Exits of McDonald’s Executives Show Risks of Missteps in #MeToo Era

By Leslie Patton and | November 5, 2019

  • November 5, 2019 at 6:24 am
    knowall says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 24
    Thumb down 0

    The big cheese was thrown out

    • November 7, 2019 at 1:41 pm
      FFA says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 0

      It’s Mayor McCheese. Big Cheese is somewhere in Americas Dairy Land.

  • November 5, 2019 at 10:01 am
    ralph says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 21
    Thumb down 1

    apparently Ronald McDonald was caught having an affair with Wendy. The Burger King was P*SSED and decided to sell her favorite pet, the Taco Bell Chihuahua.

  • November 5, 2019 at 10:39 am
    Observor says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 20
    Thumb down 0

    The CEO is no small fry.

  • November 5, 2019 at 11:50 am
    Craig Cornell says:
    Hot debate. What do you think?
    Thumb up 20
    Thumb down 26

    So let me understand this. All of you are on-board with firing someone with simply having an extra-marital affair with a consensual partner. She isn’t claiming abuse or coercion or anything else.

    So now all of you who defended Bill Clinton’s abuse of an intern with cigars and Oval Office you-know-what are now in agreement that plain old consensual sex is wrong and deserves firing.

    The Left, which introduced us to the sexual revolution with cries of “loosen up” and “sex is natural” and stop being so Puritanical are now the . . . New Puritans.

    • November 5, 2019 at 1:23 pm
      Rosenblatt says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 20
      Thumb down 5

      “All of you are on-board with firing someone with simply having an extra-marital affair with a consensual partner”

      Hmm. Did some comments get taken down?

      I don’t see even one person who said anything close to that.

      • November 5, 2019 at 1:29 pm
        Craig Cornell says:
        Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 5
        Thumb down 16

        Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

        • November 5, 2019 at 2:07 pm
          Rosenblatt says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 16
          Thumb down 3

          “all of you” doesn’t mean everyone? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

          • November 5, 2019 at 2:27 pm
            perplexed says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 7
            Thumb down 16

            Rosenblatt is it that hard to read comments or do you dislike Craig so much you assume he’s saying something he isn’t?

          • November 5, 2019 at 2:50 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 16
            Thumb down 4

            Perlexed – I cited Craig verbatim and asks if posts were removed. Don’t think I deserve your attack on my reading skills when I was asking for clarification.

            “All of you WHO are on-board” is an entirely different statement than saying “all of you are on-board.” Watch….

            All of you are on board that THC is safe….

            All of you who are on board that THC is safe….

            Those are two different statements.

            It’s not hard to read his posts, but when he doesn’t actually write what he meant (then attacks me for putting words in his mouth when I cite him verbatim) do make it difficult to really figure out what he wanted to say versus what he actually posted.

            Words matter.

          • November 5, 2019 at 3:13 pm
            flawedlogic says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 10
            Thumb down 5

            Perplexed,

            I love how you are just not comprehending what a conversation is. No one made a comment about approving of this decision. By making that statement without anyone indicating what he said, then it is a bad comment to no one.

            You defending it because you agree he shouldn’t have been fired is also wrong, as no one made the point Craig was arguing against.

            Good day, and glad I can educate you on conversations.

          • November 5, 2019 at 4:38 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 10
            Thumb down 2

            Polar … how did I misrepresent what Craig wrote when I cited him and asked if he was responding to a since deleted comment?

        • November 5, 2019 at 3:29 pm
          Nebraskan says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 19
          Thumb down 1

          No, I think Rosenblatte is right. Your comment is loaded. How do you know everyone who thought the Bill Clinton situation was ok thinks this situation isn’t? How are you getting, “The Left,” and, “The Right” out of this?

          • November 5, 2019 at 6:27 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 12

            Well then, weigh in. Are the new standards of behavior applicable to Bill Clinton or not? And if so, should he have been “fired”. After all, what he did was far worse for most people than a consensual adult sexual relationship. He was diddling a low level intern with cigars after getting sexual favors. No intercourse at all.

            Care to walk the walk and take a stance on Big Bill?

        • November 5, 2019 at 4:26 pm
          ImpeacHam Sandwich Dems says:
          Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 4
          Thumb down 14

          Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • November 5, 2019 at 4:36 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 12
            Thumb down 3

            Okay Polar … what Straw Man argument did I make when I cited Craig’s post and asked if he was responding to a since deleted comment?

    • November 5, 2019 at 1:24 pm
      TGagent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 12
      Thumb down 0

      No, it’s because they have a no-fraternization policy that applies to management and underlings. That’s why he was fired. Not because of it being an affair with a consensual partner. It was because of the power of his position and breaking the employee handbook rules. She didn’t have to claim abuse. What he did was against the corporation’s rules.

    • November 5, 2019 at 2:24 pm
      chad balaamaba says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 13
      Thumb down 0

      Agree with your overall point, but I don’t think anybody has been cheerleading the MCD decision in this forum…would love to see the ee manual, odds are there is a clause to preclude a relationship with a subordinate…which is clearly their right to enforce. There is zero evidence thus far of sexual harassment…will be interesting to see if the relationship in question falls apart if litigation then follows. I do admire the mob mentality growing in this country…the CEO erred in judgement, the company removed him…but that’s not enough to satisfy so many. As was pointed out, if it was a middle manager, he’s probably walked out with a box to his car…but remember the corporate golden rule: whoever has the gold makes the rules. No system is perfect…cigar jokes aside! I do like the comparison to the new puritans…ironic isn’t it?

      • November 5, 2019 at 3:15 pm
        flawedlogic says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 13
        Thumb down 1

        I can confirm that the you are right. There is a rule in their manual that precludes a relationship with a subordinate. He violated that rule and admitted he violated it.

        I do not agree he should have been fired as it was a consensual relationship with no forcing, but he did break a rule, and McD did enforce their rules.

    • November 6, 2019 at 5:16 pm
      SAK74 says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 3
      Thumb down 0

      It depends on how McDonald’s policies read. If there are policies (which when it comes to large corporations typically there are) that states executives are not allowed to have relationships/sexual affairs with other in the organization then yes he should be fired whether the other party is complaining or not. He broke policy and should have to face consequences. If there are no policies then I would think he would have a case against the board for wrongful termination.

    • November 7, 2019 at 1:52 pm
      curious says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 0

      Easterbrook is not married. His ex-wife and children live in England.

  • November 5, 2019 at 1:09 pm
    Captain Planet says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 10
    Thumb down 3

    I wonder if McD’s has a fraternization clause in their employee handbook. Do they have additional rules that prohibit execs having relationships with other co-workers because of the power of the position? That would be grounds for firing. Or, was this decision made based solely on optics?

    • November 5, 2019 at 1:23 pm
      TGagent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 1

      Yes, they have a no-fraternization policy that applies to management and underlings. That’s why he was fired. Not because of it being an affair with a consensual partner. As you said, it was because of the power of his position and breaking the employee handbook rules.

    • November 5, 2019 at 1:34 pm
      Craig Cornell says:
      Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 6
      Thumb down 17

      Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

      • November 5, 2019 at 2:34 pm
        Perplexed says:
        Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 8
        Thumb down 19

        Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

  • November 5, 2019 at 3:45 pm
    Observor says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 19
    Thumb down 0

    I believe that MD does have a fraternization clause in writing.

    If you look at this from a pure risk management perspective, this is a positive long term move from the Board of Directors.

    As I understand, the CEO was very successful in turning around the corporations finances so I am sure that they had a difficult decision. However, this move minimizes the frequency and severity of potential lawsuits down the road because employees or middle managers who fraternize or abuse their power at the corporation have less ground to file and win lawsuits. The company is demonstrating an attempt to develop a culture that allows employees to focus on work.

    Whether we like it or not, we are living in a culture where many are sensitive to this type of behavior. The key is to minimize your loss exposure.

    • November 5, 2019 at 4:43 pm
      Rosenblatt says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 16
      Thumb down 1

      I’m with you, Observor. While I don’t think having a consensual relationship is in and of itself justification for termination, not firing them in this situation does give the wrong impression …. letting management get away with behavior that is against written company policy sets a bad example for the rest of the employees who would begin to wonder why those policies are there when they’re not being enforced.

      • November 5, 2019 at 5:26 pm
        Craig Cornell says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 5
        Thumb down 14

        And Bill Clinton? Something liberals all told us at the time was that it was “just sex” and don’t be so uptight.

        Should Clinton have been fired for cigar tricks and sexual favors from a low level intern? And if not, why not?

      • November 5, 2019 at 6:31 pm
        Rosenblatt says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 14
        Thumb down 4

        No, Clinton should not have been fired SOLELY for his (presumably consentual) sexual relations with Lewinsky. Unlike McD, there’s no policy against what he did. HOWEVER, he 100% should have been fired for lying under oath about it.

        Got any more unwarranted personal attacks or vitriol for me or do you want to turn over a new leaf?

  • November 6, 2019 at 8:42 am
    David Backs says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 9
    Thumb down 1

    Before I’m attacked as a “lefty” I will state up front I am a moderate. Both the McD CEO and Clinton should have been “fired.” It is completely inappropriate to enter into a sexual or romantic relationship with someone subordinate to you in an organization, even if it is consensual. The relationship may go sour and the manager is in a position to impact the subordinate’s job. Seems simple to me – don’t enter into a relationship with a subordinate. How hard is that? There are plenty of potential partners outside of work.

  • November 6, 2019 at 11:45 am
    Craig Cornell says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 8
    Thumb down 9

    So, after learning that the leftists at NBC News suppressed stories about Weinstein, now we learn that the leftists at ABC News and CNN suppressed legitimate stories about Epstein in 2016.

    Yep, liberals who reported on every wild accusation against Kavanaugh (rape parties!) without any evidence whatsoever went out of their way to protect rapists and serial pedophiles. Why?

    The same people who covered for Bill Clinton in the face of credible accusations of rape and sexual assault.

    And where is the outrage from daily, regular old liberals about any of the above? No where.

    But a consensual affair by a corporate executive with another adult? HANG HIM!

    • November 6, 2019 at 12:02 pm
      Rosenblatt says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 7
      Thumb down 2

      Attempt to get back on topic #3: “What EXACTLY do you think should’ve happened to the McD’s CEO for violating written company policy?”

      • November 6, 2019 at 12:18 pm
        Craig Cornell says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 12

        The same thing that you recommended for credibly accused Bill Clinton. Nothing.

        I believe in protecting the women. Period. You believe in documents.

        • November 6, 2019 at 12:36 pm
          Rosenblatt says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 11
          Thumb down 2

          What’s wrong with you, Craig?

          Why are you claiming I care about documents and NOT protecting women?

          I said I believe Clinton should’ve been fired if he was having NON-CONSENSUAL relations, REGARDLESS of policies or documents.

          I said if it WAS consensual, the act alone is “fine” (not that I think adultery is fine, but it’s not a fireable offense) … but again, he should’ve been fired for lying under oath.

          The issue here is there was a CONSENSUAL relationship which violated company policy.

          Since you don’t think anything should’ve happened to the McD CEO here, what’s the point of having company policies in the first place?

          Did you sign any kind of agreement when you were hired. and do you think it’s okay to do whatever you want in direct violation of the agreement you signed?

          • November 6, 2019 at 12:58 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 10

            And so I stated it perfectly: Clinton abused his position of power, a classic definition of legal “sexual harrassment” in order to get cigar tricks and oral sex from a low level intern. If you think that is okay because there was no “document”, well that’s what I said. (And it wasn’t “consensual sex” in the minds of nearly ALL women.)

            The McDonald’s executive, by all accounts, had a respectful consensual relationship with another woman. But you don’t care about the woman – who must feel horrible about the outcome now. You care about the “documents”.

            And Clinton’s credible accusers of rape and sexual assault? Silence is golden, right Rosenblatt?

            I stated your position perfectly.

          • November 6, 2019 at 1:49 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 2

            Me (stating the same thing for at least the 2nd time): “I said I believe Clinton should’ve been fired if he was having NON-CONSENSUAL relations, REGARDLESS of policies or documents.”

            You: “If you think that is okay because there was no “document”…”

            You actually tried to argue I said the OPPOSITE of what I wrote. Let me try this one more time….

            NON-CONSENSUAL ACTS ARE NOT OKAY AND SHOULD BE A FIRE-ABLE OFFENSE REGARDLESS OF WRITTEN POLICY.

            Do you understand the words that are coming out of my mouth now?

          • November 6, 2019 at 2:56 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 8
            Thumb down 7

            HA HA HA. This is so much fun!

            You started with stating only that it was “presumably consensual”. Now you waffle, and say that maybe it wasn’t consensual. Newsflash: in a power relationship between the Most Powerful Man in the World and a low level intern where there is NO intercourse but only sexual favors from the female to the male, the law “presumes” abuse of that relationship. It is the literal definition of sexual harrassment under the law. (And you said Clinton should only be fired for lying! HA HA HA.)

            And your dodging of the rape and sexual assault allegations – which even the NY Times called credible last year – is pretty pathetic. (Did they need a document?)

          • November 6, 2019 at 3:11 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 3

            pre·sum·a·bly: used to convey that what is asserted is very likely though not known for certain.

          • November 6, 2019 at 3:41 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 4

            Could you help me understand why you keep asking me how I think Clinton’s non-consensual acts should be handled when there’s not a “document” saying it’s against some kind of policy?

            Did you forget me saying:

            NON-CONSENSUAL ACTS ARE NOT OKAY AND SHOULD BE A FIRE-ABLE OFFENSE REGARDLESS OF WRITTEN POLICY.

            I’ve said it like 4 times now. Why can’t you retain this information?

          • November 6, 2019 at 4:48 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 5

            But consensual sex is not okay for the corporate exec. . . . because there was a document!

            Right, you care about women. Especially the ones who for years claimed credibly that Clinton was guilty of rape and sexual assault. I’m sure you were outraged and told all your friends and family that Big Bill should be prosecuted.

            Just like now.

          • November 6, 2019 at 4:58 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 2

            Craig – your last post brings up a question I’ve asked you multiple times here, and I’d love it if you actually answered.

            What’s the point of having company policies if they are not enforced when violated? Did you sign any kind of agreement when you were hired, and do you think it’s okay to do whatever you want in direct violation of the agreement you signed?

            …and in case you forgot: NON-CONSENSUAL ACTS ARE NOT OKAY AND SHOULD BE A FIRE-ABLE OFFENSE REGARDLESS OF WRITTEN POLICY.

          • November 7, 2019 at 5:41 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 9

            So Bill Clinton should have been fired for the credible rape and sexual assault allegations, is that what you’re saying now? That all the people who defended him and attacked his accusers were wrong? Is that right?

  • November 7, 2019 at 10:24 am
    Smooth says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 8
    Thumb down 1

    Did someone seriously try to turn this into a political debate? That’s just sad. I voted for both Clinton and Trump. I’m pretty certain they both have had some historical issues with cheating, but neither have anything to do with this particular article. How does McDonald’s get turned into a Presidential debate? lol

    • November 7, 2019 at 10:50 am
      Rosenblatt says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 6
      Thumb down 2

      Not sure how it happened, but that’s why I keep trying to bring Craig back to the topic at hand. Doesn’t seem to be working, though :(

      • November 7, 2019 at 1:47 pm
        FFA says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 4
        Thumb down 5

        Smooth, it always does. same lines from the same people.

        I tend to disagree with the no fraternization rules. If I find my true love working for me and I am her true love, why cant we pursue each other/?

        • November 7, 2019 at 2:21 pm
          CL PM says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 8
          Thumb down 0

          My take on that is one of you should find another job if you want to continue the relationship. “True love” may not last and it would not be fair to her for you to still be her manager. Unlike Nike, just don’t do it.

          • November 7, 2019 at 2:28 pm
            ralph says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 2

            don’t sh*t where you eat…it’s generally not a good idea. yeah, I’ve done it before, long ago in the days before I started disappointing Mrs. Ralph on a permanent basis. I had the sense to end things before the unlucky lass could tell everyone in my office that I had the sexual prowess of an 85 year-old tortoise. I would’ve hated for that to get out…

    • November 7, 2019 at 5:39 pm
      Craig Cornell says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 10

      Here’s how: the McD guy had an affair. Big whoop. And all the self-righteous people who defended Big Bill in the face of cigars and oral sex and credible allegations of rape and sexual assault. . . well, lots of them are now in favor of the McD guy getting fired.

      It is OF COURSE a political issue. Nobody cared about affairs 20 years ago. But in the MeToo era . . . well, if you don’t see the dramatic change in morals by lots of people, you aren’t looking.

      • November 7, 2019 at 6:03 pm
        Jon says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 12
        Thumb down 7

        No one is talking about or cares about Bill Clinton but you, sad old man.

  • November 11, 2019 at 2:51 pm
    Smooth says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 7
    Thumb down 2

    Craig – Shouldn’t you be happy people are now caring about affairs? I don’t get it. Who cares what people thought 20 years ago. That sort of anger will kill you. Twenty years ago, I liked playing Nintendo. I don’t today. People can change their minds over a 20 year period.

    I also haven’t seen anyone here defending Clinton or TRUMP. I haven’t seen you call for Trump’s resignation and we know he has been around the block, consensually and possibly otherwise. This message was brought to you by a guy who voted for Trump, but also understands wrong is wrong.

  • November 12, 2019 at 1:48 pm
    TheExpert01 says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 1
    Thumb down 1

    Read, and then re-read this article carefully:
    Fight for 15
    ACLU
    SEIU
    Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren
    the National Advertisers MULTICULTURAL Marketing Convention
    the MeToo Movement
    Senator Tammy Duckworth

    All liberal left leaning individuals and organizations dedicated to taking down anybody that owns/operates/represents an evil, multi-national corporation dedicated to the pursuit of the equally evil profits that the corporations is expected to produce for the shareholders.

    The ONLY reason this should be an article in the Insurance Journal is this: The actions of the above named organizations are a direct threat to our clients (you know, the businesses that we insure) and the we, the agents, MUST do all in our power to protect and defend those clients, with whatever insurance products and/or training modules that we have available to them, whether it is EPLI or any other form of liability policy that will pay for that defense.

    I wouldn’t give two cents for the opinions of all of the named liberal organizations or organizers that this article printed. Why wasn’t a SINGLE McDonalds franchise owner or employee quoted? Don’t they count?

    • November 12, 2019 at 5:43 pm
      flawedlogic says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      So your name says you are an expert, what are your qualifications or is this just agent or polar using another fake name?

      I wouldn’t give two cents to any news organization liberal or conservative for their opinion pieces because for the most part it is crap. It is not fact checked and it is meant to provoke either fear or panic to rally behind a cause.

      You cannot justify vilifying one whole group because you agree with the other one. That is illogical by all accounts, and it is called the confirmation bias (where you seek out only information that agrees with your current views).

    • November 12, 2019 at 5:48 pm
      flawedlogic says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      How is this also a direct threat to our clients? The client broke their rules they have in place that bars a superior with engaging in a consensual relationship with a subordinate. Had he simply had the subordinate quit or switch to a new company (had this happen before), he would not have fired.

      What are your thoughts regarding why this was negative even as he BROKE A WRITTEN RULE. I would not consider writing a company who allows their executives to break these rules, but would enforce it for the little guys. You need to have an even hand and enforce rules that are meant to minimize your exposure. If you disagree with that, you aren’t the best agent.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*