What does McDonald’s have against their Californian workers?
By Erica Smiley, Executive Director, Jobs With Justice | Twitter: @SmileyJWJ
What’s the difference between a McDonald’s worker in Denmark and a McDonald’s worker in California? One is lucky if they make more than $13 an hour, the other earns $22 an hour or more. One is denied paid sick days, the other gets six weeks of paid vacation guaranteed. During the pandemic, one was told to use coffee filters, or even doggy diapers, instead of masks because their store refused to buy them real PPE — the other would never even dream of being treated like such, well, dog crap.
You’ve probably guessed by now which worker is which. Yes, McDonald’s workers in San Francisco actually complained to the city’s health department after management told them to use coffee filters as masks. And McDonald’s workers in Oakland went on strike after management refused to get them PPE, offering actual doggy diapers to use as substitutes for masks. Meanwhile, as one Danish McDonald’s worker told The New York Times, “I feel for them,” referring to the difference between their own benefits versus their American counterparts, “we are from the same brand.”
The same brand apparently doesn’t count for much. There is, obviously, a huge gap between the working conditions and pay of Denmark’s fast food workers versus that of California’s McDonald’s workers. However, a bill that is making its way through the California state legislature could finally begin to close this gap. It’s called the FAST Recovery Act and it borrows a lot of ideas from Denmark, specifically when it comes to worker representation. If passed, AB 257 would establish an industry-wide, regulatory council made up of corporate representatives, franchisees, and — most importantly — fast food workers. The council would meet regularly to decide on adequate health, safety, and pay standards within California’s fast food sector.
Put simply, the FAST Recovery Act would finally give fast food workers something they have been fighting for over a span of decades — a seat at the table.
It’s no secret that corporations like McDonald’s have made it notoriously difficult for fast food workers to join together in union to advocate for themselves and bargain with management. The very nature of the franchise model — which allows each McDonald’s or Burger King or Wendy’s outlet to set its own, individual standards — keeps workers separated and fractures any industry-wide organizing effort. It’s a divide and conquer business model that intentionally separates workers and undermines their ability to collectively bargain for better, more consistent industry standards. It’s simply impossible, especially within the context of US labor laws, to negotiate with thousands of different bosses at once — all of whom are in competition with one another and don’t want to be paying more than the other guy, thus creating a race to the bottom among franchises.
Naturally, all of this has led to incredibly inconsistent working conditions across fast food franchises. If you are a McDonald’s worker, you could be working at a franchise that offers coffee filter masks, or you could be working at a franchise that offers doggy diaper masks. Who knows! In truth, the only consistencies among Californian franchises have been low pay and poor benefits.
Now, 5,600 miles away in Denmark, each and every fast food worker earns $22 per hour or more, gets six weeks of paid vacation, life insurance, paid parental leave, and a pension plan. How are things so consistently fair for Danish fast food workers? Well, they have a seat at the table — a governmental, regulatory table where employers and workers come together to improve industry standards around things like wages, safety, training and benefits. If it seems like a model for the FAST Recovery Act, that’s because it is.
Believe it or not, bosses actually talking to and working with their workers in Denmark hasn’t turned out so bad for McDonald’s. Improved conditions have reduced turnover — over 70 percent of fast food workers in Denmark keep their jobs for more than a year, while most fast food locations in the U.S. experience more than 100 percent turnover yearly, which collectively costs them billions. It’s not bad for consumers either, despite what the McDonald’s CEO and his right-wing allies in the media may tell you — a Big Mac in Los Angeles costs about as much as a Big Mac in Copenhagen. And, thanks to low turnover, there aren’t periodic labor shortages closing stores, as is the case here.
Nonetheless, fast food companies, spearheaded by McDonald’s CEO Chris Kempczinski, have been lobbying hard against the FAST Recovery Act in California. The question is: Why are supposedly pro-worker Democrats within the state assembly buying what McDonald’s is selling? McDonald’s has proven that they can work directly with worker councils and not only remain profitable, but also save a lot of money while not driving up costs.
So, to McDonald’s and to the assembly members on their side, please answer this for me: What makes fast food workers in California so different that they don’t deserve the same protections as workers in Denmark? Is it because 80 percent of California’s fast food workers are people of color? Or because 45 percent are women? It can’t be an economic reason — again, McDonald’s works with Danish worker councils and very much remains profitable. So, until we get a real economic reason, I’ll keep assuming there is something more sinister behind your opposition.
Erica Smiley is the executive director of Jobs With Justice, a leading worker advocacy organization within the national labor movement. She is the first Black woman to hold the position.
