McDonald's faces boycott over DEI rollback: Who's protesting and when
Where's the beef? This week, at McDonald's.
A boycott targeting the fast-food chain slated to begin June 24 is the latest in a series of consumer actions from the grassroots advocacy group The People's Union USA.
Led by John Schwarz, The People's Union began organizing 'economic blackouts' in February motivated by the corporate rollback of diversity, equity and inclusion programs as well as other grievances.
McDonald's was one of the corporations to roll back its DEI initiatives in January. Citing the 'evolving landscape around DEI,' it stopped setting goals to increase diversity in senior leadership and ended a program that encouraged diversity among its suppliers.
McDonald's chief people officer for the U.S. market Jordann Nunn in June told a human-resources conference that the company changed some of its DEI language 'but at the core, none of our programming has changed.'
Trump Juneteenth backlash Trump DEI attacks changed how companies celebrated Juneteenth
Boycotts fight Trump war on DEI
The backlash against DEI gained momentum during the 2024 presidential campaign but hit a fever pitch when President Donald Trump took office and issued a series of executive orders aimed at eliminating 'illegal DEI' in the federal government and the private sector.
As the Democratic Party struggles to respond to the Trump-led culture war, pro-DEI consumers have emerged as the first line of defense for Democrats.
Taking a page from activists who mounted effective anti-DEI campaigns against Bud Light and Target, Black churches and community activists have put pressure on companies rolling back DEI initiatives with a string of boycotts.
It's unclear how much of an impact these boycotts are having on the bottom line.
Target cited its decision to end some diversity policies as a contributor to the sharp pullback in consumer spending in the first quarter as church pastors and other community activists launched protests, spreading word of planned boycotts on social media.
The retail giant said the boycotts dented its first-quarter performance but could not estimate by how much. Foot traffic declined for four straight months, according to Placer.ai data.
McDonald's boycott comes after sales decline
This week's boycott comes at an inopportune moment for McDonald's. Buffeted by economic headwinds, U.S. sales fell sharply in the first quarter – the largest drop in its home market since the height of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 – despite efforts to win back diners with menu changes and deals after hiking prices.
McDonald's CEO Chris Kempczinski said at the time consumers were 'grappling with uncertainty' but that he remained optimistic his company can navigate 'even the toughest of market conditions."
McDonald's did not respond to a request for comment on the boycott.
Why is there a McDonald's boycott?
On Instagram, Schwarz listed five reasons for The People's Union boycott of McDonald's.
'We're boycotting McDonald's because they've shown time and time again that profit matters more than people, from price gouging to tax evasion, from inequality in pay to exploitation in advertising,' he told USA TODAY. 'And yes, their DEI efforts feel more like promotional stunts than real systemic change. We're done funding companies that pretend to stand for something while doing nothing."
More boycotts planned against Walmart, Amazon
Schwarz also shared a flyer on social media that lists upcoming boycotts against Starbucks, Amazon, Home Depot, Walmart and Lowe's.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
32 minutes ago
- The Hill
Updated Senate bill slashes wind and solar incentives – and adds a new tax
An updated draft of the Senate's megabill text slashes tax incentives for wind and solar energy – and adds a new tax on future wind and solar projects. The initial draft released by Senate Republicans earlier this month cut the credit for any wind and solar projects that did not 'begin construction' by certain dates, while the latest version bases incentives on when projects actually begin producing electricity — a much higher bar to clear. The first draft gave any project that began construction this year full credit, any project that began construction next year 60 percent credit and any project that began construction in 2027 20 percent of the credit, before they were phased out thereafter. The new legislation instead says that the credits will only apply to facilities that begin producing electricity before the end of 2027. In addition, it imposes a new tax on some wind and solar projects that are placed in service after 2027. The projects that will be taxed if a certain percentage of the value of their components come from China. The Democrats' 2022 Inflation Reduction Act included hundreds of billions of dollars in tax credits for low-carbon energy sources, including renewable energy. These subsidies were expected to massively reduce the U.S.' planet warming emissions. The GOP's cuts to the credits are expected to severely curtail those gains. If they pass, the cuts represent a win for the party's right flank, which has pushed for major cuts to the credits, and a loss for it's more moderate wing which has called for a slower phaseout. The renewables lobby slammed the changes as hampering the sector. 'In what can only be described as 'midnight dumping,' the Senate has proposed a punitive tax hike targeting the fastest-growing sectors of our energy industry. It is astounding that the Senate would intentionally raise prices on consumers rather than encouraging economic growth and addressing the affordability crisis facing American households,' Jason Grumet, CEO of the American Clean Power Association, said in a written statement. 'These new taxes will strand hundreds of billions of dollars in current investments, threaten energy security, and undermine growth in domestic manufacturing and land hardest on rural communities who would have been the greatest beneficiaries of clean energy investment,' he added.
Boston Globe
33 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Senate Republicans revise Trump's policy bill, scrounging for votes to pass it
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Republican leaders in the Senate are rushing to shore up support for the legislation so they can quickly pass it and send it to the House for final approval in time to meet the July 4 deadline Trump has set. An initial vote in the Senate could come later Saturday. Advertisement Party leaders are trying to appease two flanks of their conference. Some, including Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, said they could not support it without greater reassurances that the Medicaid cuts it contains would not hurt rural hospitals in their states. And fiscal hawks, including Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, have said they do not want to back legislation that would only increase the deficit. Advertisement The core of the bill remains the same. It would extend tax cuts passed by Republicans in 2017 and add some new ones Trump campaigned on, while slashing spending on safety-net programs, including Medicaid and food assistance. The biggest tax cuts and the biggest changes to those anti-poverty programs remained intact. Taken together, the bill would likely increase federal debt by more than $3 trillion over the next decade, though lawmakers are still shaping the bill and waiting on an official estimate from the Congressional Budget Office. With Trump demanding quick action, Republicans in Congress have intensified their efforts to push it through to enactment even as many of them — including several who voted for it in the House — have been open about their reservations about a measure they are concerned could be a political loser. The revisions released early Saturday were designed to allay some of those concerns. Senators, including Tillis and Susan Collins, R-Maine, had pressed for the inclusion of a rural hospital fund to help health care providers absorb the impact of a provision that would crack down on strategies that many states have developed to finance their Medicaid programs. Despite their pushback, that provider tax change remains in the bill, though lawmakers have delayed its implementation by one year. It is unclear whether a $25 billion compensation fund will be enough to win their votes. Collins had suggested that she wanted to provide as much as $100 billion to ensure that rural hospitals, which operate on thin margins, were not adversely affected. Advertisement But it appeared to be enough to win over at least one Republican holdout who had expressed concern about the Medicaid cuts — Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, who said he would vote for the bill and was confident that changes benefit his state at least in the short term. A new provision allowing 'individuals in a noncontiguous state' to be exempt from enforcing new work requirements imposed on SNAP, formerly known as food stamps, appeared aimed at mollifying Murkowski of Alaska. Her state would be hit with billions of dollars in nutrition assistance costs as a result of the legislation, and she had cited the provision as one of her chief concerns. The bill also includes new health provisions designed to benefit Alaska, as well as new tax benefits for fishers in the state's waters. Some of the changes were aimed at appealing to members of the House, where Republicans from high-tax states like New York have threatened to sink the bill if it does not include a substantial increase in the state and local tax deduction, currently capped at $10,000. Senate Republicans, skeptical of the deduction, still ultimately decided to match the House plan to lift the cap to $40,000. But while the House made the increase permanent, the Senate keeps it for only five years, allowing it to snap back to $10,000 in 2030. The newest draft makes even sharper cuts to subsidies for wind and solar power, something that Trump and other conservatives had explicitly called for this past week. It remains to be seen whether those changes could cause friction with Republicans who have publicly supported green energy credits, including Tillis, Murkowski and Sen. John Curtis of Utah. Advertisement Previously, the Senate proposed allowing companies that were building wind and solar farms to claim a tax credit worth at least 30% of their costs if they started construction this year, with a phaseout over two years. But the revised bill would require companies place their projects 'in service' by the end of 2027 to claim the tax break. The bill would also impose additional taxes on renewable energy projects that receive 'material assistance' from China, even if they don't qualify for the credit. Because China dominates global supply chains, those new fees could affect a large number of projects. The new Senate measure would more quickly end tax credits for electric vehicles, doing away with them by Sept. 30. It would also slow the phaseout of a lucrative tax credit to make hydrogen fuels, allowing such projects to qualify if construction were started by the end of 2027, instead of by the end of this year. The bill also includes a provision written by Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, to sell as much as 1.225 million acres of federal land across the American West in order to build housing. Earlier versions of that proposal that would have auctioned off even more acreage had drawn fierce opposition from conservative hunters and outdoorsmen, and Republican senators from Montana and Idaho had said they would not vote for it. This article originally appeared in
The Hill
36 minutes ago
- The Hill
Nikki Haley hails Trump for US strikes but warns ‘Iran is not done'
Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley offered her first praise for President Trump in several months in a Monday op-ed in Israel Hayom, an Israeli right-wing newspaper. She congratulated his decision to strike three Iranian nuclear sites but warned of further retaliation from Iran. 'Those in America that worry about why these strikes took place should understand that those strikes were a move to keep Americans safer. That was a move to take out one of the threats that Iran has used against Americans for years,' Haley wrote in the outlet owned by Republican megadonor Miriam Adelson. Israel Hayom is distributed in Hebrew and is also available online in English. The op-ed is a rare public appearance for Haley, who has largely faded from public view since the 2024 election. When she has spoken on Trump's foreign policy decisions in recent months, she has often criticized them, panning him for a phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin and slamming his acceptance of a Qatari jet. In the opinion piece, however, Haley praised Trump's decision as 'very well done' while arguing that the United States should continue to be hawkish on Iran for the sake of both America and Israel. 'A safe and secure Israel helps us have a safe and secure America,' she wrote, arguing that the chance of diplomacy with Tehran was thin. 'They always say they want to talk, but the action doesn't match what they want to do,' she wrote. 'Trump was right that while you could kick this can down the road if you wanted, the threat would only get bigger.' She also took aim at the United Nations after Secretary-General António Guterres said he was 'gravely alarmed' by the strikes, accusing the international arbiter of failing to condemn Iran's moves on ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons. Haley finished by warning that America and Israel both needed to remain on guard. 'Americans need to be vigilant of our military bases in the region. We need to be vigilant of cyber attacks that could come our way through Iran. Iran is not done,' she wrote. As Trump's ambassador to the United Nations during his first term, Haley made the case both to him and to the global stage that the United States should back out of its 2015 nuclear deal with Iran. In the 2024 Republican presidential primary, during which she attempted to criticize the president, she also positioned herself as both a staunch defender of Israel and a Middle East hawk. After being the last of Trump's primary challengers to bow out, Haley failed to secure a place in his administration (she claimed she wanted no part in it). She is currently at the Hudson Institute, a conservative think tank, and making her way around the speaker circuit.
