So, a great deal of variation exists because of franchisees; one, whom I've worked for, tends to be an exceptional slave-driver and profiteer. Another, in the next city up the freeway, is a multi-millionaire and the nicest guy you could know. In contrast to the other guy, his employees are trusted more completely, seem to have better training and better attitudes. I believe, strongly, that the *character* of the franchisee affects the character of the operation.

The same is true of the managers, and really GOOD ones are probably rare ... most talented individuals don't stay with the company that long. There are of course many exceptions; but with so many employees, they are certainly not the rule.

Expanding the "character" axiom above, indeed the *entire corporation's character* is based, perhaps more than it knows, on the character of Ray Kroc. Anyone ever read "Grinding it Out?" Quite revealing... one swing manager I worked for noted that she was not very surprised how things worked in McDLand, given Mr. Kroc's priorities and behaviors.

So, in some cities/stores, a "McJob" isn't such a bad thing. In others, it's definitely earned its reputation and definition. Until the corporate people make *every location* as spiffy as the home office's display unit, they're going to have negative PR ... the only thing they're really concerned about is *how much*. Having "McJob" in the OED apparently crosses the threshold of acceptability.

Same thing applies to McJob. A McJob is a cesspool in the realm of employment. If McDonalds really wants to literally redefine it, they should make the jobs better instead of trying to harass the people who write dictionaries.

I have worked other jobs where I have been offered more money, but have inevitably found myself back at McDonalds full-time, by my own choice.

If my own McJob is any indicator of what a McJob really is, then I think I can define 'McJob' in the following positive ways, at least in comparison to my other nonMcJobs.

A McJob is a job where people do their jobs and let you do yours. A McJob is a job where people work for every hour they get paid and where they get paid for every hour they work. A McJob is a job where no one gets bitten by the boss's dog or punctured with used medical sharps. A McJob is a job where directions, goals and expectations are unambiguous, and where the opportunity to advance is completely contingent upon how well you meet clearly stated goals and expectations according to clearly stated directions. A McJob is a job where whether or not you're doing what you're supposed to be doing in the way that you're supposed to be doing it is so important that there is effectively no possibility for people to personally judge each other by demographic variables. A McJob is a job where the benefits you get are the benefits you pay for. A McJob is a job where the shirts that get destroyed belong to the company, and where the work that destroys the shirts is technically part of the same class code that your employer is assuming applies to you when they pay their workers comp insurance. A McJob is a job where the boss never calls you a 'fag', throws wadded paper at you or swats you with the back of his/her hand. A McJob is a job where what you get paid per hour is commensurate with the skills you provide to the employer. A McJob is a job where, because they (rightly) do not give a f*** about your M.A., or what special skills you may have; where your supervisors will not treat you brain like some kind of grab bag into which to dip freely at any time for anything there they may be able to use for personal advantage. If you work at a McJob, your student loans may go into default just the way they would have if you'd stayed at your other jobs, but you at least won't be subsidizing your employer by offering advanced skills at below cost.

I could probably continue, but I think I've probably made my point.

I understand that there are people who might like to use the idea that working at McDonalds is undesireable to obliquely disparage McDonalds because they have some other problem with McDonalds, but that's a commentary I'll mostly have to save for a later discussion if it comes up. Until then, let it suffice to say that McDonalds continues to succeed because it continues to meet the demands of consumers. If you don't like something about how McDonalds does things, maybe you should blame the consumers.

Other than not paying very much, I find there is NOTHING that routinely comes up to dislike about working at McDonalds, other than the personalities of the customers. But that's exactly what makes it 'work', anyway. I at least don't get calls from the customers at 4AM angrily demanding that I help them figure out where they left their food after I handed it to them.

As for the low pay, I like to think that I get paid what consumers demand that I get paid. Again:
big deal. Blame the consumers. They still gripe about the prices going up, but they sure didn't do much to stop the City of San Francisco from raising my minimum wage to $9.14 per hour, which explains the price increases. Let 'em complain. They keep coming back anyway and, so far, I get to keep my McJob.

McFuck 'Em.

Not true? My ex-brother-in-law was [and probably still is] manager of a 24/7 McDonalds, so I know for a fact that corporate does not cover any phone expenses and does in fact, require their managers to be reachable at anytime of day. This may not be true with every regional McDonalds restaurants, but it sure is in my state.

So if you're going call BS on my words, or tell me I'm smug, go jump in a lake.

"1985 Los Angeles Times (Nexis) 29 July II. 6/1 For instance, the McDonald's fast-food chain recently began a training program for the handicapped in the San Fernando Valley called McJobs. McDonald's has hired a dozen people after the two 10-week training programs held so far."

"1986 Washington Post (Nexis) 24 Aug. C1 (heading) The fast-food factories: McJobs are bad for kids. 1991 D. COUPLAND Generation X I. i. 5 Dag..was bored and cranky after eight hours of working his McJob ('Low pay, low prestige, low benefits, low future'). 1993 Albuquerque (New Mexico) Jrnl. 4 Apr. C3/2 So many bright and ambitious young people are wasting what should be their apprentice years in low-wage, low-skilled jobs, what are called 'McJobs'. 1995 Face Jan. 91/2 Up to the beginning of this year he was painting houses for a living. Name a McJob and Beck has probably done it."

That's the citation list from the OED online (thank you sf public library)

So, I have to partly agree with McDonald's on this one.

I used to work bagging groceries, and even though it was repetitive and low paying, it was still rewarding in other ways.

It didn't pay well, but it did pay more than minimum wage, even to start with.

There was never any question about what you should be doing, everything was very structured, and the training was through.

The grease was nasty, but cleaning was done very frequently, so nothing got really bad.

The food was (and is) bad for you, but you never had to worry that the food was going bad. Rotation of stock was done religiously, and nothing ever expired on the shelf.

Those are all things that cannot be said about most of the other McJobs I had.

McDonalds is focused on efficiency, and all the employee policies served that purpose. Beyond promoting a good work ethic, I don't see how any of the skills would translate to non-McJobs.

I hope I never again need a McJob, but if worst came to worst, I'd go back to McDonalds before any other fast food place.

That's simply not true.

Most of these commenters have been very unfair to McDonalds. The people who never worked at McDonalds can just shut up. And the people who did and hated it, might I suggest that you had a bad experience, or were perhaps uncooperative? McDonalds Corporation demands excellence from its employees, and rewards them well with promotions, vacations, sabbaticals, etc. It is much less demanding of the franchisees.

It is really disappointing to see you people being so smug and snarky.

Dead-end job indeed. Imagine a few millon fast food chain people being laid off. Where are they gonna find new employment?

McDs gets around their crappy treatment of employees by arguing that their jobs are "not meant to be wage-earner jobs." They seek employees who wish to work part time (up to 39.99 hours per week in most states) on non-fixed schedules. For people who only want to work a few hours a week, this isn't a big deal. But because employers COMPETE for people like this, McDs can't get enough "part time" employees. So this forces McDs to work some people full time - or nearly full time. However, they STILL do not give full time employees benefits.

These conditions just about define the conditions of employee exploitation - non-living wages, no health insurance and schedule changes at the whim of the employer.

I worked at McDs through the 80s and "worked my way up" to store manager. Their managers are not even paid a decent wage. I remember well how McDs discouraged employee unions. As managers, we were instructed to keep union organizers away from employees. We were instructed to say something like, "I am the representative for my employees."

The negative connotation of "McJob" will disappear when "McJobs" disappear. A I see it, in about the time that pigs grow wings.

Plus I stole a great plant from the front area for my first apartment. So I don't think you guys are considering all the angles.

Finally, even if Ronald McDonald personally rewrote the entire dictionary with a salt-free french fry, people/customers/exworkers/kids/media would STILL call a shit job a "McJob." So stop wasting your time, McDonald's shills in the thread above.

McJob, the definition is dead-on and I don't need Websters to spout such a easily comprehendible definition. Kudos to them, for having the balls to print it in liable and offering McD's lawyers a place to stick their complaint letters. Next time beat them with a rubber hose.

I'm not making up this prescriptive/descriptive thing: when Websters changed from a prescriptive model to a descriptive model (3rd edition, maybe? I'm not sure which) there was great debate in language and dictionary circles. This is what you learn in library school.

However, it's a slang term used to refer to any number of generic low-level jobs. Just because it has a 'Mc' in front of it doesn't mean McDonald's has a strangehold on it.

I totally agree with Secularsage.

I used to work for McDonald's; So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies. Some of you guys are very good at making it sound like you know what you are talking about. But trust me.... You don't. I think you just want to make yourself sound smart, when in reality you don't know what you are talking about. This is how bad info gets passed around. If you don't know about the topic....Don't make yourself sound like you do. Cos some Consumerist posters believe anything they hear.

They got the idea from a book called "Nineteen-Eighty-McFour."

Since the McLawyers scare tactics didn't work, I guess it's time for the sweet soothing application of lobbyist money.

Basically, if your managers are dicks, it'll suck to work there. True of any job, I daresay.

Like, uh, prostitution? Sounds good to me, Mr. Fairhurst.

New words get added to the dictionary based on usage. Huge corporations shouldn't be allowed to buy off encyclopedia and dictionary publishers and get their company shown in a more favorable light just because they used their influence and wealth to do so.

Sorry, McDonalds...your petition should go in the McDumper.

McDonald's gives each store a HUGE "Operations & Procedures" manual that details every part of the operation down to smallest point. Ray Kroc, the father of the corporation, was very insistent that this be the way his franchises were run, and corporate frequently sends people to make sure that the standards are being enforced.

BTW, I don't work for McD's or own stock in them; I just hate seeing a good company get maligned because of the negative stereotypes around it. McD's isn't evil; they're just everywhere. From what I've heard, Taco Bell is the absolute WORST quick service restaurant you can work for, and even it varies depending on location and owner.

1) One of the top employers of teenagers.
2) One of the most common "first jobs."
3) Heavily focused on promotion from within the company; many management training opportunities.
4) When managed properly, values quality, efficiency, customer service, and cleanliness.
5) Through its franchise program, McDonald's claims to have made more millionaires than any other company out there. Knowing how profitable these franchises can be and how long the waiting list is, I believe it.

Incidentally, I got my start as a manager at McDonald's, and I learned a lot about dealing with people in high stress situations through the job. If I had worked in a retail chain through high school and college, chances are good I would not have had the same opportunities as a part time worker. It wasn't a glamor job, but it was a GREAT foundation for my business management career.

http://www.dfairhurst.com/index.cfm?area=contact&sub=true

Christ, how can McDonalds corporate not expect this to backfire?

Perhaps Burger King will want to change the definition of Whopper next?

Ludicrous. Shakespeare must be rolling. Leave OED alone.

Think what you want about Midtown Promotions, but that Asian manager guy was right. There's not a job in McDonalds you can't teach a person in 10 minutes. Hell, I learned how to make fries at Chick Filet while standing in line. All they do is dump the frozen fries in a trey, push a button on the frier, and wait for the alarm to go off.

But the term came from somewhere and that somewhere is the fact that a McDonalds employee is the quintessential example of "a low-paying job that requires little skill and provides little opportunity for advancement"

We are talking about putting hamburgers on a moving conveyor and taking them off to put them in a bun. If you could train shaved monkeys to not fling their poo they could do this job. Hell I wonder if some already arnt the condition of the hamburgers I get at that grease ball join.

The reality is that the dictionary reflects language in its present state, and to do anything differently would inevitably destroy the objectivity and the usefulness of that dictionary. Oxford doesn't make up the definition...it just reflects what people already think.

Why, so they do. How hugely entertaining.

I just signed the petition in the name of Upton Sinclair, using a dodgeit.com e-mail address, though they don't appear to actually be checking to see if the address is valid.

I cordially invite the rest of you to sign the petition as well, using whichever disposable e-mail address service you like (or an example.whatever address, if they really aren't checking), and the name of whichever famous trade unionist, Communist or Star Wars character takes your fancy.

The Commerce Guild demands that dictionary fascists cease oppressing the courageous feeders of the people!

Here's a better question: Why does McDonalds have lobbyists?

Have you ever looked at the Oxford English Dictionary? Just about any slang term which lasts long enough will end up in it.

Also, "McJob" is used in serious popular articles on employment. It isn't like hip-hop slang.

Maybe if they really did make the jobs stimulating and well-paying, that'd change things. But apparently it's easier to complain.

Yup, they're definitely American.

Perhaps McDonalds should focus their attention on changing the work environment that caused this term to enter common usage.

That said, this post was hilarious. McDonald's wants to change the definition to a job that is "stimulating" (see: "greasy"), and "rewarding" (see: "minimum wage"). That is awesome.