LABOR EXPERTS SAY McD’S STUDY ON FARMWORKER WAGES “SHOULD HAVE NO CREDIBILITY WHATSOEVER”… In April, McDonald’s released the results of its long-anticipated study of tomato pickers’ wages in its Florida suppliers’ operations. The study came up with some pretty remarkable results (according to the report, for example, tomato pickers earn upwards to $18.27/hr and average around $14/hour…) and employed some intriguing methodology to arrive at findings which, though only preliminary, provided the basis for a number of quite far-reaching conclusions.

Well, some of this country’s leading labor experts have had a chance to review the study, and the reviews are in… The critics aren’t liking what they see:

• “So riddled with errors both large and small that it cannot be accepted as factually accurate on virtually any measure”
• “Almost nowhere are ordinary norms of social science research followed”
• “The report should have no credibility whatsoever”

Those are just a few excerpts from a critical analysis of the McDonald’s study — produced by Dr. Bruce Nissen, Director of the Research Institute on Social and Economic Policy at Florida International University — that holds the report up to fundamental research standards and finds it sorely lacking. Dr. Nissen’s analysis is supported by thirty scholars from the fields of labor law, labor relations, and social research, including a former General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board and the Dean of the University of Maine Law School, adding:

“… We affirm the conclusions in Professor Bruce Nissen’s response to the recent report, commissioned by McDonalds, on Florida farmworkers’ working conditions. We agree that the McDonalds report does not meet accepted standards of research, and its findings and conclusions should not be taken seriously.”

Perhaps the most concise review of the study’s value as science comes from Dr. Fred Seidl, Professor Emeritus and Dean Emeritus, University at Buffalo (SUNY), who wrote:

“I was horrified by the lack of methodological sophistication, low level statistical competence, and simple computational errors. The analysis of qualitative findings ignored anything resembling standard social science procedures. Much of the report is simply the listing of unsupported opinions. It seems clear who paid for the study. I am a social scientist, first and foremost, and there is no way this would have survived a Master’s degree defense. The result is misinformation, and no policy decision should rest in any part on this study.”

Click here to see the full analysis by Dr. Nissen.

FORMER SECRETARY OF LABOR ROBERT REICH, FORMER NLRB CHAIRMAN WILLIAM GOULD, AND HARVARD LABOR LAW PROFESSOR PAUL WEILER TELL McD’s TO “NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH WITH CIW”… A blistering letter signed by three former top labor officials rejects McD’s recently released “study” on farmworker wages as “patently aimed at preempting a fair process of engagement with CIW,” and says McD’s should:

“… negotiate in good faith with CIW, should agree on a fair code of conduct that reflects workers’ own priorities, should take direct financial responsibility for improved wages and benefits rather than passing the buck to McDonalds’ growers, and should ensure that farmworkers are able to participate fully in monitoring and enforcing the code of conduct.”

The letter continues:

“… McDonalds, the most powerful force in the fast-food industry, recently announced that it rejected this path toward justice for farmworkers.  McDonalds declined to take responsibility for increasing the wages paid by its growers, leaving the economic responsibility and burden with the growers.   The growers have adamantly refused to improve workers’ lives, in part because big buyers like McDonalds place their growers under severe pressure to reduce prices, costs, and wages. The ultimate buyers of tomatoes – the fast-food chains and grocery chains — have vastly greater resources and bargaining power than the growers and must therefore bear joint responsibility with growers for improving farmworkers’ terms and conditions of employment, including wages.  Taco Bell has taken this important step, and McDonalds should do the same.

Equally important, McDonalds has shunned partnership with the farmworkers.  McDonalds has instead decided it knows best which grower-provided benefits should be a priority for the farmworkers, without entering into good-faith discussions with the workers’ own chosen representatives.  McDonalds has not recognized workers’ elemental right to participate in formulating the rules under which they work and in monitoring and enforcing those rules.“

The letter concludes, “There is no question that McDonalds has the resources and the clout to do these things.  It lacks only the will.” Read the full letter here.

ALLIANCE FOR FAIR FOOD (AFF) BLASTS McD’S USE OF “CLEARLY ILL-CONCEIVED AND POORLY EXECUTED STUDY FOR PUBLIC RELATIONS PURPOSES,” DEMANDS McD’s WORK “AS GENUINE PARTNERS OF CIW”… The founding members of the AFF, along with several key member organizations, have joined their voices to those across the country strongly denouncing the McDonald’s study on farmworker wages, demanding that McDonald’s abandon its public relations strategy and work with the CIW to address the human rights crisis in Florida’s fields. Here’s an excerpt:

“(T)his commissioned tomato study dangerously reaffirms the immoral inequities in power between grower and farmworkers that have been the root cause of farmworker exploitation…

It is our sincere hope that McDonald’s will look upon this obviously flawed and failed tomato study as an opportunity to reevaluate its approach and change course, instead working as genuine partners with the CIW, the farmworker organization that is a proven, respected force for human rights and voice for the farmworkers whose undervalued labor provides millions of pounds of tomatoes for McDonald’s salads and sandwiches.” READ FULL STATEMENT HERE

Click here to see the AFF statement in its entirety!

McD’s MARKETING “SWEET SPOT” SOUR ON STUDY, TOO... Six national student organizations — Student/Farmworker Alliance, United Students Against Sweatshops, Student Labor Action Project, National Latino/a Law Student Association, United States Student Association, and the Living Wage Action Coalition — representing the 18-24 yr. old market demographic McD’s has called its “Sweet Spot” have denounced the McD’s study in the strongest possible terms. Here’s an excerpt:

“Simply put, this study is a joke, but the punchline is muted by the reality of grinding poverty for thousands of farmworkers…

Students and young people were on the front lines of the four-year Taco Bell Boycott and if you do not want to face similar protest, your actions are not making that clear. If you currently believe that we are your “sweet spot,” we are here to tell you that we will become your sore spot. It’s not too late to change course.”

Read the whole student statement here!