Íűșì±ŹÁÏ, Michigan Workers File Class Action Lawsuit Against McDonaldâs for Sexual Harassment
DETROIT â The Íűșì±ŹÁÏ and Michigan McDonaldâs workers filed a class action lawsuit Tuesday seeking to force the company to address a âsystemic problemâ of sexual harassment in its restaurants across the country.
The suit was filed against McDonaldâs USA, McDonaldâs Corp., and franchisee MLMLM Corp. in state court in Ingham County with support from the TIME'S UP Legal Defense Fund. It zeroes in on a McDonaldâs restaurant near Lansing, Michigan and alleges a trail of illegal harassment that went ignored by management â including groping and physical assaults â is emblematic of a company that permits a toxic work culture from the very top.
âMcDonaldâs likes to say that it is powerless to stop sexual harassment from occurring in its franchise restaurants,â said Gillian Thomas, senior staff attorney at the Íűșì±ŹÁÏ Womenâs Rights Project. âThat would be laughable if it werenât so destructive to the lives of tens of thousands of workers being left to fend for themselves. Today, we are taking McDonaldâs to court to demand that it take responsibility and use its immense power to address the pervasive abuse happening under its âGolden Arches.â Enough is enough.â
The named plaintiff in the suit, 32-year-old former McDonaldâs worker Jenna Ries, has also filed a charge against McDonaldâs with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The complaint alleges a swing manager frequently propositioned Ries for sex on the job, called her epithets in front of other workers and the general manager, and frequently grabbed her. In one alleged incident, the manager placed his penis in Riesâs hand when they were working next to each other in the kitchen. In another, he cornered Ries in the storeâs walk-in freezer, pinning her against a wall. Ries responded to the managerâs harassment by begging him, âstop,â âno,â âleave me alone,â and âdo not touch me,â but he only yelled at her and threatened to have her fired.
âI lived in constant fear of losing my job because I didnât want to be treated like trash, and because I didnât give in to my harasserâs disgusting behavior,â said Ries. "It drove me to tears, and ultimately left me no choice but to take action. Iâm speaking out now to make sure what happened to me doesnât happen to anyone else at McDonaldâs."
A former Detroit McDonaldâs worker filed a separate charge Tuesday with the EEOC, alleging a manager asked how sheâd feel if he and another coworker âran a trainâ on her, referring to sex with multiple partners. When she reported the incident, she was transferred to another store and her hours were cut, forcing her to quit.
âDespite superficial attempts by McDonaldâs to address sexual harassment, todayâs suit and EEOC complaint show the problem persists,â said Eve Cervantez, an attorney with Altshuler Berzon who represents many of the McDonaldâs workers who have filed complaints in recent years. âMcDonaldâs is the leader of the countryâs fast-food industry, yet these complaints show McDonaldâs is among fast-foodâs worst offenders when it comes to protecting the workers who make the companyâs success possible. Employees should not have to endure violation of their humanity and bodily autonomy as the price of earning a paycheck.â
Over the past three years, McDonaldâs has largely ignored its frontline workers alleging illegal harassment in both corporate and franchise McDonaldâs restaurants. Many of those who have spoken up about harassment have felt the brunt of retaliation, alleging reduced hours and unwarranted discipline to being fired or forced to leave their jobs.
âWeâre demanding McDonaldâs new CEO, Chris Kempczinski, sit down with worker-survivors and hear our stories,â said Jamelia Fairley, a leader in the Fight for $15 and a Union and a McDonaldâs worker from Sanford, Florida, who filed a sexual harassment complaint against the company earlier this year. âMcDonaldâs needs to let survivors and our advocates drive the solution. Nothing is going to change for us, without us.â
McDonaldâs workers who have experienced harassment on the job can call the Íűșì±ŹÁÏ Women's Rights Project at (212) 549-2644 or complete a form online here:
Learn More Íűșì±ŹÁÏ the Issues in This Press Release
-
Press ReleaseJul 2025
LGBTQ Rights
Women's Rights
Supreme Court Will Hear Challenges To Bans On Athletic Participation By Transgender Students. Explore Press Release.Supreme Court Will Hear Challenges to Bans on Athletic Participation by Transgender Students
WASHINGTON â The Supreme Court today granted certiorari in two federal court cases involving transgender youth challenging bans on their participation in local school and college sports. âLike any other educational program, school athletic programs should be accessible for everyone regardless of their sex or transgender status. Trans kids play sports for the same reasons their peers doâto learn perseverance, dedication, teamwork, and to simply have fun with their friends,â said Joshua Block, Senior Counsel for the Íűșì±ŹÁÏâs LGBTQ & HIV Project. âCategorically excluding kids from school sports just because they are transgender will only make our schools less safe and more hurtful places for all youth. We believe the lower courts were right to block these discriminatory laws, and we will continue to defend the freedom of all kids to play.â âOur client just wants to play sports with her friends and peers,â said Lambda Legal Senior Counsel Tara Borelli. âEveryone understands the value of participating in team athletics, for fitness, leadership, socialization, and myriad other benefits. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit last April issued a thoughtful and thorough ruling allowing B.P.J. to continue participating in track events. That well-reasoned decision should stand the test of time, and we stand ready to defend it.â Earlier this year, efforts to enact a national ban failed in the U.S. Congress. Since 2020, 27 states have banned transgender youth from playing school sports. Many of these bans allow for invasive forms of sex testing that put all female student athletes at risk and open the door for any school official or adult to question and harass young women. In Florida, a 15-year-old junior varsity volleyball player was the subject of a police investigation after an anonymous accusation, prompting local officials to draft a 500-page report investigating her medical history, body weight, and anatomy. In Utah, a teenage basketball player was accused of being transgender by a member of the state board of education, leading to threats of violence against her and her family, and a teenager in Maine faced a similar attack from a state senator. In May, President Donald Trump bullied a 16-year-old transgender girl for participating in a high school track meet. Many women athletes have spoken out against bullying and discrimination against transgender student athletes. This includes Billie Jean King, Megan Rapinoe, Dawn Staley, Sue Bird, and Brianna Turner, as well as leading organizations fighting for gender equality in athletics including the Womenâs Sports Foundation, the Womenâs National Basketball Playerâs Association, and the National Womenâs Law Center. The two cases the Supreme Court has agreed to hear include: Little v. Hecox, a challenge brought by one transgender and one cisgender student athlete against Idahoâs 2020 ban on transgender athletes and requirements for sex testing West Virginia v. B.P.J., a challenge brought by a teenage transgender girl against West Virginiaâs 2021 ban on transgender athletic participation The two cases charge the bans with violating the rights of transgender and cisgender female students under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution. In addition, West Virginia v. B.P.J. argues that the bans violate Title IX, the federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in educational programs. Federal courts have blocked enforcement of these bans in both lawsuits. These cases are part of the Íűșì±ŹÁÏâs Joan and Irwin Jacobs Supreme Court Docket. -
Press ReleaseJun 2025
Reproductive Freedom
Women's Rights
Aclu Responds To Supreme Court Greenlighting State Efforts To âdefundâ Planned Parenthood. Explore Press Release.Íűșì±ŹÁÏ Responds to Supreme Court Greenlighting State Efforts to âDefundâ Planned Parenthood
WASHINGTON â The Supreme Court ruled today that Medicaid patients do not have a right to sue to enforce their right to a qualified health care provider of choice under the Medicaid statute. The decision in Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic will facilitate some statesâ politically motivated efforts to block low-income patientsâ access to certain health care providers and may effectively defund Planned Parenthood and other disfavored providers by barring them from state Medicaid programs. âThe majority decision in Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic contradicts Congressâs clear purpose to give Medicaid patients their choice of qualified health care providers and also wrongly curtails patientsâ rights to vindicate their choice of provider through Section 1983,â said Cecillia Wang, National Legal Director for the Íűșì±ŹÁÏ. âThe decision may have the effect of blocking patientsâ access to birth control, cancer screenings, and STI testing and treatment for patients in South Carolina and potentially will permit state officials to override patientsâ choice of provider based on political whims.â âThe impact of this decision on our reproductive freedom will be compounded if Congress follows through on federal efforts to 'defund' Planned Parenthood by prohibiting patients from choosing Planned Parenthood health centers for their care,â said Deirdre Schifeling, Chief Political and Advocacy Officer of the Íűșì±ŹÁÏ. âDoing so would force the closure of hundreds of Planned Parenthood health centers nationwide, robbing people of their freedom to get reproductive health care from trusted providers in their communities and would result in shuttering 1 in 4 of the countryâs abortion providers. "Make no mistake: our reproductive freedom is still under siege. The Íűșì±ŹÁÏ remains committed to fighting for Planned Parenthood, abortion access, and the fundamental human right to control oneâs own body using every tool we have. -
News & CommentaryJun 2025
Women's Rights
Parents Push Back Against The Trump Administration's Latest Attack On Working Families. Explore News & Commentary.Parents Push Back Against the Trump Administration's Latest Attack on Working Families
The Trump administration is attempting to gut Head Start, a federally-funded early childhood program Congress created for low-income families -
WashingtonMay 2025
Women's Rights
Washington State Association Of Head Start And Early Childhood Assistance And Education Program Et Al., Robert F. Kennedy Et Al.. Explore Case.Washington State Association of Head Start and Early Childhood Assistance and Education Program et al., Robert F. Kennedy et al.
The Trump Administration is threatening the future of Head Start â a program that has provided critical and evidence-based servicesâfrom education to childcareâ to more than 40 million children and their families. The Administration by gutting Head Start staff and resources, delaying funding, and prohibiting activities that âadvance or promoteâ âdiversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility,â is irreparably harming the young children and low-income families who rely on Head Start.