Nearly 200 comments have been submitted to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service regarding a proposal to let slaughterhouses mostly self-inspect chickens and turkeys for diseases, feces and other potentially harmful contaminants.
Many of these comments come from the federal inspectors who now do this work. Letting the companies that slaughter the chickens do their own inspections is a recipe for disaster, the inspectors say. In addition, the proposal would require the few remaining federal inspectors to examine five times as many chickens as they do today — up to 175 chickens per minute, or nearly three chickens every second. Many inspectors point out that providing a thorough examination of chickens at such speeds is humanly impossible.
Comments on the proposed rule must be submitted by April 26. Let the government know what you think of this proposal by submitting your comment today.
Below are excerpts of comments already submitted by federal inspectors:
“This rule is a bad idea. I have worked as an inspector for 26 years and I can tell you from experience that while the plants talk a good game about food safety, when it comes right down to a choice between production and yield numbers and food safety and quality, production and yield comes first! They will cut corners and ignore obvious problems in food safety if they are behind due to break downs in equipment or if they have more production to do than they can do before the end of the shift. Even now at 35 poultry carcasses per minute per inspector, we only have a bit over a second and a half to inspect the carcass which is too fast and this rule will increase speeds. What is the sense in that? Our inspectors do not ‘sort’ carcasses for the plants and look for ‘scabs.’ That is a ridiculous over simplification. That is akin to saying a doctor only checks a patients temperature and throat when examining them. This is not a more ‘scientific’ approach to inspection, it is plain and simply a job cutting measure.”
– Steven Clarke
———-
“I am a GS-7 working at a poultry facility inspecting chickens. I have been doing so (for) 15 yrs. I have quite a bit of training in this field. It is not an easy job. At times (it is) very demanding. Sometimes the birds have a lot of pathology. A trained eyed and a professional person is needed to make sure a healthy bird leaves the facility. Please keep these people in there positions to ensure public health and safety. THANK YOU.”
– Julie Murphy
———-
“Having worked in an establishment operating under the HACCP-Based Inspection Models Project (HIMP), which is what the modernized poultry slaughter inspection will be based on, I think it is critical to mention that the data contained in the Federal Register is out of context. When comparing the number of zero-tolerance tests for fecal contamination performed in a HIMP establishment versus the number of tests performed in a Non-HIMP plant, it is important to mention that in a HIMP plant the SI (System Inspector) can direct inspection personnel to perform additional testing as deemed necessary. In a Non-Himp plant, ONLY two tests per line are performed on each shift. PERIOD. This is because in a Non-HIMP plant, the IICs do not have such authority or leeway and additional testing is considered “over-inspection”. So, while the data is accurate, it is not altogether truthful. You are comparing apples and oranges.”
– Dawn Reyna
———-
“I have worked as an inspector with USDA, FSIS for more than 30 years. This whole idea of the plant employees making decisions is unreal. Before working for the USDA I worked in a pork plant and a beef plant for the company on the slaughter line. I know what the industry is capable of and how they operate. They can be sneaky trying to avoid losing money. No matter if it is a slaughter plant or processing plant, the company has control over what their employees do and don’t do. If they don’t listen, they will just find someone else off the street who will. None of them are trained the way USDA inspectors are trained, so what does that tell you? I worked on a turkey and a chicken line before and there is no way poultry can be inspected and safe with the increased line speeds. It is also a safety issue for inspectors or plant employees if they would get a finger caught in a shackle, which happens at the line speeds now. If the inspectors are going to be at the end of the line and the chickens viscera (guts) is missing, the inspector cannot ensure that chicken is safe to eat. The inspectors need to be able to inspect the viscera in order to be 100% sure. There are tons of ways to cut budgets and federal money; and it shouldn’t be at the expense of consumer’s health and safety. We are supposed to be trying to make food more safe and this is totally a ridiculous idea. As a processing inspector now, I have plants adding allergens to their products without them being on their product’s label. They don’t know enough to verify what there ingredients have in them, before they are added to their product. You would be surprised at the things plants are capable of doing, including sneak to produce product outside of their inspection hours to avoid paying reimbursable overtime. It is just unreal for anyone to trust these companies.”
– Cindy Huato
———-
“I am a CSI-7 that periodically works a poultry plant at my duty station. This plant runs at maximum speed with the number inspectors that it has at this time. Increasing line speed with less inspectors defies logic as the plant process is out of control much of the time now. Our purpose for being in plants is for consumer safety. How can we assure the public their food is safe if we are not present to inspect?
– Michael Thornton
———-
“The agency would have you believe that all line inspectors do is look for scabs and bruises; nothing could be further from the truth. Inspectors are charged with finding and rejecting diseased carcasses, including those that can be transmitted to humans, marking for further processing birds that are contaminated with feces, bile, metal from processing errors, and other hazards to public health. Allowing these duties to be turned over to plant employees who are often and forcefully reminded of who signs the paychecks is a bad thought process on behalf of USDA. The American public will in the end suffer the harm. The agency has misled Congress and consumer groups with junk science and lies. Please reject this poorly designed program for all consumers’ health.”
– Charles Wilkins
LET THEM EAT CHICKEN 