problems that affect them directly

Make sure that every single one of their needs/wants are met or exceeded

Reappear and make a victory announcement, include an obscure statement of tepid, bare bones support for any negative consequences for Owner Operators that is the smallest $ commitment possible that also directly benefits them

Disappear from the scene of the crime

Every single move that McDonald’s has made in the last number of years has disproportionally benefitted them, any benefit to any other interest- including suppliers or Owner Operators has been coincidental, however the coincidental benefits are the headline that is promoted.

In this case, while Owner Operators benefitted by beating back joint employer status, we and only we will pay for it. McDonald’s avoided liability, and to top it off, prices will necessarily skyrocket and what a surprise, McDonald’s wins again with increased top line sales that is absolute incremental income, straight to the bottom line while Owners are left to fend for ourselves with our bottom line- they will not help us.

This is absolutely a win/win for the company, perhaps a net loss to every Owner Operator in CA. McD’s beat back what threatened us and they paid for it with our cash flow. There is no other way to see this, this is a clear public example of how they operate today. If they were acting in any other way besides pure self interest, McDonald’s would give back every dollar in increased price taken to us to pay for avoidance of joint employer status, allowing us to secure our financial solvency.

By the way, to the owners who made public statements in support with hopes of favors returned- you are about to find out how that works too. They owe you nothing, while you may gain short term recognition, you will be forgotten. Your use to them is finished, you’ve been wrung out.

This is the benevolent helpful and altruistic partner who calls us “McFamily.”

Who would do this to their own family and what kind of person does this and actually feels like they have done anyone other than themselves a favor?

I’ll tell you who: a narcissistic predatory sociopath, that’s who.

Anonymous said...

Franchisees had no choice their backs were against the wall with the reinstatement of the Industrial Welfare Commission (IWC) no legal challenges the IWC board could have enacted far worse wages and compliances on California Franchisees.

The unions called their bluff (in regards to overturning assembly bills, legal challenges, and going to the voters') with the help of the politicians they own by reenacting the IWC.

Yep McDonald's O/O's lose (far less than they would have) and McDonald's Corporation wins we'll see how the corporation helps the O/O's with the windfall of newfound profits, this will be telling how they act for the rest of the system.

Anonymous said...

IWC has been around for 100 years. The recent funding was a paultrey 1M and this not a real threat. Besides it can be refunded anytime before 2029. A seasoned lobbyist said the old AB1228 didn’t have the votes.

ALL about joint employer!!!!!

Anonymous said...

To the person above- dont hold your breath waiting for help from mcdonalds corp. Dont forget they offered millions of dollars if we adopted the EVP, only to renege on the promise once EVP was adopted. We can not trust any promise the current upper management team makes.

PS- the court challenges to the IWC reinstatement would have been tied up in the courts for YEARS. It was not inevitable.

Anonymous said...

The IWC threat is a false flag. Yes, the IWC would be bad, but it was far from inevitable and it would have been tied up in courts forever. If a Republican governor got elected, it was dead. If there was budget pressure, it was dead (and there is budget pressure).If there is widespread defiance of its dictates, it is dead.

If n IWC dictate was tied up I a legislative vote, it was dead.

False flag to give away someone else's money to escape joint employer (which the NLRB will re-impose anyway).