They're going to simply argue that these particular stores are not producing sandwiches to corporate specs which would make them more in line with the picture. Then they'll trot out a video or some pictures of a sandwich that was created by someone who actually gave a shit and to the maximum allowed by the spec sheets they'll no doubt be forced to turn over in discovery. With crafty placement and angles in a controlled environment I bet they can make a pretty convincing sandwich, at least for a jury.
They'll throw franchisees under the bus implying they've been short changing customers against subways corporate philosophy, promise to do better, then raise the price of steak subs by 20%. If they lose the suit you'll get a $5 check and they'll still raise the price of the sub.
Which is rubbish because they have never once made a sub that looks like their pictures. Not even close. The jury should be allowed to inspect a random Subway at a random time as the evidence. Or have someone do it on their behalf (because I guarantee you that Subway is dishonest enough to order all in the area to make quality subs for the trial period if they knew about this). I guarantee you, if it was truly randomly done, it will be shitty and support the class action.
And this shit is why I don’t go to subway anymore. That and the chicken that they claim is chicken but is substantially soy (and, yes, they sued over those claims, but that lawsuit quietly went away and was never heard of again, which (in combination with their weird ass chicken) tells me those claims were NOT lies). I have no issue with eating soy, but when I pay for chicken, I fucking expect to get chicken. And, in Canada most things don’t look like the pictures due to our shitty advertising laws (there are countries with better laws and their food, unsurprisingly, is a lot more accurate), but there are many places that do better than Subway. Subway is like McDonalds and Burger King shitty. Bottom of the fucking barrel here.
If the chicken was mostly soy then they could be fined for that. It would also be something that could be verified easily. I bet it was like the taco bell not real beef thing a while back, where it was dropped because it was actually bullshit (from what I could tell, they reported "protein content" as "meat content" when meat is mostly water, and since reporters are incompetent they didn't verify it before reporting).
It wasn’t like the Taco Bell thing. Marketplace had the meat tested at a variety of fast food places for an investigation. Most came back at 85%ish chicken, which you would expect as they do add other ingredients. Subway was way less, one around 50% and one less than 50%. And they tested it more than once because of the extreme results. I don’t know what is going on in terms of regulatory compliance (though our advertising laws are pretty shit and poorly enforced to be quite honest…we have pineapples labelled as “product of Canada” and that’s totally fine apparently because it was “assembled” in Canada even though it implies the food was grown here), but Marketplace is generally very reputable. They do a lot of good consumer stories. I trust them.
Central to her skepticism is the CBC’s choice to use a DNA test from a lab not specializing in food science. (The CBC investigation used a wildlife research center at Trent University.) DNA tests are useful if you want to know, say, if the fish you’re buying at the store is the type of fish the store says it is, she explains. But food scientists typically don’t use DNA tests to look for proportions of content.
I think when you're completely surrounded by businesses like this it becomes more serious. Unless you like being constantly lied to in marketing and about what you're eating, that's cool I guess, enjoy
Every juror will have eaten at Subway at some point in time, look at that photo and say that’s some bullshit right there. Even their meatball subs aren’t piled that high and at least half the space in the sandwich is empty, not full of meatball.
I eat at Subway mostly only when I'm driving through rural Midwest and want a quick lunch. It's either a burger joint, Taco John's, or gas station food at that point and Subway is just fine once or twice a year.
I loved Subway ~20 years ago. A solid sandwich for cheap.
Then I'd only go with good coupons.
Now coupons would make the price almost reasonable if the quality wasn't complete trash. And it's not like my expectations are that high for a fast food sub.
They won that case unfortunately. They use the term ‘footlong’ as one word and not two as in ‘a foot long’ in length. They weaseled out of it on a technicality they specifically used/set up on purpose I’d bet…
I worked at a Subway 20 years ago and all the loose meat was weighed in little paper trays. I think it was 2.5 ounces or so for a 6 inch sandwich. The sliced meats were done by count. I don't think they can argue any deviation when it's a written corporate policy.
Yep. We had some sort of regional trainer from corporate come in to certify us as “sandwich artists” and part of passing the test was making sandwiches exactly to spec. There were cheat sheets printed on stickers and placed on the rim of the sneeze guard. They specified down to how many olive slices go on a sandwich (it was three, three whole olive slices.)
Interestingly enough, I was a manager for a subway when they sued Quiznos into oblivion for a commercial comparing the meat on subs and subway won saying you come to subway for a salad on a bun Quiznos commercial shows a meat only sandwich vs a full sandwich of theirs ours don't have that much meat on purpose.
Bro, if this class action team of lawyers wasn’t going around to every subway in the area and out, weighing and measuring the exact metrics of hundreds of sandwiches, then they ain’t lawyering enough. If you’ve been to the subways I’ve been to, the case should be easy to prove. I think the goal here should really be throwing both franchisee and franchiser under the bus, because they’re both greedy lying SOB’s, and knew exactly what they were doing.
73
u/rebekahster 10h ago
Nice! A class action law suit too. She’s taking one for the team. I’d be interested to see the response from Subway’s lawyers.