Buyer food safety demands condemned
Buyer food safety demands condemned
In a sharply worded missive to its members, Western Growers Association condemned the actions of Publix Super Markets and a consortium of produce buyers that are seeking to impose their own set of food-safety standards on suppliers.
Other organizations, including the Produce Marketing Association, expressed concern that the food-safety issue was being handled in such a manner.
The reactions were precipitated by an Oct. 29 letter that was sent to produce suppliers by Publix, which claims to be part of the Food Safety Leadership Council that also includes Avendra LLC, Darden Restaurants, McDonald's Corp., Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and Walt Disney World Co.
The one-page letter had a 19-page addendum titled Food Safety Leadership Council On-Farm Produce Standard. The document spells out specific Good Agricultural Practices in many different areas, such as worker health and hygiene, field sanitation, animal control, pesticide and fertilizer use, water use, harvesting, transportation and microbiological testing. While it does contain many details, such as the number of toilets that should be in each field and the distance between the edge of the field and animal feed lots, it also pales in comparison to the Good Agricultural Practices guidelines adopted by the California Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement Advisory Board, which is 54 pages long. Nonetheless, the Publix document is at odds with the LGMA in several areas.
Publix asked its suppliers to sign the document, stating in the letter, "Please review these standards, together with the food-safety procedures used by your firm, to ensure that you meet the standards required by Publix. It is our intention to utilize these FSLC On-Farm Produce Standards to evaluate vendor farms that provide produce to Publix. As a vendor, you agree by signing below to adhere to the standards."
In the correspondence to its members, WGA President Tom Nassif said, "We have very serious concerns about these new food-safety standards and demands. We are extremely disappointed that they are taking this approach. The new standards clearly imply, without any scientific basis whatsoever, that the already-developed-and-adopted GAP metrics, scientifically developed and peer reviewed by some of the nation's leading food-safety scientists and experts, are inadequate. We know that is not the case as federal and state government food-safety agencies all agree that the GAP metrics include the latest, cutting-edge food-safety science."
PMA President Bryan Silbermann told The Produce News Nov. 7 that he only had a few minutes to review the Publix document and could not comment on its specific guidelines. However, he said that a "splintered approach [to food safety] only adds to the confusion.
"I'm sure everyone is driven by the best intentions, but we need a transparent process for food-safety guidelines," he continued, adding that it does not serve the industry to have many different sets of guidelines. "This points to the need to have a national, minimum standard in place for all produce." Mr. Silbermann added, "How we get to that place is the $64,000 question. I will say that where we are today [with regard to national standards] is because of lack of funding and political will at the federal level."
While the produce industry moved ahead very quickly on leafy greens standards, the PMA executive said that there hasn't been similar action on all fresh fruits and vegetables.
The Publix approach paints all fruits and vegetables with the same brush and requires all fresh produce suppliers to follow the FLSC on-farm standards. The letter said, "We request our supplier's (sic) farms be inspected and audited for conformity to these standards by representatives of member companies of the FSLC or designated inspection agencies that have been certified by the FSLC to conduct food-safety audits. As a supplier to Publix, this standard will be verified through Primus and their Good Agricultural Practice auditing program."
The letter was signed by Garry Bergstrom, who is Publix's business development director of produce and floral, and Michael Roberson, who is the retailer's director of corporate quality assurance.
WGA responded with a letter back to Publix, signed by Mr. Nassif, stating that it had reviewed the new standards and found them to be "unreasonable, excessive and scientifically indefensible, and will require produce suppliers to submit to redundant, expensive and unnecessary food-safety inspections and audits. Further, they will result in significant loss of available farmland and may cause serious environmental harm."
Mr. Nassif added: "Your effort marks the beginning of a destructive food safety 'arms race,' where different groups of produce buyers, in an effort to claim that they have safer produce than the next, will impose ... food-safety requirements without even the implication that the additional costs will be reimbursed."
WGA asked Publix to explain how the standards were developed and to further explain specific points so the organization of growers and shippers could better advise its members how to proceed. In the meantime, it urged its members who received the letters "to become better educated about the new standards and to wait until the fresh produce industry receives from the consortium more scientific evidence and validation to support their new standards."
At the very least, it encouraged its members "to contact and confer with their own attorneys, internal or external food-safety experts and/or Western Growers before agreeing to be bound by the new standards."
Mr. Silbermann said that to the best of his knowledge, no PMA members had sought counsel from the organization with regard to signing the agreement. "At this point, we do not have a position" on whether a member should sign the food-safety document, and "I am not sure we will take a position.
Both Messrs. Silbermann and Nassif expressed concern that non-reimbursed demands on production agriculture can greatly affect the affordability of growing fresh produce in the United States.
Other organizations, including the Produce Marketing Association, expressed concern that the food-safety issue was being handled in such a manner.
The reactions were precipitated by an Oct. 29 letter that was sent to produce suppliers by Publix, which claims to be part of the Food Safety Leadership Council that also includes Avendra LLC, Darden Restaurants, McDonald's Corp., Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and Walt Disney World Co.
The one-page letter had a 19-page addendum titled Food Safety Leadership Council On-Farm Produce Standard. The document spells out specific Good Agricultural Practices in many different areas, such as worker health and hygiene, field sanitation, animal control, pesticide and fertilizer use, water use, harvesting, transportation and microbiological testing. While it does contain many details, such as the number of toilets that should be in each field and the distance between the edge of the field and animal feed lots, it also pales in comparison to the Good Agricultural Practices guidelines adopted by the California Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement Advisory Board, which is 54 pages long. Nonetheless, the Publix document is at odds with the LGMA in several areas.
Publix asked its suppliers to sign the document, stating in the letter, "Please review these standards, together with the food-safety procedures used by your firm, to ensure that you meet the standards required by Publix. It is our intention to utilize these FSLC On-Farm Produce Standards to evaluate vendor farms that provide produce to Publix. As a vendor, you agree by signing below to adhere to the standards."
In the correspondence to its members, WGA President Tom Nassif said, "We have very serious concerns about these new food-safety standards and demands. We are extremely disappointed that they are taking this approach. The new standards clearly imply, without any scientific basis whatsoever, that the already-developed-and-adopted GAP metrics, scientifically developed and peer reviewed by some of the nation's leading food-safety scientists and experts, are inadequate. We know that is not the case as federal and state government food-safety agencies all agree that the GAP metrics include the latest, cutting-edge food-safety science."
PMA President Bryan Silbermann told The Produce News Nov. 7 that he only had a few minutes to review the Publix document and could not comment on its specific guidelines. However, he said that a "splintered approach [to food safety] only adds to the confusion.
"I'm sure everyone is driven by the best intentions, but we need a transparent process for food-safety guidelines," he continued, adding that it does not serve the industry to have many different sets of guidelines. "This points to the need to have a national, minimum standard in place for all produce." Mr. Silbermann added, "How we get to that place is the $64,000 question. I will say that where we are today [with regard to national standards] is because of lack of funding and political will at the federal level."
While the produce industry moved ahead very quickly on leafy greens standards, the PMA executive said that there hasn't been similar action on all fresh fruits and vegetables.
The Publix approach paints all fruits and vegetables with the same brush and requires all fresh produce suppliers to follow the FLSC on-farm standards. The letter said, "We request our supplier's (sic) farms be inspected and audited for conformity to these standards by representatives of member companies of the FSLC or designated inspection agencies that have been certified by the FSLC to conduct food-safety audits. As a supplier to Publix, this standard will be verified through Primus and their Good Agricultural Practice auditing program."
The letter was signed by Garry Bergstrom, who is Publix's business development director of produce and floral, and Michael Roberson, who is the retailer's director of corporate quality assurance.
WGA responded with a letter back to Publix, signed by Mr. Nassif, stating that it had reviewed the new standards and found them to be "unreasonable, excessive and scientifically indefensible, and will require produce suppliers to submit to redundant, expensive and unnecessary food-safety inspections and audits. Further, they will result in significant loss of available farmland and may cause serious environmental harm."
Mr. Nassif added: "Your effort marks the beginning of a destructive food safety 'arms race,' where different groups of produce buyers, in an effort to claim that they have safer produce than the next, will impose ... food-safety requirements without even the implication that the additional costs will be reimbursed."
WGA asked Publix to explain how the standards were developed and to further explain specific points so the organization of growers and shippers could better advise its members how to proceed. In the meantime, it urged its members who received the letters "to become better educated about the new standards and to wait until the fresh produce industry receives from the consortium more scientific evidence and validation to support their new standards."
At the very least, it encouraged its members "to contact and confer with their own attorneys, internal or external food-safety experts and/or Western Growers before agreeing to be bound by the new standards."
Mr. Silbermann said that to the best of his knowledge, no PMA members had sought counsel from the organization with regard to signing the agreement. "At this point, we do not have a position" on whether a member should sign the food-safety document, and "I am not sure we will take a position.
Both Messrs. Silbermann and Nassif expressed concern that non-reimbursed demands on production agriculture can greatly affect the affordability of growing fresh produce in the United States.
