Employee retention in the restaurant sector has been a longtime issue, with rapid turnover of service staff creating multiple issues and challenges for proprietors. But a McDonald’s branch has put the proverbial cat among the pigeons with what can charitably be described as a ‘unique’ solution.
In a bid to stem the turnover rate and a highly transient workforce, a McDonald’s franchise has enforced a ‘no quit’ policy on its workforce, meaning that any employee wishing to leave their job must first consult with management about their reason(s) for leaving, see if a resolution to those reasons is possible, and if not, then leave only on management’s approval. Meaning, in practical terms, an employee can only leave if management allows them to. To the surprise of absolutely no-one, and especially in the febrile and super-charged socio-political culture in the U.S. currently, this bold move by the management of the McDonald’s franchise in question has provoked outrage from some quarters as a regression of worker’s rights and established employment law.
It’s worth noting here that the controversial policy is limited to a single autonomous franchise and not the McDonald’s corporation as a whole. But regardless, it certainly stirred the hornet’s nest. The concept of a ‘no quit’ policy on a workforce has no basis in employment law in the U.S., either at state or federal level, and certainly has not been tested as yet in a judicial court, although some of the policy’s critics have stated they believe it violates the ‘at will’ employment legislation that has been enacted in all U.S. states except Montana.
The article “Hollywood Faces Uncertain Future As Actors Join Writers On Strike” might also be of interest to you. We recommend giving it a read.
The ‘at will’ laws basically state that an employer can terminate an employee’s job for any reason whatsoever, except in cases where doing so would be illegal, like provable discrimination against the employee’s protected characteristics such as race, religion, gender, age, disability, etc. A counterpart to ‘at will’ laws also grants employees the freedom to quit their job at any time without explanation, insofar as it does not break a contract signed by both parties. This cuts right through the audacious ‘no quit’ policy at the lone McDonald’s franchise and would likely ensure the latter policy was ruled unlawful should it ever be legally challenged.
It would perhaps be better for the McDonald’s franchise at the center of the controversy to seek less confrontational – not to mention potentially less legally expensive – alternatives to retaining employees, for simply treating employees like chattel is not a conducive way to foster cooperation, a harmonious working environment, or indeed a more stable workforce.
