Lawsuits against fast-food restaurants have become relatively common since the infamous 1993 case where a woman sued McDonald’s and won $2.86 million after spilling nearly-boiling hot coffee on herself. Now Subway Sandwiches is in the spotlight for the content in its tuna.

Something Fishy

Early in 2021, two women from San Francisco filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against Subway claiming their tuna sandwiches and wraps don’t include any actual fish. Based on independent lab tests of “multiple samples” taken from Subway locations in California, they claim the “tuna” is a mixture of various concoctions that do not constitute tuna.

The plaintiffs argue that Subway is “saving substantial sums of money in manufacturing the products because the fabricated ingredient they use in the place of tuna costs less money.” They argue they paid premium prices for an ingredient that they prize for its health benefits. (1)

Subway PR director Maggie Truax called the lawsuit’s accusations “baseless”. She said the allegations “threaten to damage our franchisees, small business owners who work tirelessly to uphold the high standards that Subway sets for all of its products, including its tuna.” (1)

Katia Noll, senior director for global food safety and quality at Subway stated, “Subway delivers 100% cooked flaked tuna to its restaurants, which is mixed with mayonnaise and used in freshly made sandwiches, wraps, and salads that are served to and enjoyed by our guests.” (1)

One might ask, who oversees restaurant food content and quality? Four agencies play major roles in carrying out food safety regulatory activities: the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) which is part of the Federal Health Department, the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) of the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2)

Other Questionable Food Lawsuits

In 2017, Subway filed a lawsuit of its own against the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, arguing that the public broadcaster defamed the chain in a report that claimed the company’s poultry products contained only 50 percent chicken in its chicken sandwich with the other half being soy. The report was based on testing done at Trent University in Canada. (3)

In 2013, some European meat suppliers came under fire when investigators found they’d been mixing horsemeat in with products advertised as beef supplied to businesses including Burger King. Although the lawsuit was not successful, it still puts doubts in customers’ minds regarding the entire arena of false advertising. (3)

In 2011, a class-action lawsuit claimed that Taco Bell’s beef was only 35 percent meat. Which, according to USDA standards, means it can’t call itself “beef.” (3)

In 2016, a customer sued Krispy Kreme Donuts stating their fruit-filled desserts did not contain real fruit. He also argued that the Maple Bar and other maple products contained no actual maple ingredients. (3)

Although Subway’s tuna lawsuit has not been resolved, it may not join those dismissed either. It certainly represents yet another case of questionable food content. Large chain restaurants are prime targets for unhappy customers and lawyers are only too willing to listen. Meanwhile, you might want to stay clear of their tuna sandwiches.