When Prevention Isn't Enough: The McDonald's Case And The New Standard For Workplace Safety

In February 2023, McDonald's Restaurants Limited entered into a formal agreement with the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) after concerns were raised about how sexual harassment complaints were being handled in a number of its UK restaurants. Staff had spoken about unwanted behaviour and discriminatory treatment, and there were questions about whether issues were being escalated or resolved in a consistent way across the organisation. Workers as young as 17 were being sexually harassed and were groped routinely according to a BBC investigation published in July 2023.

In February 2023, McDonald's Restaurants Limited entered into a formal agreement with the< a href="https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/media-centre/news/our-letter-mcdonalds-franchises" target="_blank">Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) after concerns were raised about how sexual harassment complaints were being handled in a number of its UK restaurants. Staff had spoken about unwanted behaviour and discriminatory treatment, and there were questions about whether issues were being escalated or resolved in a consistent way across the organisation. Workers as young as 17 were being sexually harassed and were groped routinely according to a BBC investigation published in July 2023.

The EHRC, which oversees and enforces equality law in Great Britain, intervened after 450 McDonald's employees were implicated in complaints of discrimination, homophobia, racism, ableism and harassment. The EHRC heard more than 300 reported incidents of harassment indicating that harassment was a systemic issue. The EHRC looked at the situation and concluded that improvements were needed. The agreement required McDonald's to review its policies, train managers more effectively and provide clearer, safer ways for staff to raise concerns. The intention was to encourage structural improvement, not simply to deal with individual incidents as they arose.

That agreement has now been extended. Earlier this year the EHRC wrote to 1,400 branches telling them that they must comply with their legal duties or risk enforcement action. Despite the steps taken, new allegations continued to come forward. McDonald's told a parliamentary committee that it had managed a significant number of harassment complaints over the previous year, some leading to disciplinary action and dismissals. The EHRC formed the view that sustained oversight was necessary and that the earlier commitments needed to go further.

Why the story has wider importance

The timing matters. Since October 2024, employers in Great Britain have been subject to a statutory duty to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment before it occurs. This is not a duty that waits for a complaint. It asks employers to look at their workplaces with a critical eye and to act where there are signs of vulnerability.

The McDonald's case shows what can happen when well-meaning systems do not produce the cultural effects that regulators now expect to see. Policies were updated, and training was delivered, but those measures did not appear to lead to the level of change the EHRC wanted. When that became clear, the Commission deepened its involvement. In many ways, it illustrates the kind of ongoing scrutiny that employers can now expect where concerns persist.

It is fair to say that the preventative duty has changed the landscape. Regulators have a clearer basis for taking action, and they are prepared to use it.

What employers are expected to do in practice

The strengthened requirements within the extended McDonald's agreement provide a window into the type of approach the EHRC considers credible.

A risk assessment, for example, is no longer a generic exercise. Employers are expected to look closely at the way their particular workplace functions. That includes the daily realities, such as who interacts with customers, when staff work alone or late in the day, and where there are significant differences in authority or job security. Harassment risk is rarely spread evenly across a workforce, and the law now expects organisations to recognise that.

Reporting routes must also work in practice. It is one thing to have a policy that invites people to speak up. It is another for staff to believe they will be listened to, supported and treated fairly. If workers fear the consequences of raising concerns, very little will come to the surface, which is precisely the problem the preventative duty is designed to address.

When complaints are made, the way they are handled matters. Investigations should be prompt and impartial, but they also need to be sensitive to the individuals involved. Where similar concerns arise in more than one area of the business, employers should take that as a signal that deeper changes may be needed.

Businesses operating across multiple sites or franchise arrangements face an additional challenge. The EHRC's decision to now write directly to McDonald's franchisees shows how seriously the regulator regards consistency and that the Equality Act applies to businesses of all sizes. A brand's reputation is shaped by every part of its network, not just its head office. It is therefore sensible for franchisors and multi-site employers to consider whether their oversight mechanisms are genuinely capable of identifying issues.

A tightening legal environment

The preventative duty is not the only development. On the horizon, The Employment Rights Bill, which is currently before Parliament, would further broaden the circumstances in which employers can be held responsible for harassment, including conduct by third parties such as customers. It fits with the wider trend. Employers are increasingly expected to anticipate risks and to foster working environments where problems are less likely to arise.

Policies and training remain part of the picture, but they are no longer considered sufficient on their own. Regulators want to see signs that measures are embedded and that staff have confidence in them. Culture is becoming an area of compliance in its own right.

A moment to pause and reflect

Although the McDonald's case has received significant coverage because of the scale of the organisation, the issues it raises are relevant to many employers. Any business with customer-facing staff, dispersed teams or varied working environments will recognise the challenges involved.

It is worth asking some practical questions. Where in the business are staff most exposed to risk? Do workers feel comfortable reporting concerns? When issues arise, are they dealt with consistently, and does the organisation look at what can be learned? And for employers with multiple sites or franchise operations, is there enough visibility of how standards are being applied day to day?

These are not abstract considerations. The EHRC has shown that it will intervene when it believes an employer's approach is falling short, and it is prepared to maintain that involvement until it sees genuine progress.

We can help

Our Employment team works with businesses of all sizes to assess harassment risks, strengthen reporting and investigation processes, and ensure compliance with the preventative duty. If you would like to discuss your current arrangements or understand what the legal changes mean for your organisation, please get in touch.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.