Saturday, 8 November 2025
The widening fallout from sexual-harassment allegations at McDonald’s has moved beyond the UK and is now drawing the attention of unions, regulators and workers’ organisations across Europe. What began as a domestic investigation by British media has evolved into a broader European issue as testimony, legal filings and union complaints reveal a similar pattern of alleged misconduct and inadequate protections at restaurants in several countries.
The most advanced regulatory action remains in the United Kingdom. In February 2023, McDonald’s UK signed a legally binding agreement with the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) after the watchdog intervened over concerns that young workers, some under 18, were facing sexual harassment and that internal systems were not sufficiently protecting them. By late 2024, the volume of new reports had not slowed. The EHRC confirmed that it had received around 300 submissions relating to harassment or abuse. The BBC received more than 160 additional reports, with workers describing unwanted touching by managers, sexual comments, explicit messages sent via social media and fear of retaliation when raising complaints. Earlier this year, the regulator strengthened its intervention, requiring McDonald’s to introduce more advanced training for managers, independent oversight of complaint handling, and new safeguarding measures tailored to a workforce that is predominantly young.
That level of regulatory oversight is rare for a multinational corporation in Europe and unprecedented in the UK fast-food industry. But what is increasingly clear is that the allegations are not isolated to Britain.
In France, the fast-food chain has faced a growing number of complaints from workers claiming harassment and inappropriate behaviour in restaurants. In 2020, French restaurant staff submitted more than one hundred formal testimonies documenting sexual harassment and abuse, according to the International Union of Food Workers, which represents workers in hospitality and catering sectors across Europe. These accounts were collected at a time when union activity intensified following high-profile global scandals involving US-based fast-food workers. The European Federation of Food, Agriculture and Tourism Trade Unions, which works across EU member states, later supported a cross-border complaint filed through the OECD National Contact Point mechanism, alleging that McDonald’s had failed to prevent a culture of harassment and gender-based misconduct in several countries, including France. That complaint, backed by unions representing millions of workers globally, also referenced concerns in the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and additional European jurisdictions.
The OECD procedure is not a court process and does not result in fines. Instead, it requires multinational companies operating across borders to meet due-diligence and human-rights standards. The fact that the case was accepted for review was notable: the mechanism is used only when complainants present evidence that a corporation may not be respecting obligations under the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. The unions’ argument is that a franchising model, where restaurants are operated by independent business owners but carry the brand, creates structural gaps in accountability, particularly when safeguarding involves vulnerable or young employees.
While France and the UK represent the most visible European cases, the issue has also attracted attention from labour organisations in other EU markets. In the Netherlands, worker representatives have raised concerns about harassment allegations in franchise restaurants. In Spain and Italy, unions have echoed warnings that the prevalence of teenage workers in fast-paced environments may increase vulnerability when there is insufficient managerial oversight or training. In each instance, the challenge is the same: responsibility is distributed between the corporate headquarters, which sets standards, and franchise owners, who manage day-to-day staffing and supervision. That separation can leave staff unsure who to approach when a serious complaint arises and can slow responses during internal investigations.
McDonald’s maintains that it has made significant improvements to its processes and that the strengthened EHRC oversight in the UK will reinforce changes already underway across Europe. The company points to training programmes, new reporting channels and a “Speak Up” platform designed to allow staff to report concerns anonymously. It also notes that in the UK, twenty-nine employees were dismissed within a year following harassment investigations.
Critics argue that training and technology will only go so far if the underlying issue is cultural rather than procedural. Worker testimonies in the UK and France describe experiences where staff did not feel safe speaking up because the alleged perpetrators were shift managers or supervisors who controlled scheduling and performance reviews. Union representatives across Europe have repeatedly stated that corporate policies have limited effect if local management does not enforce them.
The growing number of allegations across multiple European markets suggests a systemic challenge for McDonald’s. Regulators are increasingly focused not only on whether companies have the right written policies in place, but whether those policies translate into a workplace culture where young employees feel secure. If additional European labour or equality authorities decide to follow the UK’s approach and introduce formal oversight mechanisms, the company may face further regulatory obligations in the EU.
For now, the decisive test is not whether new policies exist, but whether workers experience meaningful change inside restaurants. As one trade union representative in France put it when asked about McDonald’s reforms, “Policies are not safety. Practice is safety.”
The European regulatory environment has shifted. McDonald’s now finds itself at the centre of that shift.
