Posted on 03/11/2016 1:34:37 PM PST by Citizen Zed
For the Corporation to be held responsible for all day to day activities and decisions in a franchise they would have to run them themselves, those restaurants are called corporate stores, not franchises. If an individual owner doesn't follow the law why would anyone think the corporation should be penalized.
I guess if you follow the logic a police chief should be prosecuted for the crimes of an officer, or should that be the mayor of the city, or when someone in the federal government breaks the law let's prosecute the president.
re: should corporations be responsible for their franchisers paying fair wages.
Really. If a restaurant is part of a franchise, it should mean something. That something means some direction on how employees should be treated. Any franchiser who doesn't want to follow rules should run an independent restaurant.
To a degree of course. Why wouldn’t they. The franchise name is the asset of the corporation. They should do everything they can to protect it. If they fail to do that then they’re probably not fulfilling their traditional fiduciary duties.
I cannot believe that some in this forum would actually think that this is a good idea...to have the NLRB dictate that a corporation is responsible for the actions of private independently owned franchisees.
No wonder this country is in the shape that it is today!
Mediocre people with ambition gravitate to the state and the incredible power it gives them over their hated betters.
Some loser in life pencil pusher in the bowels of a government bureaucracy can make, with a stroke of his regulatory pen, brilliant entrepreneurs dance like terrified sheep herders having their feet shot at by gunfighters in an old West cow town.
If McDonald’s is held responsible you can kiss franchising goodbye. I expect this will just be another case of lawyers disrupting the economy while siphoning money from it.
So by exercising control of the brand, they then assume the financial liability for the actions of franchisees?
So FritoLay is now responsible for every supermarket worker as well, since they exercise dramatic control over their product placement, sales price, and stock?
The most simple test that has stood the test of time (and courts) is that if you are unable to hire or fire the employee directly, your company does not hold financial liability unless you choose to accept it.
Yes absolutely. Notice part of that Operations Maintenance and Training manual (OMT is the bible of McDs, everything you need to know how to run a McD is in that book, EVERYTHING) is pay scale. McD corporate TELLS the franchises how much to pay people with job title X.
Fritolay is not a franchise operation. Completely different, they don’t tell grocery stores how much to pay box boys, which cash registers to buy, or what layout the store should have.
And in the end you prove my point. McD corporate CAN directly fire employees. Hell they can fire the OWNER. They hold the financial liability because in the end they run the store. Usually indirectly through the OMT, but they still come by to grade the store periodically, and can revoke the franchise license and take over the store directly on 30 days notice.
I don’t think that it’s possible. The level of supervision would be unachievable.
Agreed.
All this will lead to is even more self-service kiosks at McDonalds’.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.