The progressive group People’s Union USA has declared a week-long “McDonald’s Blackout,” urging consumers to shun the Golden Arches after headlines claimed the company “eliminated” its diversity, equity & inclusion (DEI) program. The protest follows similar actions against Walmart, Target, and Amazon and is framed as an “economic resistance” campaign designed to punish brands that “abandon” DEI commitments. According to Fox Business, the group stated:
“The idea that DEI initiatives should be abandoned is backward, regressive, and dangerous… Every American deserves a fair shot at success, and that includes every race, every background, every belief system…”
“This is about more than burgers and fries, this is about power. When we unite and hit corporations in their wallets, they listen… This week, we’re taking a stand. No McDonald’s. No compromise.”
At first glance, the backlash suggests McDonald’s executed a wholesale retreat. In January the company dropped numerical “representation goals,” re-branded its Diversity Team as the “Global Inclusion Team,” ended participation in outside scorecards, and shelved a supplier-DEI pledge. Corporate critics seized on those cosmetic changes as proof that McDonald’s had joined the conservative crusade against DEI.
Yet buried deeper in the same coverage is an admission that little substantive policy has changed.
“We changed some of the language that we’ve used it around it, but at the core none of our programming has changed… we have no intention of doing that,” said McDonald’s Chief Field People Officer Jordann Nunn at the From Day One human resources conference in Chicago in June.
Translated: the budgets, affinity groups, and preferential contracting guidelines remain intact—only the public-relations gloss is different. The company even stresses its “commitment to inclusion remains steadfast” in a statement defending itself from the boycott.
By trying to mollify both sides—downshifting rhetoric while preserving expenditures—management invites blowback from activists of every stripe, amplifying brand risk without reducing liability. Meanwhile, McDonald’s U.S. same-store sales fell 3.6 percent in Q1 as core customers traded down. Investors should prefer leadership focused on price discipline and food safety rather than navigating an ever-shifting DEI narrative.
NLPC’s 2025 shareholder proposal and supporting analysis highlighted the sleight of hand: McDonald’s never “scrapped” DEI; it merely re-labeled it. That façade now leaves the company exposed to consumer boycotts from the Left while still drawing scrutiny from investors who question racially preferential policies. Our Corporate Integrity Project has filed similar resolutions at companies such as Boeing and Goldman Sachs to require them to revisit DEI incentives. The McDonald’s episode is fresh evidence that half-measures satisfy no one and that opaque social-engineering budgets are a material governance issue.
The current boycott proves that rhetorical retreats do not neutralize DEI risk. Until McDonald’s provides full transparency and subjects its inclusion bureaucracy to the same performance tests applied to burger sales, investors and customers will keep wondering whether management’s priorities are in the right place. NLPC will continue to push for that transparency.
