: I am also a Mcd's employee.
: A couple of months back i was flicking thrugh the internet for infomation about the Mclibel case, and am appalled in the fact that action groups have to go all this way just to make a point, i say good luck to Mcdonalds for taking it to court!!!: There are a few things i would like to say about McD's as well, most of our customers know that it is in fact not the perfect diet to live on, but use Mcdonalds as a 'snack' or for a quick 'meal'. Mcdonalds isn't really meant for a full three course meal which gives you all the nutrients your body takes.
: Our advertising does not specificly go out to children, in the last two promotions there heasn't been one child in. (double deluxe burger & sundeas for 49p) Anyway Toys R Us' adverts target children, so have a go at them.
: Going back to the diet, what do you want us to do,? become veggies? A planet full of vegiteriens?? I don't think so, we would not only have a population problem, but also a cattle problem as well.
: Concerning acciedents, a McD procedure for less accidents in their store is the safety circle, a group of 6-8 who tell a member of management, who is the head of the safety circle any areas of the store that is dangerous.
: Concerning my personal views on Mcdonald's, I have been in this type of industry for seven years,I have seen what other kitchens are like, so far the cleanest kitchen I have worked in is Mcdonald's (store 065). Fine, the staff meals are limited, but not as limited as Pizza Hut (a pizza with two toppings)but staff moral, the management team and our regular customers makes it a good store to work at. I am also endevoring to move up in Mcd's,something that doesn't get a mention in media or even web sites like this is that it is very easy to move up within the company. Most importantly, other employees see Mcdonalds management training programmes as one of the best in the country.
: SO MCSPOTLIGHT, WHY CAN'T YOU SAY ANYTHING OF THE GOOD SIDES OD MCDONALDS? IS IT BECAUSE YOU ARE TRYING TO MAKE A NAME FOR YOURSELF BY TAKING ON A CORPARATION SINGLEHANDEDLY? GETTING INTO THE RECORD BOOKS (WHOOPS YOU ALREADY DID THAT DIDN'T YOU!!) OR YOU AINT GOT ANYTHING BETTER TO DO? OR EVEN YOU DON'T THINK THAT MCDONALDS CAN OFFER ANYTHING TO THIS WORLD. AND ANSWER ANOTHER QUESTION, IF OUR FOOD WAS SO BAD, WHY DO PEOPLE KEEP COMING BACK FOR MORE?????
: If anyone wants to e-mail me about anything I have said in this,
: my e-mail is:-
: Wakeyjo@aol.com
:
: --
: McSpotlight: Impressive. You claim to have examined the points, yet show no signs of them having impinged on your consciousness.
: From the start page of McSpotlight:
: "McDonald's spends over $1.8 billion a year broadcasting their glossy image to the world. This is a small space for alternatives to be heard".
: Understand? Light beginning to dawn yet?
: If you'd read up on the story, you'd know that it was McDonald's who took it to court, not London Greenpeace; the Two fought the case because they didn't feel they had anything to apologise for.
ooooooo McSpotlight is trying to be funny with the smart remarks..or maybe its true what they say bout the british and their snobish attitudes towards others......
--
McSpotlight: Not at all. We've made the story of the trial abundantly clear - from many independent viewpoints. Our volunteers have spent many hours collecting information from around the world and converting it to HTML - both in Britain and in our mirror sites around the world (that's right, around the world.)
For a poster to turn up in our debating rooms and show the world a) that the poster was very badly informed about the case b) that they lacked manners and c) that they hadn't taken a few minutes of their time to clue up a bit before posting (a basic point of netiquette) is fairly insulting to the people who've worked on this site.
Of course, as moderators, we could have rejected the post at the start, but we aren't in the censorship business, even if the post was mildly offensive to us.
So we're not "trying to be funny". The original poster displayed a lack of manners, a lack of background reading and dare I say it, a lack of independent thought. I'll reply to this thread no more, as personal emotions are endangering my neutrality as a moderator. A response to the original article may be posted in the near future.
