Where’s The Beef?

Earlier this year a class-action lawsuit was filed in California which claimed that independent lab tests had concluded that Taco Bell’s various beef-filled products were not actually filled with beef – which is to say, that the beef mixture did not conform to USDA requirements for calling something “beef,” which requires that the product in question be at least 70% meat from an actual cow. Anyone who has ever made a taco – or, for that matter, any other form of seasoned-meat entre – already knows that there is no such thing as a 100% beef product; at the very least, the taco meat would have to contain salt, pepper extract, and a number of other ingredients that make it taste better. For that matter, most people who are familiar with the American fast-food industry would be able to guess that such products would probably include a certain amount of fillers, binders, and other substances that make the little individual crumbles of taco meat look and behave as expected – this is the reason the USDA has a minimum standard for “beef” in the first place. But in this case, the suit alleges that the Taco Bell product is less than 35% beef…

Now, there are a lot of ways that a company can react to this kind of legal action. First, they could throw money at it; offer the plaintiffs a much smaller amount of money (but enough to make it worth their while) to just drop the suit and go away. Second, they could counter-sue, claim that the whole thing is merely an attempt to screw money out of the corporation, and refuse to discuss matters any further until the case comes to trial. If neither of those options seemed appealing, they could hire public relations firms, hold focus groups or “taste test” events, or even offer special promotions or low-price deals to reward their loyal customers. According to the story that appeared on CNN Money a few days after the suit was filed, Taco Bell has decided on the most direct possibility: meeting their accusers head-on, both in court (where they are contesting the lawsuit) and in the mind of the public, by running full-page ads calling the allegations ridiculous and disclosing the contents of their products in detail…

It seems likely that the people behind the original lawsuit were not expecting this kind of counter-measure. They might still be able to get some traction with the general public, since most consumers already regard Taco Bell meat products as being relatively low in quality, but public opinion will not matter in a court of law, and if the company can produce evidence to support its claims their arguement will be difficult to dispute. If the plaintiffs have any hard evidence they may be able to at least to make their case, but this seems unlikely; unless they can establish than some neutral third-party took samples of Taco Bell products obtained directly in the field and found less than 35% (or less than 70%, anyway) of the “beef” filling was actually made up of beef, they have no case. And it’s hard to imagine how you would establish the neutrality of a testing company or facility that you have paid to run such a test…

To complicate things ever further, many of the Taco Bell restaurants are franchised, which means that even if the plaintiffs can prove that a specific outlet sold them food products that do not meet USDA standards for meat, the company itself may be able to disavow responsibility or knowledge, revoke the franchise, and leave the people actually responsible swinging in the wind – which will lead to arguments about how much responsibility a parent company has for the franchisee under these circumstances. I don’t know how all of this will shake out – and it’s important to remember not to take legal opinions from bloggers with legal training – but strategically, at least, the company appears to be making the right moves. At the end of the day, this case should come down to who has the evidence on their side. And on where the beef actually is, of course…