Product Safety - Beyond Compliance

This blog post has been moved to the author's eBook.

Posted By Felix Amiri

____________________________________

Felix Amiri is the current Food Sector Chair of GCSE-Food & Health Protection

Your Safety at the Restaurant

This blog post has been moved to the author's eBook.

Felix Amiri is currently the chair of GCSE-Food & HealthProtection. He is also the Director of Technical Services at Amiri Food Industry Support Services (AFISS) and the Canada/U.S representative for the World Food Safety Organisation.

Food Safety, Politics and Semantic Maneuvers – Canadian Style

This blog post has been moved to the author's eBook.

 Posted By Felix Amiri

____________________________________

Felix Amiri is the current Food Sector Chair of GCSE-Food & Health Protection

Voluntary Disclosure of Product Safety System Non-conformances - An Open Challenge:

A true value-added audit realistically identifies strengths and weaknesses in the operation for the purpose of capitalizing on what is beneficial while improving areas of weaknesses.

Are facility managers therefore voluntarily disclosing system non-conformances that inspectors or auditors might have missed? Are inspectors and auditors, requesting the disclosure of system non-conformances that they (the auditors or inspectors) might have missed? If not, why not? 

Under which product safety and quality system or scheme do audited managers willingly disclose weak points in their operations without penalties?

Sad Truth

Do you cringe at the idea of voluntary disclosures during audits or inspections? You are not alone. Although such voluntary disclosures represent that for which the industry yearns, the popularity of the idea wanes as soon as it is mentioned. Voluntary disclosures cannot be popular because they stand in complete contrast against that which the industry wishes to eradicate (DISHONEST BEHAVIOUR) but finds itself heartily and slavishly embracing. 

The notion of "compliance enforcement" leaves people in chains. These chains do not prevent wrong-doing. They only drive it underground. Is it any wonder then, that many in the industry are uncomfortable with the idea of voluntary disclosures?

 –  Read "Marks of a Value-Added Audit System":

Out from the Trenches of Product Recalls - Professional Casualties and Crusaders

Who suffers from the adverse effect of a food-borne outbreak the most, the operation providing the defective product, the victims, the relatives of victims, the industry or society at large?

Simply doing what everybody else is doing no longer cuts it. 
One hard knock and recovery could be tough.

In the words of a once popular reggae song by Jimmy Cliff, “Who feels it knows it.” 

We all suffer the consequences but not all of us know it. The victims and their relatives certainly do feel the direct negative effect of a food-borne outbreak. They are not alone.

Company owners, proprietors and chief executive officers feel and know the pain when major recall incidents occur that involve products from their companies. For company owners with a conscience, the pain is most excruciating where their products are  known to have caused harm to consumers. Nobody wants to go through that experience. Even competitors in the same business suffer the pain as sales of products drop because of public fear. 

The front-line product safety and quality managers also feel and know the pain. They are right on the firing lines and are most likely to be among the first professional casualties following such harmful product recalls. Otherwise glowing resumes become undoubtedly tainted and the prospects of being hired by other companies quickly erode. The situation worsens where potential employers are aware of the events at the current or previous employers.

What can and should product safety managers do if they happen to have the misfortune of being the ones in charge when products caused harm to consumers?

Other groups from the trenches of harmful product recalls are made up of external consultants, auditors and auditing companies that may have worked with the affected companies. These groups are also on the firing lines as the hunt for scapegoats expands. In spite of attempts to distance themselves from the unfortunate events, these external parties suffer the consequences of damaged reputation. If their credibility is not completely destroyed, it is, at least, tainted.

Depending on the circumstances surrounding such incidents, should current or future employers have less confidence in the managers, external consultants, auditors and auditing companies? 

GCSE-Food &Health Protection  believes that such managers, consultants, auditors and auditing companies could become great crusaders after going through the trenches as it were. Hence the coalition does not subscribe to the current tendency of treating these groups as the scapegoats. The coalition believes that the terrain gets the blame for a rough ride; rather than the vehicles. 

Some may like to be observers; some may like to be active participants; some may even want to be critics; everyone is welcome: You can do more than you may be imagining right now.

Posted by Felix Amiri

___________________________________________________________

Felix Amiri is currently the chair of GCSE-Food & Health Protection, and a sworn SSQA advocate.