
A federal judge in Miami has ruled that Burger King must contend with a lawsuit claiming the fast food chain unlawfully limited employee movement and suppressed wages across its franchise network. The decision marks a significant development in a case that has been ongoing since 2018.
According to Reuters, U.S. District Judge Jose Martinez determined that the plaintiffs, a group of current and former employees, presented sufficient factual allegations to move forward with their proposed class action lawsuit. The complaint accuses Burger King of engaging in anti-competitive behavior by enforcing so-called “no-hire” or “no-poach” agreements among its thousands of U.S. franchisees.
These agreements, as outlined in the court documents, allegedly prevented individual franchises from hiring workers who had recently been employed at another Burger King location, typically within a six-month period. The plaintiffs argue that such practices curtailed job mobility and held down wages in violation of federal antitrust laws.
Per Reuters, the employees involved in the case worked at Burger King restaurants in Illinois and other states, with claims dating back as far as 2010. They are pursuing unspecified damages and seeking class-action status to represent thousands of similarly situated workers.
Burger King has previously denied any wrongdoing and maintained that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a direct connection between the no-hire policy and wage suppression. In seeking dismissal of the case, the company contended that there was no concrete evidence showing the agreements affected compensation.
However, Judge Martinez disagreed, stating that the allegations plausibly suggest the no-hire provisions constituted an “unreasonable” restriction on the labor market, according to Reuters. His ruling allows the case to proceed into the discovery and litigation phase.
The lawsuit—Jarvis Arrington et al v. Burger King Worldwide et al, filed in the Southern District of Florida—mirrors similar legal efforts against other major fast food corporations. Notably, in 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a case involving McDonald’s, which faced parallel accusations over its franchise hiring practices.
Source: Reuters
Featured News
Meta Begins Defense After FTC Concludes Case in Landmark Antitrust Trial
May 15, 2025 by
CPI
UK Data Bill Still No Closer to Passage As Parliamentary ‘Ping-Pong’ Drags On
May 15, 2025 by
CPI
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Awarded $271.2M in Damages Against Amgen
May 15, 2025 by
CPI
FTC Chair Proposes 15% Staff Reduction Amid Budget Constraints
May 15, 2025 by
CPI
UK Urges Antitrust Watchdog to Prioritize Growth and Clarity in Business Regulation
May 15, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Healthcare Antitrust
May 14, 2025 by
CPI
Healthcare & Antitrust: What to Expect in the New Trump Administration
May 14, 2025 by
Nana Wilberforce, John W O'Toole & Sarah Pugh
Patent Gaming and Disparagement: Commission Fines Teva For Improperly Protecting Its Blockbuster Medicine
May 14, 2025 by
Blaž Višnar, Boris Andrejaš, Apostolos Baltzopoulos, Rieke Kaup, Laura Nistor & Gianluca Vassallo
Strategic Alliances in the Pharma Sector: An EU Competition Law Perspective
May 14, 2025 by
Christian Ritz & Benedikt Weiss
Monopsony Power in the Hospital Labor Market
May 14, 2025 by
Kevin E. Pflum & Christian Salas