Sep 16, 2013

Maccas Tecoma stoush could slime brand, expert tells global HQ

Paul Rogers, a leading social responsibility expert, has warned McDonald's that its ongoing dispute with protesters over a planned restaurant in Melbourne's eastern suburbs could irreparably damage the brand.

Andrew Crook — Former <em>Crikey</em> Senior Journalist

Andrew Crook

Former Crikey Senior Journalist

A leading corporate social responsibility expert has written to McDonald’s US board and management alerting them to millions of dollars in brand damage stemming from the now-infamous Tecoma dispute, which went global over the weekend.

In a letter sent by environmental, social and corporate governance sage Paul Rogers to McDonald’s global directors and senior executives and obtained by Crikey, the fast food conglomerate is taken to task for pressing ahead with its plans for a 24-hour restaurant in Melbourne’s leafy east despite ongoing protests and petition action.

Free Trial

Proudly annoying those in power since 2000.

Sign up for a FREE 21-day trial to keep reading and get the best of Crikey straight to your inbox

By starting a free trial, you agree to accept Crikey’s terms and conditions


Leave a comment

10 thoughts on “Maccas Tecoma stoush could slime brand, expert tells global HQ

  1. zut alors

    One would expect a multi-national company to employ savvy executives capable of making a prudent judgement in the Tecoma case.

    What’s Maccas’ global annual budget for publicity and PR exercises? Compare that with the drop-in-the-ocean revenue they gain with one more outlet in Victoria.

  2. Salamander

    For them it would be the precedent, wouldn’t it? Thin end of the wedge.

  3. Ian

    I have never been to McDonalds since the day, Many years ago, that I heard about the McLibel case. I hope many others do the same as a response to this episode.

    These huge corporations need to realize that they are dispensable.

    On another tack; this is not the best time for Macca’s to attract adverse news coverage in the US. They are in the midst of rolling industrial actions by workers of the fast food chains there.

  4. dazza

    Why do rate payers have to defend their local council’s inability to read their own planning schemes?

  5. AR

    Given the stunning success of the McLibel case, it raises the question too infrequently put to the powerful – how come, unlike the higher mammals, you don’t seem to learn from experience?
    To reverse the old put down, “if’n yer so rich, how come you ain’t smart?”

  6. Liamj

    The ‘positive image’ of McDs is shameful, it seems like we’re grateful for obesity. Maybe that’ll finally change once zero-hour contracts, as forced on 90% of UK staff, become commonplace here.

  7. michael crook

    HI Guys, read the Deloitte Access economics report for the Butterfly Foundation to realise just what a problem unhealthy food choices, such as McDonalds, and especially Coca cola, have created. Here in Sandgate, we are also opposing a new McDonalds, but with less community support, this is Queensland after all, our task is made more difficult by Mcdonalds cynical support for the local Police Youth Club, school P and Cs and Junior Sport. The fact that the two local councillors work on McHappy day, is also a problem as one of them is chairperson of the council department assessing the application. At the “community information” session, McDonalds executives advised that they want a McDonalds within 3 minutes drive of everyone in every Australian city. Horrifying isn’t it. If they succeed we will try and organise a boycott and feel that the Tecoma example will stand us in very good stead.

  8. K A

    This case sets the example for communities around the world. McColonisation of the world must be regulated or the insatiable appetite of this greedy corporation will truly take over every last special place in the world. Ubud in Bali has its own battle with a McDonald’s development in progress. Is no where safe from the corporate bully who has zero respect for the environment and communities?

  9. klewso

    What’s one less eye-sore to the greedy behemoth?
    There’s nothing Noble about the way this is being played.

  10. klewso

    But Michael – after these dietary deficients affect your health, some are enlarged heart enough to plough a small amount of those profits (thus generated) back in to help you get better, after a fashion?
    They will keep the rest of those profits of course.
    Sort of “Profit from Profanity”?

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details