Court rejects SDA bid to stop class action against McDonald’s in favour of its own case
A class action against McDonald’s filed by Shine Lawyers will go ahead after a failed attempt by a union to halt it in favour of its own case.
A class action alleging McDonald’s workers were not allowed to take 10-minute breaks during their shifts will go ahead, after a competing union case had attempted to thwart it.
Shine Lawyers filed a class action in 2021 seeking compensation for the unpaid rest breaks. The close to 20,000 group members allege the fast-food franchise operated a system that denied workers their right to a break, in breach of their enterprise bargaining agreement.
The Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association (SDA) also sought to sue McDonald’s over the same issue and in February this year applied for a stay of the class action.
But on Thursday a Federal Court judgment found both cases would be allowed to proceed.
“The SDA’s proposal for resolving issues involved an unwieldy hotchpotch of different actions without the manifold procedural benefits of a class action,” the court heard.
Shine Lawyers joint head of class action Vicky Antzoulatos said the firm now “look forward” to progressing with the case.
“The court found that the class action was an appropriate vehicle for the continuation of the compensation claims of group members,” she said.
“We’re privileged to have the opportunity to continue to fight on behalf of these workers, many of whom were teenagers when they were allegedly not given the rest breaks to which they were entitled.”
An SDA spokesman said the union’s case covers more workers than the class action because it goes back further in time for the franchises.
“The SDA will continue to seek the best possible outcome for Maccas workers who were denied their right to a paid drink break,” he said.
“The SDA acknowledges the criticisms in the judgment today, but reiterates that our only objective has been to ensure that McDonald’s back pay their workers in full, without any unnecessary deductions by third parties.”
He said Thursday’s decision found SDA members would be covered by the SDA cases and not the class action.
“The SDA should not have to drag McDonald’s through the Federal Court for young Australian workers to be compensated for denials of basic workplace rights,” he said.
According to the judgment, there were multiple cases before the court seeking compensation for McDonald’s workers.
“Before the court in its original jurisdiction are no less than 17 related matters, each connected in one way or another to allegations that McDonald’s Australia Limited and its franchisees contravened the Fair Work Act 2009 in failing to provide employees with 10-minute rest breaks,” the judgment read.
“If contravening conduct is established, the applicants in two of the 17 proceedings seek compensatory orders on behalf of 300,000 to 350,000 current and former workers.”
The two proceedings referred to involve the Shine action and SDA case.
In a related decision also handed down on Thursday, the Federal Court can now order a portion of settlement money be paid to the litigation funder if a settlement is approved.
Court House Capital is supporting Shine’s class action.
More Coverage
How Scottish silk became an Australian legal star
A barrister with a thick Scottish brogue who became a lawyer after falling in love with the television drama LA Law is leading one of the corporate watchdog’s biggest cases of the past decade.
Police probe NSW prosecution office over leaks
The investigation has revolved around the alleged leak by the office of the DPP to a commercial radio outlet of legally restricted information about an underage Aboriginal offender.