What language do corporations listen to? They listen to lawsuits. Ex-employee Natalie Gunshannon complained that she was given no choice on how she was paid: she was given payroll cards. That means that she was essentially earning less than minimum wage, since the card charged $1.50 for her to withdraw cash, considering that the card was issued to JPMorgan Chase, and no branch of the bank existed near where she lived. It might seem like petty cash, but when you are a low-wage earner, such petty charges add up, and make life even more cramped than needs be.
This is why McDonald’s responded that “We wanted to take swift action,” upon hearing of the lawsuit, as Mueller-Carron said, as reported by the Associated Press. “Our employees have always been our No. 1 priority.”
Employees need options, because not all of them have bank accounts. Lacking a bank account, they might be charged to cash a check. The payroll cards were given as an alternative to this, but banks charged on these too.
“We didn’t hear any complaints,” Mueller-Curran claimed. “Many employees have been using these cards without complaint for many months. When it became apparent there were some employees who may want the choice, we’re going to give them the choice.”
Whether or not they “heard no complaints,” seems unlikely, as complaint is a natural and spontaneous human expression, and Natalie Gunshannon herself claimed to have complained, and was told there was no other payment option.
But what’s more important is that it’s not even legal: there has to be other payment options. It’s state law. State law says employees should be paid by cash or check. That’s why she isn’t backing down with her suit.
McDonalds meanwhile is changing payment options for 16 McDonald’s restaurants in Northern Pennsylvania, so that they will have the option to use direct deposit or paper check, not just payroll cards.