McDonald’s responds to racial discrimination lawsuit that includes former Atlanta franchisees
McDonald’s responds to racial discrimination lawsuit that includes former Atlanta franchisees
McDonald’s has responded to a racial discrimination lawsuit filed by 52 Black former franchisees, including 14 who operated restaurants in Atlanta.
Attorneys for McDonald’s Corporation (NYSE: MCD) on Oct. 23 filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, claiming the plaintiffs “have not stated a viable claim of intentional race discrimination.” McDonald‘s legal representation said the majority of allegations put forth by the former franchisees are not valid because they are outside the two- and four-year statute of limitations.
“[T]heir complaint alleges a longstanding, company-wide practice of discrimination against Black owner-operators, including with respect to the location of the restaurants they purchased, the frequency and results of inspections, and the renovations and investment required of all franchisee owners,” McDonald’s attorneys wrote in a memorandum addressing the court. “On its face, this claim is illogical as it suggests the company somehow has an interest in undermining its franchisees and seeing them fail. But what is extraordinary about this argument—perhaps because of the inherent flaw in their essential theory of the case—is that the Plaintiffs’ accusations are grounded almost entirely on speculation, “information and belief,” and conclusory assertions.” (Read the memo here.)
“[T]heir complaint alleges a longstanding, company-wide practice of discrimination against Black owner-operators, including with respect to the location of the restaurants they purchased, the frequency and results of inspections, and the renovations and investment required of all franchisee owners,” McDonald’s attorneys wrote in a memorandum addressing the court. “On its face, this claim is illogical as it suggests the company somehow has an interest in undermining its franchisees and seeing them fail. But what is extraordinary about this argument—perhaps because of the inherent flaw in their essential theory of the case—is that the Plaintiffs’ accusations are grounded almost entirely on speculation, “information and belief,” and conclusory assertions.” (Read the memo here.)